Redefinition

The Left hurts the battle against torture, rape and other evils By Dennis Prager

When you hear the words "oppression," "genocide," "racism," or even "torture" or "rape," do you immediately recoil as you always did? I don't. While I hate those evils as much as ever, I no longer assume the term always describes the reality.

For example, the liberal press' unending preoccupation with American abuses of Iraqi detainees had a number of deleterious consequences. One was a further undermining of Arab and Muslim support for America's liberation of Iraq. But the longest-lasting negative effect was probably the cheapening of the word "torture."

It undermined the war against torture to characterize what some Americans did to some Iraqis in the Abu Ghraib prison -- actions that were indeed sick, un-American and shameful to our military -- as "torture." Labeling abuses as "torture" filled me with pity for all the people around the world who had experienced real torture.

I kept thinking about those whose bodies were burned, whose fingernails were torn out, who were hung by their arms in a way that broke their shoulders (a common Chinese communist torture), who were put into human shredders (in Saddam's Iraq) or who had burning hot steel rods shoved into their rectums. How did these poor souls react to seeing the Western media routinely describe humiliating and frightening naked men for the sadistic amusement of guards as "torture"?

A second example is "rape." In the past, when I heard that a woman had been raped, I recoiled in horror. Not any more. Now, my first reaction is, "What happened to her?"

One has to ask that question because the feminist left has redefined the word "rape" to the point where, unless you know the specifics, you don't know if a woman was violently forced into sexual intercourse or had engaged in sex that she regretted the following morning.

For the latter is one of the definitions of "rape" that the feminist movement uses and has disseminated. That is how the figure "one in four" women having been raped was derived. And while the late feminist thinker Andrea Dworkin did not actually make the statement widely attributed to her that "all (heterosexual) sex is rape," it was a sentiment that was earnestly debated in feminist circles.

Individuals and groups on the left have done the same to the word "genocide." The term originally meant an attempt to murder all members of a racial, ethnic, national or religious group. Today, it is used to describe an Israeli attack on Palestinian terrorists that also unintentionally kills some civilians, and to describe what America is doing in Iraq and even what America has done to its black population. So, when one hears "genocide" today, one immediately wants to know who is using the term and against whom.

Even the left in Israel, the nation that arose from the ashes of the most organized genocide in history, misuses the word. For example, professor Israel Charny, director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem, told the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz: "We (Israelis) have never committed an act of genocide. We have perpetrated a few acts of genocidal massacre against a small number of people."

No term is more often used by the left than "oppressed." American women are routinely described as "oppressed," as are America's blacks, Hispanics and all poor people. But if American women, the freest women in human history, are oppressed, what term is left to describe the treatment of women in Arab and some other Muslim countries?

And then there is "racism." Being aware of the racism of those who lynched blacks in America and the racism of Nazism, I grew up believing no doctrine was more evil. Yet today, I yawn when I hear a member of the left use the term -- such as when Sen. Harry Reid characterized the Senate's proclamation of English as America's official language as "racist," or when whites and blacks who oppose race-based affirmative action are called racists.

One more example will have to suffice: The left regularly charges America's conservative Christians with wanting to make America a "theocracy," being "fascists" and/or being "anti-Semites." They are none of those things, and as a result, the battle against real theocrats (Muslim fundamentalists), real fascists and real anti-Semites is compromised.

The tragedy of all this is that when evils are defined down, good people are left verbally unarmed when the real evils present themselves. It is yet another way in which the left, intentionally or not, undermines the battle against evil.

Dennis Prager is a radio talk show host, author, and contributing columnist for Townhall.com.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Find this story at: http://townhall.com/opinion/columns/dennisprager/2006/06/27/202728.html

Right on in every word.

The attack on language he describes is precisely what we should expect from a group that really has no moral underpinning {It's all relative, anyway}, and to whom redefinition is nothing more than another tactic {It depends on what "Is, Is."}

Dennis Prager:

The tragedy of all this is that when evils are defined down, good people are left verbally unarmed when the real evils present themselves. It is yet another way in which the left, intentionally or not, undermines the battle against evil.

Nailed It!
Moral Clarity BUMP !

This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.) I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention. You can see the list of articles I pinged to lately on my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about). Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.

