On January 1, 2024, vendors who sell books to Texas government schools will be required to rate each book they offer for sexual content. Any book that portrays or describes sexual activity must be labeled as sexually explicit or sexually relevant. The former is defined as books with content that is “patently offensive” which Texas obscenity law states is content that affronts “current community standards.”
Book vendors object to the law. They correctly argue that what is sexually relevant to one person might be sexually explicit to another. And a third party might conclude that a book falls into neither category. Despite the subjectivism of the law, book sellers will be held financially responsible for properly labeling the titles that they sell.
The bill’s author, Republican Rep. Jared Patterson, argues that,
If you’re selling something that’s going to be in the hands of children, you should know whether or not it’s safe for that child to consume. The book vendor is the one with the financial relationship with the school district and, so they’re the ones that can most easily be held accountable for this.
Patterson went on to say that he believes “capitalism is the path forward here” and the law gives vendors “an incentive to figure this out.” Patterson believes that forcing private companies to act in a manner he desires is capitalism. However, Patterson’s bill is not capitalism.
Capitalism, Ayn Rand wrote,
is a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in which all property is privately owned.
The right to property means the freedom to produce and trade without physical interference from others. Patterson’s bill dictates the terms by which certain trades will be allowed—vendors who do not abide by Patterson’s demands will be prohibited from selling books to government schools.
If Patterson truly believes that “capitalism is the path forward,” then he would be calling for the abolishment of government schools. He would be calling for an end to the state’s education monopoly. He would be promoting freedom in production and trade.