Top Hollywood Actor Surprisingly Blasts Leftist Censorship, History Rewriting

In a surprising development, a big-name Hollywood actor – more specifically, Tom Hanks – slammed the liberal left’s desire to censor and rewrite history to cater to its own “sensitivity.”

Though he didn’t call out the source of evil directly.

Tom Hanks Speaks Out

Hollywood actors are typically Marxist-Communist stooges supporting “trans kids” and other woke insanities. The effect in question has been strengthened by the film and TV industry’s canceling of actors who are known or suspected of being conservatives or American patriots.

That is why when a Hollywood actor speaks out against leftist lunacy, that’s always major news – even if it is someone like Tom Hanks.

“We’re all adults here,” the actor told NBC News, speaking out against the censorship of old books for the sake of “appeasing modern sensibilities.”

Hanks’ comments came as he was promoting his upcoming novel. He declared he refused to censor anything simply because of what somebody might find offensive, Breitbart News reports.

The actor tried to appeal to reason. He insisted people should “have faith” in their sensibilities, instead of having censors decide what might be offensive to them.

Hanks stated further he wouldn’t want to read a book that might have been “abridged” because of “modern sensitivities.”

Books, Films Already Getting Destroyed by Liberal Communists

The report points out that several books have already been destroyed through “modern updates” by the radical left’s censorship. Those include Ian Fleming’s stories about James Bond and the works of Roald Dahl.

One of the most striking cases has been that of director Steven Spielberg’s self-censorship of E.T. – described as his “beloved masterpiece.” Spielberg has since “expressed regret” for his decision to succumb to the pressure of the leftist censors, calling it “a mistake.”

He warned against removing the chocolate from Willy Wonka or destroying any other film or book; they make up “our cultural heritage” and nothing ought to be “revised” through the “lenses” of the present.


This article appeared in Mainstpress and has been published here with permission.