Navy cancels speech by podcaster who planned to reference its ban on more than 300 books
Author Ryan Holiday was going to give an address to the Naval Academy — until the military branch discovered he was going to reference the academy's recent sweeping book ban.
For years Holiday has been giving lectures on the virtues of Stoicism — he hosts a podcast called The Daily Stoic — and planned on speaking to the sophomores this week on the 'theme of wisdom.' But the Navy canceled those plans an hour before he was set to speak, he said in a New York Times op-ed Saturday.
Ahead of his address, he sent over his prepared slides, which included a reference to the academy's removal of 381 books.
In January, President Donald Trump signed an executive order ending the 'radical indoctrination' in K-12 schools, prompting schools to pull books from classrooms that don't align with Trump's agenda. Although the Naval Academy is a college, in March, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the school to review its books at the Nimitz Library to ensure that it complies with the president's order.
On April 4, the Navy issued a press release listing the hundreds of books that were removed. That list includes How To Be An Antiracist by Ibram X. Kendi and I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou.
According to Holiday, his reference to the book ban made some at the school 'extremely worried about reprisals if my talk appeared to flout' the president's order. He was asked to remove them from his speech; he declined and it was cancelled, he wrote.
The school 'made a schedule change that aligns with its mission of preparing midshipmen for careers of service,' a Navy spokesperson told the Times. 'The Naval Academy is an apolitical institution.'
'I had no interest in embarrassing anyone or discussing politics directly. I understand the immense pressures they are under, especially the military employees, and I did not want to cause them trouble,' Holiday wrote in the op-ed. 'I did, however, feel it was essential to make the point that the pursuit of wisdom is impossible without engaging with (and challenging) uncomfortable ideas.'
He walked through some of his prepared remarks, which included making the point that there was political pressure in the 1950s to pull books from the shelves, but then-President Dwight Eisenhower refrained from doing so.
'My idea is that censorship and hiding solves nothing,' the president told reporters shortly after his 1953 inauguration. Eisenhower then pointed to all of the materials that circulated before World War II that went unread but could have perhaps helped anticipate the tragedies that were about to strike. 'What I am talking about is let's educate ourselves if we are going to run a free government, and let's [not] be afraid of its weaknesses as well as its strength,' he said.
Adolf Hitler 's Mein Kampf was not among the books pulled from the library, Holiday noted. 'As heinous as that book is, it should be accessible to scholars and students of history. However, this makes the removal of Maya Angelou's I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings inexplicable,' he wrote. 'Whatever one thinks of D.E.I., we are not talking about the writings of external enemies here, but in many cases, art, serious scholarship and legitimate criticism of America's past.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
16 hours ago
- Spectator
Has deporting illegals become illegal?
The circus around Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia – whose full name the New York Times likes to trot out as if citing an old-school English aristocrat – speaks volumes about the immigration battle roiling the US. Our friend Kilmar is what we fuddy-duddies insist on calling an illegal immigrant. The Salvadoran crossed clandestinely into the US in 2012. As for what he's done since, that depends on whom you ask. According to his GoFundMe page, Kilmar is a 'husband, union worker and father of a disabled five-year-old'. Left-wing media portray 'the Maryland man' – a tag akin to Axel Rudakubana's 'a Welshman' – as an industrious metalworker devoted to his family. His wife has rowed back on the temporary protective order she once requested, claiming she'd been over-cautious. Yet according to the Trump administration, Kilmar is a member of the notoriously violent street gang MS-13 who's derived his primary source of income from smuggling hundreds of illegals over the southern border for several years. Choose A or B. In 2019, Kilmar was arrested for loitering along with three other men, one a suspected MS-13 member. He was carrying marijuana, for which (of course) he wasn't charged. From his clothing, tattoos and, more persuasively, a 'past proven and reliable' confidential source who verified he was an active gang member using the moniker 'Chele', police adjudged that Kilmar was a gangbanger, for which (of course) he wasn't charged. He was turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement – whose acronym, ICE, reinforces its rep as cold-hearted – which moved to deport him. Kilmar (of course) contested his removal. The immigration judge hearing Kilmar's case concurred that the defendant was indeed a gang member and deportable; the Salvadoran (of course) appealed the decision, which nevertheless was upheld. Kilmar (of course) then filed for asylum, as well as for a 'withholding of removal'. A subsequent immigration judge stayed his deportation to his home country, where his wellbeing might be endangered by local gangs. Now, you might suppose that putting yourself in the way of other famously rivalrous gangs would come with the territory when you join one yourself. Like, inter-gang violence seems a natural hazard of this line of work. But it's not only British immigration judges who are soft touches. Only mass round-ups and swift group trials could effectively address the millions of gate-crashers Kilmar (of course) remained in the US. In 2022, he was pulled over for speeding while driving eight other Hispanic men of uncertain immigration status in an SUV altered to add a third row of seats for extra passengers. The officers suspected human-trafficking; Kilmar's driving licence had expired; a run of his number plate through the database turned up a federal note on likely membership of MS-13. Yet when the patrolmen contacted the feds, ICE (of course) declined to pick him up. So Kilmar was (of course) released without charge. Even so, his claim that he was merely transporting construction workers between jobs did not, under investigation, hold up. Fast-forward to 2025 and why this otherwise obscure Salvadoran who is or is not a thug merits such a detailed lowdown. Meaning (of course) that this case has to do with Donald Trump – whose evil minions in March flew more than 230 purported criminals to a Salvadoran prison, including none other than Kilmar, whom ICE did finally pick up (no 'of course' there). The flights' timing was judicially dodgy. The planes did or didn't take off after a federal judge ruled that the flights could not proceed until the deportees were given the opportunity to challenge their removal. The administration appealed to the Supreme Court, which directed Trump to 'facilitate' Kilmar's return to the US. Because, remember, there was only one country to which he could not be deported because of that credulous 2019 decision: