|
In my recent post on Covid (12/3/24), I remarked that a calling card of the Left has always been the redefinition of terminology, so that words are transformed into a fundamentally altered, or even opposite, meaning. Revisiting this phenomenon, I was reminded of a story.
One day during the late 1980s, I was sitting in a café in Philadelphia, discussing current affairs with a wise old gentleman who had vast experience in the world of think tanks and public policy. We were lamenting the adoption by the city of some harebrained program championed by the usual nutjob Leftist coalition. We concluded that it was well-nigh impossible to challenge the move in a public forum because all of the keywords associated with the program were ingrained in the hivemind as positive: war on poverty, anti-discrimination, equal rights, empowerment, etc. My interlocutor, with a deep sigh, then proclaimed: “The Left owns the rhetoric.” Never were truer words spoken. We face the same problem today. The components of Leftist ideology are so infused in our language that we hardly notice it, to the degree that we often are unable to formulate an adequate response in our own minds. We become paralyzed, without knowing why. Consider, for example, the controversy surrounding the bathrooms at the Capitol in Washington, DC. A few members of Congress are bravely resisting the Alphabet freak show, and I applaud their efforts. But they are hamstrung by the lexicon itself because they engage in arguments about gender. Until recently, this word was almost exclusively a linguistic term, denoting an attribute of a noun: masculine, feminine, or neuter. When the subject was people (or animals), the operative word was sex. As in male or female. If you argue over “gender,” you have already conceded half the battle. Once this linguistic battle is lost, the door is open to a torrent of twisted Orwellian doublespeak. A good example is the mind-bending term gender-affirming care to describe the genital mutilation of children. A related sleight-of-hand is the use of the third-person plural, they, in place of the grammatically correct singular form, he or she. In addition to being a linguistic atrocity, this usage serves to blur the identification of people as male or female. The language now forces us all to speak of each other as androgynous beings. Chalk up another victory for the Left. Higher culture requires the ability to identify and analyze differences, great and subtle, between people, things, and concepts. This intellectual process used to be called discrimination. We all know what happened to the word. For decades already, noticing differences between people, once obligatory in educated circles, is taboo. A final example, and this one a bit more subtle: The use of the word planet instead of world. I am hearing this more and more. “Everyone on the planet knows that…” “They have the best sausage on the planet” “No one on the planet believes that…” etc. In all cases, up until very recently, the usage would have been “in the world” instead of “on the planet.” Planet denotes a hunk of rock, an inanimate object. It is a favorite word of the Climate-Industrial Complex. In contrast, world denotes people, nations, cultures, etc. A huge difference. When we use planet, we are already sucked halfway into the Green scam, without a single argument being made.
0 Comments
Over at the Had Enough Therapy? blog, Stuart Schneiderman has composed a concise and incisive exposition on feminism; one of the best short commentaries I have seen on this profound societal malaise. He opens the piece with this gem: “If you reject reality you will never run out of things to complain about.” While you’re there, check out Schneiderman’s other fascinating and enlightening articles.
Following up on my earlier post on Covid (11/30/24), I would like to share a few additional observations.
A calling card of the Left has always been the redefinition of terminology, so that words are transformed into a fundamentally altered, or even opposite, meaning. This tendency went into overdrive during the Covid campaign. For example, the term science. How many times have we heard “the science is settled,” or its variant, “a consensus has been reached among scientists.” This notion has been employed with great dexterity in the Global Warming scam, but in the Covidocracy it reached new (and dangerous) heights. Science is what we, the experts, say it is! And we declare that it is settled! This, of course, is the precise opposite of what science has always been taken to mean: an endless process of hypothesis, proof, new evidence, challenge, debate, new hypothesis, new experiment, etc. It can never be insulated from challenge and revision. If it did, it would be religion, not science. Another case of language rape is the word vaccine. My 1991 Merriam-Webster dictionary defines it as: “1: matter or a preparation containing the virus of cowpox in a form used for vaccination 2: a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or living fully virulent organisms that is administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease." [In other words, what every person in the world thought was a vaccine, before 2020. Here’s the current definition at Merriam-Webster:] "1: a preparation that is administered (as by injection) to stimulate the body's immune response against a specific infectious agent or disease: such as a: an antigenic preparation of a typically inactivated or attenuated pathogenic agent (such as a bacterium or virus) or one of its components or products (such as a protein or toxin)" [So far so good, though they did sneak in “protein or toxin.” But then...] "b: a preparation of genetic material (such as a strand of synthesized messenger RNA) that is used by the cells of the body to produce an antigenic substance (such as a fragment of virus spike protein)" [There you have it. A vaccine is whatever we say it is. And if that wasn’t bad enough, a few examples of usage are provided, including:] "Moderna's coronavirus vaccine … works by injecting a small piece of mRNA from the coronavirus that codes for the virus' spike protein. … mRNA vaccine spurs the body to produce the spike protein internally. That, in turn, triggers an immune response. —Susie Neilson et al. The revolutionary messenger RNA vaccines that are now available have been over a decade in development. … Messenger RNA enters the cell cytoplasm and produces protein from the spike of the Covid-19 virus. —Thomas F. Cozza Viral vector vaccines, another recent type of vaccine, are similar to DNA and RNA vaccines, but the virus's genetic information is housed in an attenuated virus (unrelated to the disease-causing virus) that helps to promote host cell fusion and entry. —Priya Kaur” Good grief. A related phenomenon is the abrupt about-face on a point of ideology. Consider the controversy surrounding the views of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on medical issues. The Left is up in arms over his nomination as Secretary of Health. But within recent memory, our Progressive masters were advocating a very similar approach. Not all that long ago, the Left would have asserted:
