Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sounds like a bunch of circular reasoning and nonsense.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sounds like a bunch of circular reasoning and nonsense.

---

I will defer to you on this one, since you obviously have so much more practice at it...



Mike

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sounds like a bunch of circular reasoning and nonsense.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HKCavalier:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sounds like a bunch of circular reasoning and nonsense.

---

AURaptor, please, try to be civil.

.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
AURaptor, I think you've been trashing people for so long, you don't realize you're doing it.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
...Cenk Uygur becomes little more than a nuisance when interviewing a first-rate mind. So, you know, just try to tune him out as best you can and listen to Lakoff.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sounds like a bunch of circular reasoning and nonsense.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SergeantX:
The most important issue discussed, in my opinion, was the way Democrats allow Republicans to frame debate by establishing the terminology we use. This is incredibly powerful stuff and it makes me wonder whether anyone ever really read Orwell.

What I find slightly ironic is that, from my recollection, it was the Democrats (more accurately, social liberals in general) who pioneered such flimflammery. They've been pushing various social change agendas for years based on efforts to manipulate the language we use. It was really the genesis of the whole PC phenomenon.

---

Quote:

---

But when the Republicans mastered the very same tactics and used it against them, Democrats were blindsided. I think they've become so steeped in such shenanigans that they don't even see it for what it is.

---

Quote:

---

Maybe the problem is that all the time they were doing it, the Dems thought of it as legitimate discourse. That's why they don't even consider resisting such tactics when used against them. To them, it's the way politics is done.

---

Quote:

---

This is why I consider so incredibly important to resist such efforts - from either 'side'. When they call the terrorism problem a "War", it means something. If we don't agree with what it means, we're fools to propagate such language.

---

Quote:

---

The most exciting thing about this sort of book is that it seems that at least some people are beginning to wake up. We're going to have to fight these tactics at very fundamental, philosophical levels if we're to defeat them. We have to unmask these kinds of language games and expose the manipulations they represent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
I think you're missing something here, Sarge. The original purpose of using "politically correct" language was to avoid the kind of framing the Right has now wholeheartedly embraced. Before "PC" became this childish mass-hysteria to avoid being "bad," it was an attempt to use language neutrally and inclusively. "Chairman," f'rinstance, frames power as belonging properly to men. It is the unavoidable meta-message of that word. So the word "chairperson" was created to avoid that meta-message...

---

Quote:

---

The point Lakoff is making is that Democrats still think they're dealing with a one to one correspondence between words and reality. They think words describe reality when, really, words frame and refract reality. That's why they're blindsided.

Seriously, look at our own board. Rue and Signy (just to name two of our most dedicated and consistently liberal posters of facts and documents) have been laying out the facts for us for years. They embody this liberal idea that if you just lay out the facts clearly enough, people will employ their reason and come to the appropriate conclusions based on the facts...
See what I mean?

---

Quote:

---

From a political standpoint, our voices are definitively disempowered. The brave walk alone.

---