his own. Hence the Justice Department's acceptance that Kilmar's deportation was an 'administrative error'. During this proxy war with Trump, Democrats have pretended to hair-tear over poor Kilmar, mouldering away in a nasty foreign prison and deprived of due process. But the story I just laid out has due process, not to mention leniency or even dereliction on the part of the authorities, up the wazoo. Meanwhile, after slyly getting their jurisprudential ducks in a row, last week Trump and co finally got Kilmar flown back to the US, only to arrest him immediately for human-trafficking – with every intention of convicting the guy and then deporting him right back to El Salvador. What do we make of this farce? The American commentariat has focused on a potential showdown between Trump and the judiciary, claiming to fear a flat-out executive refusal to follow court orders but secretly rather hoping that Trump does defy the courts and thus reveals himself as an unconstitutional tyrant. I view this absurd tale through a different lens. All these trials and flights for a lone illegal alien are expensive. The amount of 'due process' the American justice system affords every single illegal makes deportation at any scale impossible. There isn't enough time and money and there aren't nearly enough judges to make any but a token gesture toward the mass deportation of illegals that Trump has promised. That amounts to a victory not just for Democrats but also for disorder. I'd assess the odds that Kilmar is a thug at about 90 per cent. But proving membership of unofficial allegiances in court is a bastard. If every individual deportation case must be adjudicated according to exacting evidentiary rules and appeal procedures, America's drastic, undemocratic demographic change will proceed inexorably. Only mass round-ups and swift group trials could effectively address the staggering ten million gate-crashers during the Biden administration alone. What are the chances of that? In New York at the weekend, ICE raids were impeded by LA-style crowds of righteously indignant protestors screaming: 'Let them go! Let them go!' The officers just doing their jobs looked beleaguered, tired, numb and pre-defeated. After all the ICE agents' thankless labours, what proportion of their detainees will still get to stay in the country in the end? I'll take another stab at 90 per cent.
NBC News
a day ago
- NBC News
Navy sailor who vanished from Virginia barracks found dead, another sailor held in her death
A body has been found and confirmed to be that of missing Navy sailor Angelina Resendiz, and another sailor is in pretrial confinement in connection with her death. Resendiz, 21, was last seen the morning of May 29 at her barracks at the Naval Station Norfolk in Virginia. Virginia State Police issued a critically missing person alert for her last week. A body discovered by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) on Monday in a wooded area in Norfolk was confirmed to be Resendiz by the local medical examiner on Tuesday. A Navy sailor, who was not identified, has charges pending under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the NCIS said. "NCIS remains committed to uncovering the facts surrounding the tragic death of Seaman Resendiz to ensure accountability and justice," the department said. No further details were released and the investigation is ongoing. The Resendiz family said her disappearance has 'left a void in their hearts' and they 'refuse to let her suffering be in vain,' a spokesperson for the family told NBC affiliate WAVY of Norfolk. 'The family is calling on the assistance of the United States government, Senator Mark Warner, Senator Tim Kaine, the Hampton Roads congressional delegation, home congressman Vicente Gonzalez, and President Donald J. Trump to address the systemic issues that allowed her to vanish without justice since May 29, 2025,' the statement said. Resendiz's mother, Emeralda Castle, was not notified that her daughter vanished through official channels, the spokesperson said. "Her daughter's colleagues, friends, and even authorities knew she was missing, but the response was minimal, and after her friends filed a missing person's report when her commander would not, they showed little compassion or understanding," the statement said. The family is calling for Congress to investigate Resendiz' death and for reform within the Navy's notification protocol. The NCIS statement said it investigated the case as soon as the agency learned of her disappearance.
The Guardian
a day ago
- The Guardian
Fulbright board quits due to Trump administration's political meddling
All 12 members of the prestigious Fulbright program's board have reportedly resigned in protest of what they describe as unprecedented political interference by the Trump administration, which has blocked scholarships for nearly 200 American academics. The board, according to a memo obtained by the New York Times, accused the state department of acting illegally by cancelling awards already approved for professors and researchers due to travel overseas this summer, following a year-long selection process that concluded over the winter. The administration is also reviewing applications from approximately 1,200 foreign scholars already approved to study in the US, potentially disrupting exchanges that were due to begin with acceptance letters in April. 'We believe these actions not only contradict the statute but are antithetical to the Fulbright mission and the values, including free speech and academic freedom, that Congress specified in the statute,' the board's members wrote in their resignation letter. The mass resignation represents a significant escalation in tensions between the Trump administration and academic institutions. The White House has been systematically targeting higher education, with 45 universities currently under investigation as part of Trump's anti-DEI crackdown, including dozens of state schools and two Ivy League institutions. The administration has also been freezing federal funding to major universities, with more than $1bn in funding frozen for Cornell University, almost $800m for Northwestern University, and $8.7bn in federal grants and contracts under review for Harvard University. Now, secretary of state Marco Rubio is reportedly considering whether Harvard should be investigated for violating federal sanctions by collaborating on a panel with Chinese officials blacklisted by the US government. According to sources who spoke anonymously to the New York Times, the department's public diplomacy office has begun sending rejection letters to scholars based primarily on their research topics. Areas of study reportedly targeted include climate change, migration, gender studies, race and ethnicity, and various scientific disciplines. The public diplomacy office is headed by Darren Beattie, a political appointee previously dismissed from the first Trump administration after speaking at a conference attended by white nationalists. The board also raised concerns about proposed budget cuts that would slash funding for educational and cultural affairs from $691m to $50m. 'Injecting politics and ideological mandates into the Fulbright program violates the letter and spirit of the law that Congress so wisely established nearly eight decades ago,' the board concluded in their letter.
