You know that scene in The Princess Bride where Vizzini keeps saying the same word, and Montoya says, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”?
Princess Bride clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhXjcZdk5QQ
One of the basic strategies for restructuring society norms is to redefine words. But there’s no public statement of the “new definition”; it’s a subtle shift that eventuates into a takeover of the language and turns black to white and red to green, etc.
Being a writer, words matter. Words convey ideas, and if the word choice changes, the meaning can change. I strive to find the precise words I need to convey my ideas. I try to leave no room for ambiguity on what I’m saying. Ambiguity fosters misunderstanding and misinterpretation – a whole other set of problems. It is two different things to disagree and to misunderstand.
You know, it’s like how “racist” gets thrown around. It becomes a catch-all phrase that strays far from its original meaning, and can now become whatever the writer (or voice) says it means. This can only lead to confusion, accusation, misunderstandings, etc.
Here’s another example of “racism” and the contradiction of its meaning:
A cultural step to bringing order back where there is chaos, is to return to the original meaning of words. Why? Because it brings common ground back where there was confusion and division. It encourages understanding where there was misunderstanding. Remember, disagreement and misunderstanding are different things. There’s a good percentage of time that we’re misunderstanding one another, rather than disagreeing.
Think about your friends with different ideologies than your own. They may be “liberal” or a Democrat, but a lot of them are basically good people. They don’t lie, cheat or steal. They’re fair and honest. We can disagree with them on points of public policy and still be friends or love each other. But misunderstandings breed division and all kinds of hurt feelings.
My aunt was 95 years old when she died almost two years ago. She was a democrat all her life, voted in every election for the democrat candidates. She was amazing — full of love and life and compassion for others. Our politics never divided us, even though we disagreed on some points. In 2016 she voted Republican for the first time in her life because she just couldn’t cast a vote for HRC.
About two months before she died, I had stopped by to visit her and she was on her back porch. As I walked up she said, “How have I not been awake for this long?” I had no idea what she was talking about. She responded that she couldn’t believe it took her so long to see how destructive the democrats had become.
I just think if we’d find ways to connect with those of different ideologies and remove the barriers for misunderstandings, we’d be in healthier places.
Take for instance, “fascist”. I’ve posted the definition of it here, but it’s a word that’s been taken over to slap on anyone whose ideology differs from your own. Conservatives are constantly being called “fascists”. But we’re not, by definition alone. We have no desire for an authoritative government. In fact, we want the opposite.
But what do you think of when you hear “fascist”? Or “racist”? It’s an immediate negative connotation. That’s deliberate. That’s a dividing line people try to make when the resort to fabricated definitions of words slapped on people they disagree with.
Mainstream has gone so far as to call ANTIFA “anti-fascist”! That’s laughable just by definition! Yet it’s the phrase constantly accused of anyone that differs with liberal policies.
According to this article, there are no current national governments defined as “fascist”. You have to got back to the World War eras to find one.
https://www.governmentvs.com/en/fascist-countries/model-10-4
And this article is fantastic. It breaks down the very definition of fascist governments and leaders by actual history, and not some mumbo jumbo from talking heads.
https://www.realclearhistory.com/…/10_little-known_fascist_…
The author says: “Fascist states are characterized by the following: One party governance; private property is tolerated so long as it serves the state and not the individual; corporations are tolerated so long as they serve the interests of the state and not shareholders; and economic nationalism is pursued not through free trade but via trading blocs based around a shared identity (mythical or not).”
ALL of these traits are absent in most Conservatives’ ideology.
Yet mainstream is insistent on defining alternative ideologies as “fascist”. Her are some examples:
So the next time someone calls you or a conservative a “fascist”, kindly ask them to define what they mean. In a friendly and direct manner, point out the real definition of fascist and the vast difference that is to conservative values. We actually abhor authoritative government! We actually want less government regulation and oversight. We actually want individual liberties. All of these are qualities the exact opposite of “fascism”.
Additional articles on this subject: