Thinking Outside the Linguistic Box

Always Examine How Problems are Identified and Solutions are Proposed

Analyzing language usage and propaganda is one of my particular interests, and has been since I delved into linguistic anthropology at the University of Vermont- a formerly great school which now flies the BLM flag and has eliminated a host of degrees like German language and geology to eliminate a “deficit” actually caused by dumb pet projects and filler course crap like “gender studies.”

One of the most important notes I can make about propaganda is how perception is altered simply by how things are labeled. The "Patriot Act" is one example I use frequently- the act has absolutely nothing to do with patriotism, either under the dictionary definition or any quasi-hyperbolic and symbolic definition one could derive from watching George Washington stand in front of a flag waving in the breeze of howitzers as eagles fly overhead. "Clean coal" is only clean if you compare it to coal which is being utilized in older systems which happen to release larger proportions of various pollutants. "Antifa" most frequently has nothing to do with fighting fascism (I have seen communists claim to have something in common with American GIs storming Normandy) and mostly involves randomly attacking businesses and then the police that show up, occasionally, in response.

But there is another equally important thing people should understand about propaganda, especially when it involves linguistics- the interplay between a posited "problem" and "solution" is of extreme importance; one can arbitrarily define a "problem" where one does not objectively exist, propose a solution that does not solve the problem, or which would be less effective than other potential solutions. This can be easily used as a political or social cudgel.

For example, let us consider the gun crime "problem." This "epidemic" of "mass shootings" of such import in political discourse. The idea that the current gun crime rate is particularly problematic is a subjective position. The term mass shooting is a subjective term, which has multiple meanings and can include either actual bona fide mass shootings, or any situation with multiple casualties- even if accidental or incidental. Further, the solutions proposed by those proposing the problem to exist, by and large, are non-starters which have been tried and have failed prior. These same proponents of the gun crime problem openly reject some alternative solutions, because of the political backdrop of those proposing them, or because their problem is not with the stated problem of gun crime but rather their problem with gun ownership in general.

The same principle can be applied to the concept of critical race theory. Its proponents call it "antiracism." Detractors term it "reverse racism" or "antiwhite racism." If we take a step back and ignore the racial component (I admit of course my bias in thinking it is indeed bigoted) we can more properly and intellectually label it, simply, "ahistorical and revisionist." Indeed I would suggest those who oppose the CRT movement (which is rooted partly in cultural marxism) ignore the racial component altogether- since they will never win the game playing by the rules constructed by the proponents of CRT- and instead focus on the fact that the premises it proposes are simply historically inaccurate. Slavery did not build the United States, most white people did not own slaves, or even live in states where slavery was legal. A large plurality of slaves were then, and are now, owned by people of non-European extract, and virtually every tribe and nation which ever existed repeatedly pillaged and attempted to colonize its neighbors.

Then there are lies by structure. If you are reading this section congratulations- you're one of the one percent that actually found the time to go through the entire article. Were I a propagandist I could hide an inconvenient truth here, that is of import but which I do not wish to be promulgated, here at the end, and nobody could claim that I lied by omitting it.