Do not surrender to the redefinition of America
Well, I’m back on terra firma and yesterday morning went for a run on land where I could feel my legs getting used to being on solid ground. The final sessions this past Saturday of the National Review post-election cruise were very insightful. They dealt with the topics of PC, progressivism on college campuses, and conservatism’s future. One of the key points consistent throughout was the concept of language being redefined. And so I pondered that point and as I did my four-mile run on Sunday many thoughts came to mind.
I immediately considered the quote often (mis-)attributed to George Orwell, “in a universe of deceit, truth becomes a revolutionary act.”
Think about what has been happening in our America. We speak of liberalism but is it really the true definition of liberalism as intended by John Locke? That of course is classical liberalism, which promoted the rights of the individual — life, liberty, and property. It was Locke’s theory of classical liberalism and the concept of natural law and the social contract theory, which defined the relationship between the governed and government. However, today’s post-modern liberalism is a complete redefinition and does not advance the rights of the individual but rather focuses on the manipulation of collective groups.
American author, Upton Sinclair, (best known for his 1906 muckraking novel The Jungle) who twice (unsuccessfully) ran for Congress on the Socialist ticket and (also unsuccessfully) ran for the governorship of California as a Democrat in 1934 said “The American People will take Socialism, but they won’t take the label…There is no use attacking it by a front attack, it is much better to out-flank them.”
It is the careful covert redefinition of language that can ensnare an entire nation and in turn affect the entire political landscape.
Somewhere, tucked away behind closed doors, there are those working on redefining America. Take for example constitutional conservatism — closely aligned with classical liberalism – which is redefined as extreme, and those who advocate those associated principles — limited government, fiscal responsibility, individual sovereignty, free market/free enterprise economy, and strong national defense — as extremists. It is the same label given to Islamic terrorists, because for some reason we have redefined Islamo-fascism, jihadism, and terrorism into something we can find more accommodating to our sensibilities: extremists. We recently wrote about how it seems the chosen remedy to defeat ISIS is to simply call it by a different name. Then again, we don’t have wars or combat engagements any more — we have overseas contingency operations. We don’t have Islamic jihadist or terrorist attacks in America — we have “man-caused disasters.” An attacker can stand on a table shouting “Allahu Akhbar” while gunning down American soldiers and civilians and we redefine it as “workplace violence.”
Who are the folks in these hidden rooms who are redefining America? They’re the ones feeding us acceptable adjectives – with complete hypocrisy. They tell us what is inflammatory rhetoric or incendiary speech, but for some odd reason the redefinition does not equally apply.