In “Pornography, Obscenity, and the Case for Censorship,” author Irving Kristol starts rather boldly by writing, “Being frustrated is disagreeable, but the real disasters in life begin when you get what you want,” (Kristol 505). In this case, what we want, inferred by the reader, is porn, and the disasters, Kristol argues, is the collapse of civil society. His stance on pornography and censorship is made even more clear throughout the essay. He incorporates extreme examples, such as comparing gladiators fighting in an arena to pornography; thoughts on the subject written by scholars before him, such as D.H. Lawrence, C.S. Lewis, and Norman O. Brown; and he addresses counter arguments and concerns before dissecting and disproving them. After presenting his argument Kristol urges the reader to agree with him. He writes, “if you care for the quality of life in our American democracy, then you have to be for censorship,” (Kristol 513). An intense, almost intimidating, call to action for a topic that many believe to be trivial. …show more content…
He write about how liberals who claim to be “free thinkers” and against any form of censorship are hypocritical (Kristol 506). That there is no possible way for someone to really be absolutely against censorship. If a playwright were to find someone willing to commit suicide on stage, or if a masochist was willing to be tortured in the public eye, both acts of creative self-expression, according to Kristol, wouldn’t earn the approval of even the most liberal of people. On the same point Kristol brings up the outlawing of animals fights, and explains while yes, they were outlawed partly out of compassion for the animals involved, they were mostly outlawed because they “debased and brutalized” those who partook in watching