The correct option is It encourages the habit of banning.
Explanation
Freedom of speech and expression, guaranteed under Article 19(1)It encourages the habit of banning of the Constitution, is fundamental to a democratic society. In political theory, the imposition of bans on books or artistic works is scrutinized not just for its immediate impact, but for its long-term consequences on the culture of liberty and tolerance.
Analysis
- It encourages the habit of banning is Correct: The primary theoretical argument against banning books is that it sets a dangerous precedent. Once the state or society legitimizes the suppression of one idea or book, it becomes easier to suppress others. This creates a "habit of banning," where censorship becomes a normalized tool to silence dissent or controversy, thereby progressively eroding the scope of freedom.
- It reduces the revenue of the state is Incorrect: While banning a book may result in a negligible loss of tax revenue, this is an economic consequence and does not constitute the fundamental threat to the principle of liberty.
- It makes the banned content more popular is Incorrect: The phenomenon where banned content becomes more popular is known as the "Streisand effect." This explains the ineffectiveness of a ban, but it does not explain why the act of banning is harmful to the prospects of freedom.
- It leads to international sanctions is Incorrect: Banning books is generally considered a domestic policy issue and does not typically trigger international sanctions, which are reserved for severe violations of international law or human rights.
Key Takeaway: The long-term danger of censorship lies in the normalization of intolerance. Developing a habit of banning restricts the free flow of ideas and shrinks the democratic space required for intellectual growth and debate.