Throughout history, revolutionaries of all stripes have warped the meaning of words to subvert reality.
And now here we go again, with another effort — spearheaded by the media and universities — to use any linguistic means necessary to achieve political ends.
“Sanctuary city” is a euphemism for the local and state nullification of federal law — a subversive tactic that dates back to the nullification crises during the Andrew Jackson administration and, later, in the years leading up to the Civil War.
This makes a mockery of the simple constitutional principle that cities and states cannot subversively pick and choose which federal laws to obey.
The term “sanctuary” would never apply to conservative jurisdictions that in similar fashion sought to offer “sanctuary” to those dissidents who disobeyed federal gun registration, income tax, or environmental laws.
College administrators boast of offering counseling and therapeutic help to students and faculty members distraught over the recent election. They use terms like “divisive” and “polarizing” in describing the election, when in truth they wish to hide from their donors, alumni, and half the country their own abject and one-sided contempt for incoming president-elect Donald Trump.
Note that in the highly emotional elections of 2008 and 2012, universities did not offer commensurate counseling services — because their own preferred candidate won and was thus his victory was not “polarizing.” Once upon a time, campuses did not worry about whether independent faculty and conservative students were sullen and depressed in adolescent style over the implications of President-elect Barack Obama’s radical promises to “fundamentally change America.”
Campus “safe space” is another vocabulary distortion. Such places are often set-aside spots that actually discriminate on the basis of race or gender.
Likewise, college “theme houses” often admit residents on the basis of segregation by ethnicity or race — in a way that would have been considered deplorable during the Civil Rights movement. Indeed, the word “segregation” has now virtually disappeared from our vocabulary because it could more likely apply to left-wing rather than right-wing protocols.
“Microaggression” is certainly not aggression as usually defined. Instead, the term seeks to stifle free expression on the principle that one can still be dubbed a racist or sexist by saying something that normally would not offend anyone — at least not without arcane academic inventions of bias.
Both right-wing Nazi Germany and the left-wing Soviet Union banned old words and created new words that furthered political agendas and warped reality.
“Trigger warning” should mean that readers or viewers are advised that literature or media could be obscene or threatening. In fact, this one-sided term only applies to material — from Roman elegiac poetry to the works of Mark Twain — deemed potentially hurtful or unfair by 21st century progressive standards of race, class, and gender. No one on campus is given a trigger warning before reading the left-wing manifestos of Eldridge Cleaver or Malcolm X, despite their calls for violence.
There are also lots of Orwellian nouns and adjectives to describe those from other countries who broke federal immigration laws to enter and reside in the United States.
“Illegal alien” used to be a neutral and descriptive legal term — one still preferred by the Supreme Court — but is now seen as counterproductive to the agendas of the open-borders movement. Thus the more inexact “undocumented alien” followed, although few who entered illegally ever had immigration “documents” of any sort. Next came the term “undocumented immigrant” — on the theory that the ancient word “alien” (from the Latin word alienus, meaning “belonging to another”) is offensive and also unhelpful to the open-borders project.
Finally, the ambiguous word “migrant” is being used to suggest that there is really no difference between entering and exiting a country under any circumstances.
Liberal counceling truck loads of crayons and liberal coloring books for the pathetic little snowflakes still upset at trumps election and throw in a few playpens as well
I thought that’s what they were doing when they began referring to the “Democrat Party” instead of the “Democratic Party,” and the inaccurate and non-grammatical usage quickly became mandatory, even for Ivy League-educated republicans and FOX News guests.
And then they made “elite” a pejorative word, when it actually refers to that part of any larger group that is widely recognized as the best, the most accomplished, the most highly skilled, or the highest achieving.
Here’s an up-and-coming word to familiarize yourself with: racialist. If you call yourself that, you can dodge the “racist” label.
@Greg: I prefer to avoid the racist label by simply not being racist. Just because some dim-witted liberal runs out of argument and chooses to call me a racist in a vain attempt to kill the conversation does not impress me.
I myself choose “Democrat” party because I will not ascribe any characteristic of “democratic” to the current quasi-fascist, liberal, leftist gang. That could change, depending upon if the Democrat party chooses to change.
That’s precisely what the topic suggests “conservatives” never do.
By the way, the word sanctuary, when used in connection with undocumented aliens and in conjunction with the word city, relates to the days when churches were a place of refuge for people under the threat of arrest by sovereign authorities. Under English law, from the 4th through the 17th Centuries, the legal reach of the king stopped at the church door. Once inside that sacred space you were immune from arrest, and remained so until the moment you stepped outside. You were putting yourself at the mercy of the church. They could always put you out.
The modern sanctuary movement originated with the Catholic Church. Cities that took a similar position adopted the term. It describes the position they’ve taken with regard to a specific point of federal authority.
@Bill… Deplorable Me:
The democrat party thinks all is well with their idealology. They are about to place another American hating dirtbag as their dnc chair.
The democrat party is no longer a national party.