And this is a perfect example of what my problems with how people mostly do “neutrality”. I have no problem with the goal of neutrality, but it’s one of those goals like perfect equality that, while worth striving for, are never going to be reached. (Although i have hope that at some point we’ll get close enough to perfect equality that’ll it’ll be difficult to tell the difference.)
Most of the problems with the cult of neutrality is because, is suspect, of a basic way our brains tend to classify: is it a thing or is it not a thing (i.e., danger, food, etc.). So our brains tend to binary. The opposite of Stalinist isn’t anti-totalitarian because both Stalinism and anti-totalitarianism are much more complicated than that. But more importantly, Mr. Du Bois was much more complicated than just his Stalinism. The choice of what to contrast, beyond the fallacy of the binary in choosing to contrast rather than explore, is an automatic failure of neutrality unless you choose to find a contrast for every character trait and belief.
I, as a non-librarian, would think that the best W. E. B. Du Bois display would be several of his volumes along with well-respected critiques*. But i, and i suspect all of you, would have a problem with a library that included in their display** a modern-day pamphlet from the KKK denigrating Mr. Du Bois’ name.
* Because, again, neutrality is a good goal to have.
** In a non-academic setting.
Edited to add space between paragraphs.