Well, all that went out the window when the Left realized that the Medical-Industrial Complex could be harnessed to its agenda. Go ahead, folks, take those pills and injections, eat the fake meat, wear a mask that traps your waste matter, whatever; it’s all safe and effective. Big Pharma has joined the pantheon of heroes, alongside our intrepid medical personnel, who will treat you at the hospital, even if you have the dreaded, unspeakable plague. In the immortal words of George Orwell, we have always been at war with Eastasia. “Let us not be deceived! Time marches forward; we’d like to believe that everything in it marches forward, that the development is also one that moves forward. The most level-headed are led astray by this illusion … ‘Mankind’ does not advance; it does not even exist. The overall aspect is that of a tremendous experimental laboratory in which a few successes are scored, scattered throughout all ages, while there are untold failures, and all order, logic, union, and obligingness are lacking.”
—Friedrich Nietzsche, circa 1885 Would it be an exaggeration to say that the Covid affair is a watershed event in world history? We have not even begun to unravel the implications of this brazen attack on humanity, quite possibly unprecedented in its scope.
There is still no single, definitive label for it. I’ve heard Covid, Covid-19, Coronavirus, the pandemic, the Covid-19 pandemic, SARS CoV2, plandemic, scamdemic, China flu, Wu Flu, and others I can’t recall. There are also a number of awkward circumlocutions, such as “when Covid hit.” Years from now, perhaps it will take decades, when the full extent of the scandal is acknowledged by all, we will settle on a single term that encompasses the entire atrocity in all its aspects and ramifications. This is a normal process. Only in retrospect can we gauge the true dimensions, and attach an accurate moniker. I doubt whether the French and German combatants in August 1914 already knew that they were fighting “World War I.” One indication of Covid’s significance and gravity is the reticence of many people to speak of it in public. Even at this late date, there exists censorship of alternate views, and the possibility of having one’s career wrecked for daring to utter words that threaten the "scientific consensus." It is clear that users of the words plandemic and scamdemic are cognizant of the purposive nature of the Covidocracy. Yet even here, there is usually hesitation to go all the way, and state unequivocally that the pandemic was entirely a psy-op. One can decry insane government policy (masks, lockdowns, social distancing, etc.) but still believe that a novel virus was on the loose. I believe that this is the approach, for example, of Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, President Trump’s pick to head the National Institutes of Health. Indeed, {nasty new virus + terrible policy} was the overall message of the Great Barrington Declaration, of which Bhattacharya was co-author. But there have been a few brave souls willing to speak truth to power, and uncover the full extent of the Covid horror. One of these great individuals is Michael Yeadon, the British whistleblower and former chief of allergy and respiratory research at Pfizer. Early on, he took reports of the virus at face value, until it became clear to him that the whole narrative was ludicrous, from one end to the other. Yeadon now pulls no punches when exposing the mangled “scientific” research and computer simulations that first postulated a supposedly novel disease; the bogus PCR test; the deranged hospital protocols that murdered thousands of people; the mRNA genetic alteration drugs (“vaccines”) that have killed and maimed millions; and the connections between the Covid campaign and other aspects of the Globalist anti-human agenda (such as digital IDs and 15-minute cities). Let us not forget the gold standard, the American psychiatrist Dr. Andrew Kaufman, who to the best of my recollection was able, from day one, to cut through the fog of government and media manipulation. In his numerous interviews and podcasts, he methodically dismantles the Establishment narrative, piece by piece. Kaufman also traces the ideological antecedents of Covidians such as Bill Gates, and their extensive overlap with the eugenics and population-reduction crowd. Diametrically opposed to these titans is someone who uses the phrase “the Covid-19 pandemic” unironically. Here we likely have complete buy-in to the propaganda. A horrible disease has gripped Planet Earth, and only the herculean efforts of the brave scientists, healthcare workers, and government officials saved the human race from extinction. The evil vaccine-refusers threaten us all, and should be shunned and punished. Some of these people still wear the face diaper, and long for the good old days. For anyone studying the behavior of cults, these (literally) faceless automatons could easily provide several lifetimes worth of research material. A fascinating phenomenon is the use of the word Covid alone, with prolonged enunciation, and with a strong emphasis on the first syllable, so that it comes out COHHH-vid. This is said with a doleful face and a sorrowful voice. The tragedy of it all…O cruel world! Maybe you’ve heard a story like this: “Too bad about Henry. He had a heart attack, tried to drive himself to the ER, got in a wreck, fractured his skull, then an ambulance picked him up, on the way he had a stroke, at the hospital they put him on a heart-lung machine, keeping him alive for three days, but then…” [look of horror on person’s face] “…he died of COHHH-vid.” A variation on this theme is people who speak of “Long Covid,” with the same tragedy-laden facial expression and tone of voice. The words L o n g C o v i d are drawn out, in a fine theatrical flourish. “Last year Henry got his fifteenth booster, but it didn’t help; for the past six months, everything’s been wrong with him…doctors are baffled…L o n g C o v i d is a terrible thing.” The real struggle is against Long Idiocy. And it is an uphill battle. In the spirit of Thanksgiving, I have been pondering the glory of the Founding Fathers, and indeed, of the early generations that built America. One man that skillfully conveys this epic is the brilliant historian Gordon Wood (born 1933), himself a testimony to the integrity and character that Made America Great.
