No You Can’t Say That
George Orwell wrote an essay on the relationship between Politics and Language. Orwell’s Novel “1984” contained a dystopian world in which control of language is the central mechanism for maintaining a totalitarian dictatorship. The main character, Winston Smith’s job is historical revisionism: “to rewrite past newspaper articles so that the historical record always supports the current party line”. Such terms as “Newspeak”, “Thought Crimes,” “Doublespeak”, “Big Brother”, “Ministry of Truth” all come from this novel. The point is that “he who controls the language, controls the culture or the discussion in the culture.” Language (words) contain more than just meanings; they contain feelings and attitudes toward the things they define or refer to. So whoever defines a word infuses that word with emotions and attitudes. The motive in doing this is to create an atmosphere of Political Correctness: This word now means what we tell you it means and for you not to accept it implies that you are not thinking correctly. If the authority or state tells us that a word means X we must be tolerant or accepting of that meaning. The most obvious example of this is to make someone believe that 2+2=5. The goal of Political Correctness is to enforce on everyone the definition, the meaning, the logic that the state says is Correct. Another way to say this is to call it “brainwashing”. When people no longer Think for themselves but just Accept what they are told, Political Correctness has Won.
The Democrats and the Obama administration are currently trying very hard to change our language—our words and their definitions—in order to control the discussion. Michelle Malkin brought this to our attention a few days ago when she penned a column in which she listed the words which the Democrats are telling us are “Racist”.Racism is and has been for a long time, very emotionally charged because of our country’s history of slavery. Words like “angry”, Constitution”, “privileged,” Chicago, and “Golf” being redefined by those on the left as connoting negativity with regard to African Americans. . You may laugh at this, but the people on MSNBC and their audience believe that these words and others are used deliberately as code words for racist ideas and comments. For example, the Constitution was written by white men who accepted the system of slavery-therefore to say one wants to return to the Constitution and to Constitutional principles is to say one wants to bring back slavery. To my mind this is very twisted, but using twisted logic is part of redefining words. To understand the racial connotations of the other words, read Michelle Malkin’s article here.
The Condensed Liberal Handbook of Racial Code Words
The US State Department’s Chief Diversity Officer, John Robinson penned a column in which he points out words and phrases which are now offensive to certain groups of people. You have probably heard that it is offensive to say, “hold down the fort.” Dana Loesch pointed out this morning that apparently only American Indians had forts, yet most militaries around the world have Forts, don’t they. And we should remember that our military still has forts. Remember the Fort Hood shooting, which is really what we are talking about here: Political Correctness in language and therefore in attitude allowed Major Hasan to give lectures about his Islamist beliefs and no one in the military out of fear of not being politically correct questioned his loyalty to America since he was serving in the American military. Other phrases that our Diversity Officer doesn’t believe are politically correct are: “going Dutch”—makes the Dutch seem cheap; “rule of thumb” which derives from “an antiquated law, whereby the width of a husband’s thumb was the legal size of a switch allowed to beat his wife”. And the word “handicapped”, which is “rooted in a coorelation between a disabled individual and a beggar, who had to beg with a cap in his or her hand because of the inability to maintain employment.” I remember when They replaced “Crippled” with Handicapped—at that time They said it was a Kinder word. . Mr Robinson tells us that a Bank Teller is now a Financial Service Representative, a Janitor is a Custodial Maintenance engineer, and a Secretary is an Administrative assistant. Much of this may seem silly and harmless, but it is a “slippery slope” from here to more important ideas.
Don’t Say Hold the Fort . . .It’s Offensive to Native Americans, Warns state department diversity chief
State Department Chief Diversity Officer’s rule of thumb pointers for avoiding Offensive phrases
The word or phrase “illegal” or “Illegal Immigrant” is also under attack by those who are Politically Correct and who are attempting to replace it with the phrase “Undocumented Immigrant”. I have heard it said that “no human being should be referred to as Illegal”; however, these people broke our laws to enter our country illegally. By calling them Undocumented it sounds like they had papers but lost them.. I don’t want to fight the border battle here, but just to point out that if a majority of Americans accept the term “Undocumented” it will have a huge impact on our policy of the border and those who cross into our country illegally. This has serious ramifications for the future of our country—financially, politically, socially.
‘Is Illegal Immigrant’ A Racial Slur?
An even better article is this one from Legal Insurrection: Saturday Night Card Game: What Race is an Illegal Alien?
Perhaps the most important term which is actually relatively recent in origin and which has definite feelings and attitudes associated with it is Islamophobia. The paper written by the leftist Center for American Progress makes it practically a crime to be quilty of this. I wonder if the phobia part of it has any connection with Homophobia a very emotionally charged word in our culture. This is a particularly dangerous word because it connotes that anyone who Questions anything related to Islam or organizations of Moslems, ie CAIR or ISNA or their work in the US is somehow “Racist”. Given that Cair and Isna were both considered unindicted co-conspirators in the Holyland Trial, it seems logical to be apprehensive of these organizations. This is a case where the definition of this word has serious implications for the US and our future.
Fear, Inc: The Roots of the Islamophbia Network in America
It is important for us to understand that the Moslem Brotherhood and the Moslem culture are totally different from western culture. An example is that in the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, the phrase Human Rights means that Sharia Law is applied. So if the US representative is discussing Human Rights with someone from an Islamic culture at the UN, there is Not a common definition of the basic point of discussion. The fact that there are those among us who want to use Political correctness to require us to be tolerant of ideas and activities that we really don’t understand is unconscionable at best and criminal at worst.
If we are to remain a free people, we must reject the current climate of Political Correctness even among those things that seem silly. There is no need for example to change a job description from a secretary to an administrative assistant. I believe this is just a way of “conditioning” the American people to better accept change, like Pavlov’s dog in “conditioning” his reaction to the ringing bell. We Must question whatever the state or authority is telling us: is it logical or sensible?. For example, if one wants to return to the Constitution, does that make them Racist? I don’t think so. Similarly, if we question what the Moslem Brotherhood are doing in the White House, does that make us Islamophobes? No! That makes us good American citizens who are looking out for our people and our country. Thomas Mann pointed out that “Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil”. We Must learn to think for ourselves and not just believe what we are told from Government or media.