Dear Mrs. Meskis, I came across your letter responding to protests advocating for homeless rights and the repeal of the Urban Camping Ban. It is titled “Support Your Freedom To Read, Please don’t give in to those who would use distorted coercion tactics.” In the title alone, the letter pits two ideals against each other: the freedom of speech and the freedom of – or right to – sleep and shelter. By “giving in” to those who want to guarantee the homeless the right to sleep and shelter, is one really opposing the “Freedom to Read?” I don’t think so, and it is my hope and belief that homeless advocates and the Tattered Cover can find common ground, politically and intellectually. As you mention, the bookstore is a “haven” for people to “think critically and develop their own political and social ideals… unencumbered by what other want them to think, read or do.” You refer primarily to your broad inventory selection as an example of your commitment to intellectual freedom. As far as I know, at no time have advocates for the homeless asked that you change what books you offer your customers. With the information you’ve provided, I can’t picture how supporting the repeal of the Urban Camping Ban will jeopardize the store’s ability to foster a broad pursuit of knowledge. But I can picture how not taking a stance hinders intellectual freedom. Notwithstanding the natural intellectual curiosity transient people exhibit as human beings, it is harder for them to find the time, energy, and money to enjoy the pleasure and privilege of reading, especially under the constant threat of police harassment. So, while wanting to create an ideal space for the intellect, Tattered Cover nonetheless simultaneously finances the repression of the intellect for a specific but diverse set of human beings. This is through paying fees to the Downtown Denver Partnership, which is ever active in pushing and maintaining inhumane legislation like the Urban Camping Ban. I know the Tattered Cover’s commitment to the freedom of speech is a dedicated one. In 2002 you fought bravely in court – and won – against the state of Colorado, which wanted access to your sale records to gain information on criminal suspects. This is why it saddens me to think that you view our efforts as “distorted coercion tactics.” I believe that you as well as Denver’s homeless advocates both fight brave battles for the creation of a more just society. So, just as you hope to encourage critical thinking in your customers, I urge you: please think critically about what we are asking you. Is our antagonism coming from two ideals butting against each other, or is it generated by a fear of fraying ties with the Downtown Denver Partnership, probably one of the city’s most powerful and active business lobbies? While this question lingers, daily the police force society’s most needy further into the shadows, ever more removed from the sleep, shelter and respect they demand as human beings. Sincerely, Luke Leavitt Denver, CO 80205
Posted on: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 02:03:28 +0000