When Words Lose Their Meaning - People Lose Their Freedom

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 01:33 AM
link   
I recently ran across this article on the Web, and found it to be very interesting and informative. I wanted to share it with you guys, but it was copyrighted by LewRockwell.com.

With nothing to lose, I contacted Mr. Rockwell to ask if I could use the article in a post I wanted to make to ATS. He was delighted. So, any quotes taken from the article entitled, "Latin: The Unbreakable Habit" and posted here in ATS, and the link to the full article, which by the way is worth reading, are here with the full permission of LewRockwell.com.


The widespread misuse of words is a sign that a tyrant is manipulating the language. Eventually language becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenlyness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thought. A tyrant wants nothing more than the sheep-like masses to readily accept foolish ideas.


Before I read this article, I would have never dreamed of putting this together, but, as we all know (well most of us), we tend to think of G. Dumbya as basically an idiot. In part, because of his seemingly lack of ability to put two words together without having them written down for him by somebody else. Otherwise, he comes out with such ridiculous remarks like describing the war as a "catastrophic success". Just one of many of what some refer to as "Bushisms".

When he's not doing that, he's either tounge-tied, or he's spewing out meaningless words aimed at brainwashing his stupid sheep, like, 'Social Security Reform, it's all on the table', or speaking of "smart bombs" or "the war on terrorism" (one of his favorites) - I think he has it memorized now. Just like, "The world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein in Power", etc, etc.... you know what I mean. All propaganda, meant to confuse the majority of the sheep, so that they will go along with him, rather than thinking for themselves, all the while empowering the state more and more.


We have many "intrinsically meaningless" words, having no clear root in reality. On inspection, almost all the words and phrases of our political vocabularuy turn out to be hollow. Surgical strike, proposition nation, diversirty and tollerance - All are saccharine names of bitter concepts used to expand the power of the state.


All of this makes me wonder....is Bush really as stupid as he comes across, speaking like a nearly illiterate thug? Or is he deliberately "manipulating the language", (and if so, he's just a bit too obvious), because he is perhaps a tyrant in the making, a dictator in training? Perhaps, he uses the act of appearing incredibly stupid, in order to cover up his true agenda. The article in it's entirety can be found at: lewrockwell.com

I don't know. What do you guys think, after reading the article in full - or not?


[edit on 2/15/2005 by CyberKat]

[edit on 15-2-2005 by ZeddicusZulZorander]




posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 01:44 AM
link   
I'll tell you that in Midieval England, lawyers and judges spoke French knowing that most commoners did not know this language. We still have a similar system in place, which is why we require a Law Dictionary as opposed to a regular dictionary. It's amazing that words actually mean something.


But, I think what you are talking about has to do with 1984-esque concepts of double-think. We take these concepts of death and destruction and apply sugar-coating with phrases such as "liberating tyrannized peoples" and "democratizing dictatorships" when all that we're doing is blowing the hell out of a country for our own selfish purposes. People give a crap about Muslims when they get something out of it, but do you think they'd want to sit next to an Iraqi on an airplane?

As far as Bush, I think he is a burnout with a cloudy mind. He is not the real "brains" of the operation in my opinion. He is merely the front man for his administration. Could you honestly see Dick Cheney elected as President? Bush will tell you to "F**k Off" but he'll do it with a smile on his face.



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Thank you, ZeddicusZulZorander. I don't know if people are taking any more interest, but I really appreciate your help.



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 11:20 AM
link   
This is excellent. I took a year of Latin in 6th grade, afterwards the school stopped teaching it. I wish it would have kept the subject. I went on to study French for four years in high school, ninth through twelfth grade. Afterwards when I went to college my best friend was from France. Ontop of that My wife is from Panama and we speak Spanish to our daughters. I am going to look into seeing if my daughters school will see about teaching Latin. With the "No Child Left Behind" Laws, though I think they need to be changed a bit I don't agree with them 100%, I think It will help to teach our children better grammar, reading and writting skills.

