Political Semantics

[Jordan]

When does it become deception when politicians "rename" things?

Torture becomes Enhanced Interrogation.

Civil War becomes Sectarian Violence.

Loss of Civil Rights becomes Patriotic Sacrifice.

Where has it led us? Where will it lead us?
Is there something deeply wrong with renaming things to trick the public, or is the fault with the public for not seeing through the deception? Possibly Both?

Where is the line drawn between renaming things and flat out lying?

[Leadpipe]

You've got to understand what a can of worms this question can become as it approaches questions of what is truth? Bear in mind that truth is a question humanity has been pondering over since probably the first time the first man lied to the second.

Some might argue that truth is relative (Perception is Reality, after all) and along with that, so is morality. One man's terrorist is another's hero or freedom fighter or revolutionary. Again, these are tough waters to tread.

With the above in mind, the effort in terminology is an attempt to create and control the frame of the discussion more than it is outright deception. The difference is that deception is an attempt to conceal the truth whereas controlling the frame is a means to color and shade the truth, though eerie parallels can be drawn to 1984's "doublethink" description.

Now, this is nothing new in politics, it's just that this administration is particularly bad at it. I'm not going to doom-and-gloom about it. I don't think that it's particularly destructive as long as the news media do their job and question our leaders.

[Dale]

when was the last time there was a massive protest that looked like a sea of people standing infront of the Lincoln Memorial? Maybe if you had a few more of those things might change.

[Sarah Atwood]

When has politics not been deceptive. Renaming is just trying to put a positive spin on something negative. Hopefully people can see through the BS.

[Matt Gowdy]

Yeah, next thing you know, they'll be passing horrific legislation under terms like the "Patriot Act" or the "Heroes Act" to make sure that anyone who doesn't vote for it will be seen as a political outcast...

Wait... Crap.

This stuff has been going on since the dawn of the English language (or any language really). But it has been escalated slightly over the past few years to prey on political popularity fears to get stuff pushed through that no patriot of this country in their right mind would ever allow. I think it's a discredit to our heroes that we treat their image this way and I think it's hypocritical of our government to continue to pretend that that they are acting in our best interests when it is clear that they can be swayed and bought off with nothing more than a single well placed word.

[shitboy]

well, is anything really what it seems? if you do the research you will find a history tracing back thousands of years of years in which governments of various forms, and those that run governments, have been jabbing swords into our skulls and telling us they are saving us, while telling the rest of the world that they are murdering and/or raping us and stealing our land to help us advance as a civilization because we were so backward and savage, carefully omitting the fact they they either destroyed, or stole to use for themselves, that knowledge which these civilizations had been developing for thousands of years. this process has played out in various forms in various countries for ??? imagine all the money invested in scientific research, the majority of it for military purposes, and all the money for covert operations. we're told that we recieve great benefits to society courtesy of all this research, which indeed we may, but only as a residual of what is actually being developed, (if you've ever done LSD you can thank scientific military research for your trip! i know i appreciate all their hard work, thanks, guys!) and at a fraction of the rate of progress in civilian applications that it would be if the research had been being funded at the same level that the military projects are. how long did the internet exist before the general public even knew anything about it? throughout the history of this country one need only take a cursory glance at the evidence regarding our involvement in the development and deployment of covert operations in a laundry list of countries (including our own) to see that there is almost always a direct economic connection, many times even down to one specific company, which wants things to be done a certain way in the country where they're doing business (like not wanting bothersome things like labor unions, enviornmental laws, fair wages, etc.) that results in the direct involvement of the cia and/or the military. we will then happily be told over and over how well our efforts to establish democracy in that region are coming along. so basically, if you just take for granted that any technology that we might know of or have access to is light years behind what has actually already been developed and put into use by the feds/military, and assume that essentially everything that we see in every major form of media is either totally bullshitted or hyper-spun news or ridiculous distractions and advertising designed to manipulate our very inner-most cravings-reactions and totally brainwash us and fuck with our heads, you pretty much can't go wrong. yaay! a total and complete mindfuck is what has really been renamed, and it's new name is "reality" !

[Joe]

When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called "the People's Stick." -Mikhail Bakunin

Even when things are renamed, the effect of the thing is the same. However, those who give names are those who wield power over those things. When a policeman shouts "Hey you!" and you turn around, there are several assumptions of power and hierarchy being made with that simple gesture. The policeman has given you a name and you respond with subservience.

In the Bible, God gave Adam dominion over all he saw by allowing him to give them names. Names are power. It's no coincidence that in Old English, poets were called "scopes", or shapers.