I recommend watching an hour-long lecture by Wood, “The Greatness of George Washington,” delivered at Brown University in 2013. Wood delves into the stellar qualities of Washington, and of the leaders of the nascent American republic. The lecture is fascinating and inspiring, and it demonstrates what is possible in a society led by men of this caliber. For another view of George Washington, I am reprinting below a post that I wrote on the original AWOL Civilization blog (August 2007). * * * Born of Liberty One of the favorite targets of anti-American historical revisionists is the Founding Fathers. This is logical: You undermine the society you hate by delegitimizing its architects. Anyone who has read Jefferson or Madison knows that the men who fashioned the American republic need no defense. Comparing them to most of today's leaders or "intellectuals" is like comparing Aristotle to Michael Moore. Nevertheless, it’s nice to receive some reinforcement now and then. I ran across such reinforcement while reading Chateaubriand, the great French statesman and writer of the late 18th/early 19th centuries. His remarkable life included a sojourn in the New World, where he met with George Washington, in Philadelphia, in 1791. Chateaubriand was awestruck by the humility of “le Général Washington," a demeanor he described as the “simplicity of the old Roman." Washington had a small house, just like the neighbors, with no guards and no valets. The man himself appeared very tall, with “a tranquil and cool, rather than noble, bearing, looking very much like he does in the etchings.” “Silence envelopes the actions of Washington. He acts with deliberation; one would say that he feels responsible for the liberty of the future, and that he fears compromising it. What light radiates from his profound humility!” Chateaubriand was fascinated by his conversation with “the citizen-soldier, liberator of a world…I was happy that Washington’s eyes looked upon me. I will be warmed by it for the rest of my life. There is virtue in the gaze of a great man.” The author compares Washington with Napoleon: “Washington’s republic lives on; the empire of Bonaparte is destroyed. Washington and Bonaparte spring from the bosom of democracy: both born of liberty, the former was loyal to it, the latter betrayed it.” And finally: “Washington was the representative of the needs, the ideas, the wisdom, the opinions of his era…He blended his existence with that of his country; his glory is the patrimony of civilization…” [Quotes translated from Chateaubriand, Mémoires d’Outre-Tombe, Paris, Editions Gallimard -- Pléiade, 1951, pp. 219-225.] [To my American readers: I wish you a Happy Thanksgiving!]
