Tag: liberals

On “systemic racism”

Posted by

The purposes of language go far beyond communication; it can be used to affect or change how people think and behave.

When language comes from certain groups – notably politicians, clergy, or marketers – we should be aware of how often it does not refer to anything in the real world and be sensitive to attempts to tell us what’s true or otherwise manipulate us.

 The truth is what most people believe. And they believe that which is repeated most often

Josef Goebbels

Political language… is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.

George Orwell

On “systemic racism” full post

(1853 words, 1 image, estimated 7:25 mins reading time)

The (barely-) hidden agenda of racial equity glossaries

Posted by

A dictionary reports equivalencies. A "racial equity glossary" dictates them.

A dictionary reports equivalencies. A “racial equity glossary” dictates them.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

From Lewis Carroll’s “Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There” (1871)

Recently,  OpportunityNow, a San Jose-based website/resource for entrepreneurs, invited me to comment on the City of San Jose’s Racial Equity Glossary.

Here’s what I sent them:

The (barely-) hidden agenda of racial equity glossaries full post

(1186 words, 1 image, estimated 4:45 mins reading time)

How the virus of political correctness spreads: none dare call it “looting”

Posted by

As with any religion, the p.c. folks make it up as they go along. A self-appointed expert decides that yet another word - in this case "looting" - may cause offense, and the cancer of political correctness advances, one word at a time.

As with any religion, the p.c. folks make it up as they go along. A self-appointed expert decides that yet another word – in this case “looting” – may cause offense, and the cancer of political correctness advances, one word at a time.

 

When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.’

How the virus of political correctness spreads: none dare call it “looting” full post

(1373 words, 1 image, estimated 5:30 mins reading time)

On the futility of International Pronoun Day

Posted by

The goals of International Pronoun Day and the means by which they are to be achieved are vague, but it sure is fun to invent new pronouns!
Unfortunately, this is not feasible, given the role pronouns play in sentences.

Referring to people by the pronouns they determine for themselves is basic to human dignity. Being referred to by the wrong pronouns particularly affects transgender and gender nonconforming people. Together, we can transform society to celebrate people’s multiple, intersecting identities.

From the home page of International Pronoun Day

On the futility of International Pronoun Day full post

(737 words, 1 image, estimated 2:57 mins reading time)

On “semantic games” and “infrastructure”

Posted by

What is a language?

A language is a vast, amorphous consensus among its users as to how words are equivalent to each other and associated with our subjective and objective worlds.

 When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

There is nothing “mere” about semantics!

On “semantic games” and “infrastructure” full post

(795 words, 1 image, estimated 3:11 mins reading time)

Latest language crime: “equity”

Posted by

 

A new brick has been added to the wall of politically correct speech: "equity" -- a euphemism for more (and unending) racial and gender preferences in pursuit of an undefinable and unattainable goal.

It takes courage and clear thinking to resist the liberal preoccupation with racial/gender preference and language control.

[In George Orwell’s 1984] Syme [a Party official] encourages Winston to recognize that the ‘whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought’.   He explains that ‘in the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible because there will be no words in which to express it.’  Syme refers to the fact that individual thought, rebellious or ‘unorthodox’ thoughts will be impossible and so, too, will the true concept of individual freedom.   Each concept will be expressed in just ‘one’ word.   Any ‘subsidiary’ meanings will be rubbed out and forgotten. (55).The party controls the mind through the control of language (Newspeak), the control of history (the past) and the control of war/ enemies, [via] the process of DoubleThink.

Latest language crime: “equity” full post

(908 words, 1 image, estimated 3:38 mins reading time)

The language of Fox News: Two views

Posted by

From mind to thought (and from there to the speech and auditory organs)
.

‘Why can’t human beings live simply and naturally?’  The trouble is that, as Susan K. Langer has said, ‘The symbol-making function is one of man’s primary activities. . .It is the fundamental process of the mind, and it goes on all the time.’

S.I. Hayakawa, Language in Thought and Action

 

If you are on a continuous search to be offended, you will always find what you are looking for, even if it isn’t there.

Bill Kellogg

 

The language of Fox News: Two views full post

(1122 words, 1 image, estimated 4:29 mins reading time)

Riots in DC: the power of conflicting narratives

Posted by

Liberals may find fault with this American icon, but which of them coud have done what he did? Does any modern politician have his wit, diplomacy, tenacity, and, very important, his eloquence?

 

On Jan. 27, 1838, Abraham Lincoln spoke before the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois, about “the perpetuation of our political institutions.” During that address, he said:

“At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.”

Lincoln’s message: no other nation is strong enough to destroy America.  We would do it to ourselves.  And it’s happening.

Riots in DC: the power of conflicting narratives full post

(1090 words, 1 image, estimated 4:22 mins reading time)