This year marks the 20th anniversary of the publication of Markus Zusak’s novel “The Book Thief.” It is a powerful story that gives us a unique perspective regarding WWII. “The Book Thief” isn’t about the great battles and heroic soldiers. It isn’t about the somber and momentous deliberations of generals and world leaders. It refrains from overly stereotyping German soldiers, and it’s mostly free of grotesque Hitler-esque rants about making Germany great again. Rather, it is set at the onset of the war and delivers us to a small village and the humble abode of a poor, elderly German couple, Hans and Rosa Hubermann, and their adopted daughter Liesel. The street on which they live is named, ironically, Heaven Street.

A poignant and significant scene in the film version is the ransacking of Jewish owned bookstores by Nazis in Munich. This translates forward to Liesel’s village where the spirit of the Third Reich is taking hold. Liesel, who has begun to acquire a great love of books, witnesses a book burning ceremony. The plot becomes more complicated when a young Jewish man takes refuge in their home.

Of course the war would come to Heaven Street. Hell on earth does not discriminate, and despite the fact that Death, our narrator in the film and novel, has been moved to a rare moment of compassion regarding Liesel, he must pervade. He is, afterall, inevitable. A glitch in communication – a human error – would result in the destruction of Heaven Street. There would be no guardian angels, no divine intervention. All books, all the good German people living on Heaven are Street destroyed – all but Liesel and her story of innocence and courage in the face of tyranny.

We in America, of all places, should understand the symbolism of book burning. Its image should burn into our consciousness as something absolutely contrary to freedom of thought and expression and in violation of our constitutional rights. And we should be aware that those who seek unchecked power understand the importance of controlling people by controlling what information they consume.

While there is reasonable debate going on today regarding general waste in government spending, public access to knowledge is invaluable. The recent efforts to cast aspersion on and, ultimately, defund public media outlets such as NPR and PBS have roots in the kind ideology that marked the rise of naziism. The sarcastic, bullyish tone and hyperbolic rhetoric used by the Georgia representative at a recent DOGE hearing is evidence of a frightening movement, one that seeks to dismantle the most fact-checked, researched, and thereby reliable sources of information America has at its disposal.

For all her interruptions and disparaging remarks, the only bit of evidence-based research the representative offered was the fact that public media is not very popular. Of course these stations are not popular! They are not sensational, suspenseful or wildly entertaining. They are not preaching to a political choir. Their target audience is the educated and/or inquisitive listener who has little interest in TV shows or mainstream entertainment.

Programs on PBS and NPR serve to educate and, to a lesser extent, entertain the public by offering a great variety of topics and perspectives. They provide critical insight into the fine arts as well as popular culture. They expose the lifestyles of all walks of life, and bring focus to issues concerning urban, suburban and rural communities. They take on controversy in both the natural and social sciences. Regarding the environment, they stand firmly in support of the next generation, which is to say they are worried about the future of the planet.

When a government takes a stance against intellectualism, its natural impulse is to accuse, debase and intimidate. In Hitler’s Germany, it was the academics who were first painted as traitors, and the first to be censored. Of course many were Jews, but there were plenty of good German professors and artists who simply could not accept the principles Hitler stood for. Moreover, there was a youth movement among college and high school students who embraced American culture and put up resistance. They became known as Swing Kids.

To remove government funding from public media would mean putting free speech up for sale. The validity of news and information would be based on the popularity of the company that projects it. In essence, truth would belong to whoever sells the most product. And the ones who sell the most product will gain political power and control the flow and content of information.

So 80-some years after the nazi book burning mission, we are confronted with a new kind of censorship. One can only hope that, although public media will never be popular, there are enough Americans who appreciate its purpose and understand what is at stake.

Pete Howard, a musician, writer, teacher, and painter, lives in Dunkirk.