* * * A ceasefire has been announced in the war between Israel and Hezbollah. Everyone in the Middle East, from the beggar in Cairo to the citrus farmer on the kibbutz to the King of Saudi Arabia, knows that it will never hold, and that it constitutes a victory for Hezbollah. Of all the factors contributing to this disaster, one is missing from most analysis of the situation: Israel's Deep State. Yes, Israel is ruled by its very own Deep State. And that Deep State is firmly in the hands of the Left, and thus hostile to the interests of the majority of the population, who, for lack of a better term, are “conservative” (i.e., guided by common sense). The Deep State of Israel, its Leftist Establishment if you prefer, includes the security/intelligence apparatus, the high command of the military, the news media, academia, the cultural elite, and the judiciary. They run the country, plain and simple. The “government” led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has figurehead status only; it runs nothing of consequence. The Israeli Deep State routinely conducts spurious investigations and other forms of lawfare over alleged wrongdoing by patriotic officials, and arrests them at will. (For in-depth coverage of these shenanigans, I recommend Caroline Glick). They kneecap the army in its conduct of war. They also work hand-in-hand with woke American and European NGOs to demoralize the population. The Israeli judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, issues outrageous edicts at its leisure, backing the Deep State while nullifying a wide range of government policy initiatives, notably in the area of national security. Ideologically speaking, the Israeli judiciary is slightly to the left of Mao. No one has been able to stop this robed dictatorship, until some brave souls in the Knesset (parliament) introduced judicial reform legislation to rein in the worst excesses. The Deep State rallied, organizing riots and other mischief—even in the midst of an existential war—as part of a campaign to “save democracy.” They wail and lament that the evil fascist Netanyahu and his henchmen want to extinguish human rights, heretofore safeguarded by the holy judiciary. Does all this sound familiar? It should; the situation is roughly analagous to the first Trump administration. In both cases, the Deep State continues to pilot the ship of state, despite the nominal transfer of power. Meanwhile, the entire world thinks that the country is now “right wing,” while the Left merrily continues its agenda of mayhem. It wasn’t always like this. Sure, Israel was always controlled by the Left, but in the old days, these elements were mostly patriots who loved the country and its people. Let’s give credit where credit is due: they built the state. The real shift in attitudes began around 1977, when Menachem Begin became prime minister. As a result of that election, the Knesset/cabinet slipped out of the Left’s control. This could not be tolerated. The nation had to be punished for rejecting the glories of socialism. It didn’t take long for the Deep State to counterattack, committing itself to sabotaging the government. The Left hounded the country during and after its victory over the PLO in the Lebanon War of 1982, turning a decisive military win into an unnecessary quagmire (and laying the groundwork for the current Lebanon mess). Over the next decade, the Left regained control of the Knesset, and the populist annoyance was eliminated. The table was set for the great betrayal: the Oslo Accords of 1993. This was the Left’s crowning achievement, unmatched in its treachery. The Left had set a trap from which Israel (and the Arabs, for that matter) has never been able to escape. This also marks the moment when, for the first time in the history of the state, free speech was suppressed; dissenters were persecuted as “obstacles to peace.” In the U.S. as in Israel, the central issue, towering above all others, is this: How can the Left be stopped and ultimately neutralized? The survival of both countries—not to mention the rest of the “Collective West”—depends on it. In my recent post Intellectual Decay, Bitcoin Edition (11/23/24), I discussed the problem of subjective value, first as applied to money, and then to art and culture in general. I examined this issue in depth in an article I wrote in 2007 for American Thinker, entitled “Speaking Truth to Art.” I invite you to read the piece, as relevant now as it was then.
Thank God we still have a few true statesmen left in the world. One of my favorites these days is Viktor Orban. The Hungarian prime minister has refused to allow his country to be dragged into the mire of globalist and “progressive” mischief that has characterized the West for decades.
His latest poke in the eye of the Leftist cyclops: Ignoring the arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, issued last week by the International Criminal Court (ICC). Orban has invited his Israeli counterpart to visit Hungary, in defiance of the warrant. Orban can see right through the ICC charade. These midwit woke bureaucrats sit in The Hague and issue their pompous edicts, as if from Mount Olympus. I suppose that if they experience too much pushback from this latest escapade, they can always arrest some global-warming denier for “genocide.” Mr. Netanyahu is in good company. In March 2023, a similar ICC arrest warrant was directed at Russian President Vladimir Putin. I wonder if Russia’s list of potential targets for the Oreshnik missile includes a certain address in the Netherlands. As of this writing, we are in the thick of the Ukraine Missile Crisis. The French government, not wanting to be left out of this festival of dysfunction, gave permission for its own long-range missiles to be lobbed into Russia. Ça me fait chier, as anyone with half a brain in France must be saying right about now. Who’s next? Does Australia have any missiles that would qualify for the party?
The sheer idiocy on display among the rulers of the “Collective West” has gone off the scale and out the door. On second thought, the factors that we normally use to explain unfathomably bad policy⸺idiocy, greed, incompetence, etc.⸺are no longer applicable in this case. Something more nefarious is at play. This is nothing short of mental illness. Never has the phrase “the inmates are running the asylum” been more apt. Think of our “elites,” our so-called leaders. Macron, Starmer, Biden, Jake Sullivan, Scholz, Ursula von der Leyen, and their less visible minions: creeps and nutjobs one and all. Think of the damage they have caused in other realms, and of their sick pronouncements. Lunacy! Don’t bother trying to convince these people to alter course. As with spoiled children, an adult must put an end to the misbehavior. I am certain that there are individuals close to the throne who are in a position to accomplish this. Thus far, they have been reticent to act, or to act with sufficient force. Now, however, the prospect of annihilation may provide the incentive to take the necessary steps. We shall see. I believe that the same principle applies in other areas of public life. Our psychopathic ruling class can only be stopped by others; they will never stop themselves. |
Dystopian novels by
|
RSS Feed