[gdy]

"when 19th century Russia stated that no book could be written in Lithuanian"

That's a lie. Or shall I say "gas lighting at best and a false flag at worst"?

"The Lithuanian press ban (Lithuanian: spaudos draudimas) was a ban on all Lithuanian language publications printed in the Latin alphabet in force from 1865 to 1904 within the Russian Empire, which controlled Lithuania proper at the time. Lithuanian-language publications that used Cyrillic were allowed and even encouraged." [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuanian_press_ban

[taneliv]

That's a surprising way to frame what the Wikipedia page says. The ban was part of a russification attempt. One of the stated goals, on the page you linked, is "Replace Lithuanian parish schools with Russian grammar schools". Up to that point, Lithuanian had not been written in the Cyrillic alphabet. Polish language was widely used, and its use of Latin alphabet had a huge inspiration on Lithuanian orthography.

To make my point stronger: I would call it a book ban, if English language books were illegal to write in the Latin alphabet, and only allowed in the Cyrillic alphabet. This would be consistent with the situation of Lithuanian language book ban (except it would not replace kindergarten and lower grades with Russian grammar schools).

Calling it a lie seems at the very least ignorant of the actual situation, or worse, willful twisting of history. If the former, I invite you to read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuanian_book_smugglers to find out on which day they are celebrated!

[gdy]

I don't think it's me who is twisting history here

[taneliv]

Well, everyone can read the Wikipedia pages and their references, and make their own minds. Our views are so fundamentally different that I see no reason to continue discussion.

[gdy]

Ok, let me elaborate.

'Banning all books on Lithuanian language' and 'banning books in Lithuanian language written in Latin alphabet and encouraging transition to books in Lithuanian language written in Cyrillic alphabet' are different things.

Former would have had a goal of discontinuing written Lithuanian language and the latter had a goal of switching Lithuanian language from Latin to Cyrillic alphabet.

Misrepresenting the latter as the former is a lie.

[cassac]

The only thing important part is “these books are banned” and “these books are encouraged.” That you don’t care about the specifics says more about you than the ban.

[gdy]

It looks like I do care about specifics and you care only about 'important part'.

[cassac]

That’s an interesting take... Like, you can write any book you want using the English language, as long as you use Kanji to write it down? You wouldn’t consider that a problem?

But regardless you are only reinforcing the point that it was a real ban. The fact that they were banned and the books they didn’t want banned were encouraged really only continues to make my case.

[gdy]

"Like, you can write any book you want using the English language, as long as you use Kanji to write it down? You wouldn’t consider that a problem?"

Right now Kazakhstan is transitioning from Cyrillic to Latin alphabet. This year children will be taught only Latin letters and they won't be able to read the texts in Kazakh language written in Cyrillic in the last 80 years.

Do you consider this a problem?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakh_alphabets#Latin_script