Belittling of language: You can’t say ‘blind spot ‘– it’s not inclusive enough, say liberals in their hunt for power

belittling-of-language:-you-can’t-say-‘blind-spot-‘–-it’s-not-inclusive-enough,-say-liberals-in-their-hunt-for-power

07-11-19 01:46:00,

In a misguided attempt at protecting the so called “marginalized” individuals, the regressive left continues to ban an ever-increasing list of words – an action that only serves as a tool for oppression.

Thanks in large part to the intrusive nature of the internet in our daily lives, an annoying trend has taken root where any and every thing we say comes under scrutiny from complete strangers. More so now as a new community of victim olympians scour the net for things to take umbrage with. 

PSA:

We are replacing an ableist term with the term “dead angle”

It means a spot in your periphery you cannot see or an area not covered by CCTV

You all probably already know what term I’m replacing so I’m not even gonna tell you

Dead angle, use it til other people conform

— Kimberley Jane Erin (@crippledscholar) 14 октября 2019 г.

Did you know you’re not supposed to say “blind spot” anymore? You know, that thing everyone has on the periphery of their vision. It might sound absurd that such a common phrase could be deemed offensive, but as we now live in clown world, that’s exactly what has happened. The same goes with “turn a blind eye” and “tone deaf.”

The reasoning for this is that such terms are viewed as “ableist”, a word that by its dictionary definition means “discriminating against disabled or handicapped people.” Now maybe it’s because I don’t suffer from the mental handicap that is being “woke”, but I struggle to see how “tone deaf” is discriminatory. 

(And side note, let’s do our best to move away from using “lame” as a pejorative as it is actually ableist. Besides, so many other ways to insult horrible people and situations. Trust me. I find new ones daily lmao.)

— 🆃🆁🆄🅳🆈 (@thetrudz) 5 ноября 2019 г.

As for other “ableist” words, you’re no longer supposed to say stupid, crazy, psycho, dumb, idiotic, insane, lame, moron, nuts, mad, and mental.

 » Lees verder

Episode 357 – Language is a Weapon : The Corbett Report

episode-357-–-language-is-a-weapon-:-the-corbett-report

14-06-19 12:24:00,

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

“In our time it is broadly true that political writing is bad writing” wrote George Orwell 70 years ago, and the observation remains true today. But bad writing is not just bad writing; the language employed by politicians (and their string pullers) can literally be a matter of life and death. Join James today on the podcast as he delves into the tyrants’ linguistic weapons and how we can arm ourselves against them.

For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.

For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).

Watch this video on BitChute / DTube / YouTube or Download the mp4

SHOW NOTES

Politics and the English Language, by George Orwell (text)

Politics and the English Language, by George Orwell  (video)

Corbett Report Radio 186 – Politics and Language with Andrew Gavin Marshall

“Enemy Combatants” and drone killings

The Tyranny of Words by Stuart Chase

Episode 350 – History Is Written By The Winners

The WWI Conspiracy

re:publica 2012 – Rick Falkvinge – Working swarm-wise

Swarmwise by Rick Falkvinge

Filed in: Podcasts
Tagged with: language

 » Lees verder

The Language of 9/11 Unmasked: Edward Curtin – Global Research

the-language-of-911-unmasked-edward-curtin-8211-global-research

26-11-18 12:46:00,

We welcome to the programme the writer and lecturer Edward Curtin, who teaches sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, for a conversation on his research into the subject of September 11, 2001, and in particular his analysis of the language used of that event in terms of a hypothesised deep-state policy of linguistic mind control.

We also discuss the very important book 9/11 Unmasked by David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth, recently published by Olive Branch Press, which Edward Curtin particularly recommends for its scholarly approach.

“9/11 Unmasked is the result of a six-year investigation by an international review panel, which has provided 51 points illustrating the problematic status of all the major claims in the official account of the 9/11 attacks, some of which are obviously false. Most dramatically, the official account of the destruction of the Twin Towers and World Trade Center 7 could not possibly be true, unless the laws of physics were suspended that day. But other claims made by the official account—including the claims that the 9/11 planes were taken over by al-Qaeda hijackers, that one of those hijackers flew his plane into the Pentagon, and that passengers on the planes telephoned people on the ground—are also demonstrably false. The book reports only points about which the panel reached consensus by using the “best-evidence” consensus model employed in medical research. The panel is composed of experts about 9/11 from many disciplines, including physics, chemistry, structural engineering, aeronautical engineering, and jurisprudence.”—Interlink Books

Listen to the interview below.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites,

 » Lees verder