Want to change the conversation? Change the words.Submitted by Bamobo on Fri, 12/21/2012 - 19:12
Many here are aware of the fact that the ever-changing definition of words ("Terrorist", "defense", "extremist", "anti-semitic", "money" just to name a handful) has long been used as a means to confuse the masses and to stifle debate. Why then, do so many of us continue to play into it by using such terms incorrectly, therefore legitimizing the "new" definitions?
I propose that we not only stop using such terms, but create our own-- change the definition of a term, and repeat, repeat, repeat. I'm not talking about using these terms around the choir, but everywhere.
A small list of examples would be--
Assault Rifle = defense rifle
Public School = indoctrination center
Gun Free Zone = easy kill zone
President = autocrat
Democracy = mob rule (for the libs, point out that it's inherently anti-'minority')
Entitlement = handout (unless it really is an entitlement, obviously)
Income Tax = Victory Tax (as it used to be called...it'll get people curious as to its origin).
Many of us do this already to varying extents, but let's take it up a notch by abandoning the old terms whenever appropriate/possible.
Also, to the warmongering "pro"-life crowd, constantly remind them that their tax dollars are being used to murder millions of children in this country and many, MANY others. Turn the "for the children" angle around on these people.
This is also extremely effective in shutting up gun control advocates. "Why do you want children to be used as target practice?" Say it over and over until they finally give in. People like this can ONLY be swayed by emotion; facts (unfortunately) have little to no effect
This seems doable to me, and 'new' words have a habit of sticking in people's heads almost instantaneously. Even the laziest of activists can easily get in on this. What do you think of this idea?