Phae



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 12:53 PM
link   

The widespread misuse of words is a sign that a tyrant is manipulating the language. Eventually language becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenlyness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thought. A tyrant wants nothing more than the sheep-like masses to readily accept foolish ideas.


But at the end of the day and from the beginning isn't it the unique commonality of powerfully vague idiomatic nonsense that incisively breaks uniformly out of the box, offering color-blind visions binding the ties of liberated hearts and minds among the vast majority of our diverse peoples, as much the same as unilaterally different, seeking only to freely serve the inalienable tenants of fleeting liberty, so at risk in today's everchanging world of fundamental foundation that requires a bold step back to our beginnings with forward-thinking reverence for our humbly infallible traditions, to return us to the course that got us to this point, where without duly elected and imposed restrictions of carefully planned and immediate sanctions for the freedom to lead independently under God, we may find ourselves lost on the clearly defined roadmap, or in a place far different from where we started so far away and so long ago where the future lies so close to home, from which we all aspire to return, safe from those that don't share the universal truths common to all, to a time where all agree that obstacles are mere opportunites for all living things to share life in common [applause]
as an anchor to guide the way toward that beacon shining like a lighthouse in the pitch black void guiding us clear of any solid rocky foundations that threaten to...

I hate you people.



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Great post!
I believe thats right. Right on target there.



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Hoo-ha! Great thread.

To start, we ought to note just for the sake of respecting the logic of the thread, that "tyrant" used to mean "governor" in the sense of being a local administrator of an Empire. I don't know if it started in ancient Persia or with Alexander's empire. The word grew more "evil" as time went by...

One use for studying Lating I have personally noted (self-study, high-school textbook and elsewhere occasionally) is that for every new word in Latin you learn, the roots of about 3 other words, both in English and any Latin-based language you might have learned, become clear. Nice payoff. I get a lot of Spanish info as well as English each time I learn a new Latin word.

Latin may put the quash on post-modern deconstructionist games! Deconstruction theory indicates that the meaning of each word is defined by an often unconsciously arrived-at POLITICAL process. People must after all agree on what a word means. Often force of sheer numbers can subvert or change the meaning of a word. A good example is "liberal" which used to mean "freedom loving" but now, to some, (okay, to most) means "intrusive starry-eyed politically correct meddling commie."

I, of course, cling to the original meaning. It's a losing battle, believe me.

But the point is, in Latin the meanings are very precise and not much negotiation about the meanings occurs.

Orwell was right. So is deconstructionist theory, I believe, but the contrast when using modern English shows that the logic and exactness of Latin is sharp. Fuzziness of modern meanings can be used by modern tyrants to subvert the public will. Or I should say, modern dictators.



posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Before I started this short thread, I had found the article, "Latin: The Unbreakable Habit" quite by mistake.

And although I don't know much Latin myself, I was still so intreagued(sp?) by the concept put forth in the article, that I re-read it a few times, and felt as if I had suddenly found something important in our quest for hanging on to our freedom, etc...

Even now, I can't quite put my finger on it. But, had hoped that some of you out there would be able to. I'm sorry it didn't generate more interest.


[edit on 2/22/2005 by CyberKat]



posted on Mar, 13 2005 @ 06:29 AM
link   
"I don't know what you mean by 'glory,'"Alice said. Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't --till I tell you. I meant that 'there's a nice knockdown argument for you.'" "But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knockdown argument,'" Alice objected. "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." (unknown author) - But, point well taken.

Ever since I found the article I mentioned several times in this thread, I have been noticing more and more, just how stupid the president must think we are! How obvious it is that he is maniputating the language to serve his own interests, and how easily the public seems to buy the euphamisms, and more than sometimes, the flat out lies.

I could try to give examples of what I've heard here and there in order for me to come to this conclusion, but I have found a website, authored by Colby Glass, who is the teacher of a course called, "Information Evaluation". The program was founded by the library faculty at Palo Alto College in San Antonio.

The site explains what I would like to point out much better, I think than I could. I would like to quote a few exerpts from it, because I am truly worried about what is happening, and happening quickly to us, the American people, and all the other people who have been, are now, or will be affected by accepting what the Bush Administration is saying at face value, rather than at least questioning it.