The Left is winning a war of words; redefining down the meanings of the words. It is hard to win against those who control the rules of the game you are trying to play. As long as we use language to describe things, those who control language, control the battlefield. Because conservatives are predominately doers and liberals are predominately talkers, it is going to remain an uphill battle for us. One of the reasons of the Talk Radio success is a conservative yearning for a straight talk, being tired of the evasive word play, does not matter how smart it is.

I e-mailed this article to a good friend who is along in years and a true conservative. He doesn't get out much anymore...I try to keep him updated on certain things. Along with the article, I stated that "I've always felt he who controls language controls everything". I still feel that way.

FMCDH(BITS)

" ... It is hard to win against those who control the rules of the game you are trying to play ..."

If that is true, then why play?

Homosexuals are not "gay". They are homosexual.

"Progressives" are not progressive. They are Socialists.

The "black caucus" is an abomination, as would be a "white caucus".

A hypenated American is not an American.

There is nothing "affirmative" about affirmative action.

Liars are liars. Thieves steal, and robbers rob, and so on.

It is when you are convinced that your morality, and word definitions, are in error, that you play the game of your enemy.

I, for one, refuse to play.

Or whether it is simply the product of her fevered imagination.

All the left has done is taken Goebbles Big Lie theory and stretched it out a bit.

If you do not have clear definitions of what a word means, torture for example, and what it does not mean, you cannot use it correctly. The Left hates hard, clear definitions. That being the case the word then becomes meaningless. Once the word is meaningless, anyone can ascribe it to any situation.

With that accomplished, the left takes the word and uses it in their greatest pasttime, demagoguery. People hear the word Torture, and think horrible things. However, the meaning has been so cheapend that while headlines scream "Kennedy calls for closure of US Torture Prison in Iraq" the actuality is not what an average person would consider torture.

But most people do not read the whole article. Most only read the headline and come away with the opinion that we are probably using bamboo shoots under the fingernails on the prisoners in Gitmo or Abu Grahib. This process turns people's opinions against the President / Government when they really should not be. It's why the informed people are conservative and the uninformed are libs.

With the current cheapening of the word torture, I could reasonably describe flying coach from NY to LA as torture. I could describe not getting a seat on the LIRR as torture. I could call anything that bothers me torture. The word has lost its power due to the Left's incessant usage of it outside of where it really belongs.

I completely agree with the article. Words are a powerful tool and when certain words are watered down, any type of commentary can become acceptable or believable. That's why pro-abortion groups choose to use the term "pro-choice". It just sounds so much more acceptable to people. Twist the meaning of words and brainwashing can be so much easier to achieve. This article was a real wake up call for me.

I am sorry if I sounded defeatist. Did not mean that. Alarmed? Yes, but not defeated. I am trying to actually follow what you advise and use proper terms. What I was recognizing (with Prager) is that Left Stream Media has a very big megaphone, and they already forced public to use their terms instead of the true names on too many occasions. To fight this ideological battle effectively conservatives need to educate public and use our own counter-propaganda. Dennis Prager, btw, is one of the best out there to do just that.

I, for one, refuse to play.

---

Yep, me too. I selectively (and with delight) bounce back the wordsmanship with the Lefties or those that are unawake/unaware. On a given day I try to use the following words at least once: income redistribution scheme, Ponzi scheme, Negro, Eurofag, murderer of the unborn, Leftist, Pinko, Bussed-Out, Bum, on the dole, traitor, sedititious, Sodomite, Mammomist, Succubus, law-breaker, hypocrite, liar, ambulance chaser, Religion of Peace (in a snarky tone), Heathen, Chicano, rake, libertine, hedonist, solipsist, gravid, uwashed, swarthy, fat, ugly, short...

that's about a third of the list, but you catch my drift. This is how the best conversations begin for me, but more often, you see a sigh of relief from people when they know they can lower their PC deflector shield.

" I selectively (and with delight) bounce back the wordsmanship with the Lefties or those that are unawake/unaware ..."

I was glad to see your reply first thing this morning. I brought a smile to my face.

I know exactly that response you are talking about when you said you begin conversations with non P/C words. I do the same thing.

Though most do become relieved that they can "let their hair down", so to speak, most are brainwashed to the point that they react like you are putting a pointed stick in their ears.

Like "Johnny Appleseed", we are planting our trees of reality.

Keep up the good work. It's good to know there are those of us that are spreading the truth!

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.