Dark Enlightenment, Cathedral, etc are ideas. Probably bad ideas but, ideas. You battle bad ideas by showing them to be bad and showing ones that are better. You don't cower in fear or spread alarm.
We live in the age of the internet; a giant library with whole shelves (wings even) of material on scary ideas like The Dark Enlightenment, Racial Superiority, etc. These ideas aren't going away. It's basically impossible to ban motivated people from discussing ideas because of encryption technology. All a ban will do is give a weapon to suppress ideas to the vast silent majority who see little value in defending ideas others have told them are bad.
If the author of this article has a problem with these ideas, then say so or at the very least point out links to refute them. Breathlessly implying they are intrinsically wrong does nothing but signal virtue to those who don't find the topic worth investigating deeper.
All a ban will do is give a weapon to suppress ideas...
Of course, nothing in the article mentioned a ban on any ideas or advocated for the suppression of any books. The implicit argument that unwillingness to support a particular organization equates to suppression of ideas is fallacious, and I'm inclined to think that it's wholly disingenuous on your part.
Lest there be any doubt, I have no desire whatsoever to suppress, censor, or otherwise limit the spread of 'dark enlightenment' ideas. On the other hand I feel no hesitation in pointing out that they're tightly correlated with a long-running political program whose ultimate aim is the establishment of a white ethnostate within the boundaries of the USA, and whose architects are on record as considering ethnic cleansing or straight-up genocide as acceptable strategies in the pursuit of that end.
tl;dr protecting the free speech rights of Nazis doesn't alter the fact that they're Nazis.
> See Reilly, Ignatius J., Blood on Their Hands: The Crime of It All, A study of some selected abuses in sixteenth century Europe, a Monograph, 2 pages, 1950, Rare Book Room, Left Corridor, Third Floor, Howard-Tilton Memorial Library, Tulane University, New Orleans 18, Louisiana.
> Note: I mailed this singular monograph to the library as a gift; however, I am not really certain that it was ever accepted. It may well have been thrown out because it was only written in pencil on tablet paper.
It's a art piece that has been changed to another type of art.
Book -> performance art
Although since inside is a written story, I'd argue it's still a a book, unless it leads to further clues then it becomes performance art.
A good example of a fake book is a book made of plastic which is then used in ikea or has a hidden void.
The headline is not inaccurate, but it is ambiguous. When I read the headline, my assumption was that an authentic book was replaced with a counterfeit.
I guess I meant more written words, than a story.
But it does seem to follow onto some sort of 'club'
Either way, to me it's great art.