Mr. Glass points out a few very real situations in which all citizens should for their own good, and for the good of others, evaluate what they hear, before simply accepting it:


A Cardinal Rule of the Information Age is Never Accept Anything Uncritically.
Bad information is worse than useless--it's harmful. (example of buying a used car --- salesman tells you a little old lady owned it; you buy it and what do you find out?)
Any time you're exposed to new ideas or data, ask yourself the following questions. They will help you spot the bad stuff (BS) 90 percent of the time:

Are There Undefined Terms or Ambiguous Language?
Genuine information is always presented in concrete words and figures.
Words that should be red flags:

Many people say…
The majority is for…
Experts say….
Everyone says…

For instance, "Most Americans want freedom." What does that mean? What Americans exactly; how many? And how do they define freedom?


These are excellent examples of what I have been noticing more and more easily lately, both on the television news, the mainstream newpapers, and on some websites. I have found that by listening to what words are being thrown at me, then going back over them, in a lot of cases, I have found them to mean not at all what the words actually mean. They tend to mean instead what we are "supposesd" to hear. I have even gone to my dictionary or thesaurous several times, to verify that what I heard is what is what I was supposed to hear, or if what I heard were in fact words with no basis in fact, or in the English language.

I have also found that another popular way that polititians use in order to manipulate the public (the masses), is to simply lie. To just flat out lie! And the more the lie is repeated, the more the people actually tend to believe it! Assuming that the election really was not rigged (and on that subject, I have my own opinion, but nothing to back it up, so I will leave it out, as I am trying to make an example of the current subject.) Assuming that Bush really did win the election "fair and square", that alone shows just how easy it was for him to manipulate the majority of the voters, mainly by simply lying, and repeating the lies over and over again.

Here's one that perhaps the people should have questioned some, just by the fact of the very notion that they were considering postponing the election:


Part of the problem with the way Bush has been waging the war on terror is that his rhetoric makes it appear as though America has never been so threatened. But that is not the case. Our country was much more in peril during the War of 1812, the Civil War, World War II, and the Cold War than it is now. And we still had elections during these conflicts.
("Election Terrors." The Progressive, Sep. 2004: 10).


And here is another good example of how lies have been used to manipulate, and frighten the public:


Alan Greenspan has recently been frightening Americans again, as he did in April, by threatening that Congress will have to cut Social Security benefits to fund retirement for "aging Boomers." In fact, the trust fund is solvent until 2042 and sloshing with surpluses. Manufacturing a crisis helps Congressional conservatives spill our precious contributions into the
unquenchable stock market.
(Margaret Morganroth Gullette. "Playing the Age Card." The Nation, Nov. 1, 2004: 8, 29).


Couldn't resist giving you just one more quote on the subject of lying. This, imho is really too much:


"No President has ever done more for human rights than I have." - George W. Bush


This from a man who, as Governor of Texas, oversaw more executions of prisoners than any other state, a man who, as President, was ultimately responsible for the torturing of prisoners in Iraq.

Although I could go on and on with examples I have found where the people are being deliberately manipulated, for the good of the Administration, I will show you only one more example. I don't want to bore you, however, I just wish that more people would be more in tune with their own instincts, or at least learn to be, before this roller coaster flies right off it's tracks. There is another way that polititians use to mislead the public, that I have also been noticing more and more, is simply to use silence.

One example of this is, for instance, the Bush Administration's refusal to let the media broadcast pictures of the coffins of servicemen coming back from Iraq. The level of violence is also escalating in Iraq, but the government does not allow the media to report the constant examples of violence: downed helicopters, murdered military, crimes in the streets.

If you think about the inconsistancies between what we hear on the news from day to day, it is pretty obvious that there are plenty of unreported incidents.

Well, I hope that some of this will make someone, at least one person think twice about exactly what it is that they hear on television, or read in the newspapers, and even better, to encourage even one non-ATS friend or relative to do the same. That would be a great start in an attempt to take back our nation.






new topics
 
1

log in

join