Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 11/23/2025 8:52:15 AM PST by timza
We are adrift in a sea of confusion and rancor caused by mistrust and ignorance.
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
A few examples:
Progressive: Has been hijacked to the extent that the overwhelming entries in Webster Dictionary relate to political action.
New Normal: Rather old term that has morphed into a Government response to either a real or generated crisis. Results in a blank check for the Government to act without constraint.
Threat to Democracy: A political notion that is entirely dependent on the redefined ideal of democracy/republic.
Anarchy: Used to convey a false idea of a type of government rather than a lack of government.
Socialism: There is no definitive number, but political scientists and encyclopedias of socialism usually list between 15 and 30 significant variants depending on how finely they slice it.
In this context it is reasonable for a group to expand any notion. As an example: It is not a giant leap to believe that there are various levels of gender. That is progressive and New Normal wrapped into a single misunderstood notion.
It is impossible to progress, cooperate, comprehend, or even communicate with each other without a clear universal understanding of the language.
long time passing
“Progressive: Has been hijacked to the extent that the overwhelming entries in Webster Dictionary relate to political action.”
Please refer to Webster’s before generalizing.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/progressive
I stand by the comment. I believe you kinda proved my point. You focused on a single “questionable” definition rather than the subject matter.
Interesting follow-up to “The Laura Flanders and Friends Show.“She’s “forward-looking.”
“You focused on a single “questionable” definition rather than the subject matter.”
I never got past your first example.
‘
What is “Top of mind”? Is it meant to only be within the context of a “new normal” or is it just another unnecessary catch phrase, however popular?
I'd say it's caused by hate, and a lot of that hate is media-driven hate. See Tagline.
What?
Keep in mind that deliberate manipulation of language (and symbols) is a potent and universally applied approach by the Left to keep their enemies (Conservatives) off balance.
They do that, because it keeps “us” on defense. They simply change the meaning of perfectly legitimate words like “gay”, “progressive”, or “Socialism” to mean something else, and we end up having to expend energy learning the new use of the term, and including information about the “old” and the “new” lexicon in our explanations and discussions.
With symbols, they have done much the same with the Rainbow (God’s promise not to destroy man again with a flood, changing it to a homosexual symbol) and with something as inane as coloring Republicans “red” and Democrats “blue” in media graphs and portrayals. (It was the other way around at some point, but Democrats recognized the inherent weakness of having themselves associated with the color red, a well-known association with Communism)
When they do this, it wastes our time and energy, and has the additional burden of lengthening, complicating, and obfuscating the discussion.
“They” simply smirk as they watch us wrestle with the changes they have wrought, and move on to some other phrase or symbol, and change that to throw back at us.
It is, to them, like “Lexiconic Donkey Kong” where they simply throw barrels in our way to hobble us. And we let them.
Duran Duran helps explain why St. John the Revelator identifies the Whore of Babylon.
“Where have all the flowers gone?”
It’s November.
CC
And you can send me dead flowers every morning
Send me dead flowers by the mail
Send me dead flowers to my wedding
And I won’t forget to put roses on your grave
BTW, this is nothing new. Socrates used attempt communication with others and would begin by saying, let's first admit we are human
The ancient Thucydides remarks the Greeks were also "in a sea of confusion" For those who wish:
“to fit in with the change of events, words had to change their usual meaning. What was once thought to be reckless audacity came to be considered the courage of a loyal partisan; prudent hesitation became specious cowardice; moderation was held to be a cloak for unmanliness; ability to see all sides of a question was inaptitude for acting on any; frenzied violence became the attribute of manliness; cautious plotting, a justifiable means of self-defence. The advocate of extreme measures was always trustworthy; his opponent a man to be suspected. To succeed in a plot was to have a shrewd head; to divine a plot still more shrewd; but to try to provide against having to plot at all was to break up your party and to be afraid of your adversaries. In short, the man who forestalled another’s intended violence was praised, and so was he who encouraged to violence one who had never thought of it. Even family ties counted for less than party ties, because party members were readier to dare without asking questions. For such associations were not formed for mutual advantage under the existing laws, but for the pursuit of power in defiance of the laws. Their pledges to one another were secured not so much by religious sanction as by complicity in crime. Fair proposals from the opposing side were received with vigilance by those who were in the stronger position, rather than with generosity. Revenge was more important than not being harmed in the first place. If oaths of reconciliation were ever made, they lasted only as long as both sides had no other resources, and were broken the moment an opportunity presented itself. The one who first seized the chance to act unscrupulously, when he saw the other side off guard, enjoyed his revenge more than if he had acted openly, both because he felt safer and because he had won an unexpected victory in treachery. People are more ready to call rogues clever than simpletons honest, and they are ashamed to be thought honest but proud to be thought clever. The cause of all these evils was the desire to rule, which greed and ambition inspire, and the zeal for victory which these passions, once kindled, produce. The leaders in the cities, each with fine-sounding slogans—‘equality for the masses’ on the one side, ‘moderate aristocracy’ on the other—made the public interest their prize while professing to serve it. In their struggles to outdo one another they used every means, dared the most terrible deeds, and went still further in their revenges, stopping at no limit of justice or public interest, but only at what suited their party at the moment. They would seize power by unjust votes or by force, as the chance arose. Neither side thought of piety; the side that could use fair words to accomplish foul ends was the more admired. Citizens who were neutral were destroyed by both parties, either because they would not join in the struggle or out of envy that they should survive it.”
Just squeezed one out as big as a toddler’s arm.
Are you not up to it? You want to fix it?
Our communication skills have diminished over time to the point we cannot trust what is spoken or read. I found this out the hard way when I showed up naked at what was advertised as a gender reveal party.
I guess you could look at it that way. But it doesn't explain why they try to shut you up. Mellifluous speakers who cross them are assassinated. Privileges are revoked for the likes of Jordan Peterson because he communicates to those who are less literate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.