International News Immigration

[QR]

I don't think there's any change you or the likes of QR will accept that the left wing have weaponised language even if I provide multiple examples, so what's the point?

You seem very fond of going off at tangents, so to keep it clean can you give a single example of where I have said the left haven't weaponised language. Or is it another example of you straying from the topic because you are unable to back up your claims. Good luck.

 

[Marston Road yellow]

Hysterical is completely what you are my friend.

2 things

I’m not your friend.
And my stand up is ok but I wouldn’t call it hysterical.

 

[Wandering Yellow]

You seem very fond of going off at tangents, so to keep it clean can you give a single example of where I have said the left haven't weaponised language. Or is it another example of you straying from the topic because you are unable to back up your claims. Good luck.

The irony! You post all manner of nonsensical stuff on here backed up by nothing but your socialist worldview.

 

[QR]

You seem very fond of going off at tangents, so to keep it clean can you give a single example of where I have said the left haven't weaponised language. Or is it another example of you straying from the topic because you are unable to back up your claims. Good luck.

The irony! You post all manner of nonsensical stuff on here backed up by nothing but your socialist worldview.

I rest my case your honor.

 

[Wandering Yellow]

I rest my case your honor.

I'm afraid anybody (who doesn't share your worldview which is scarily a lot of people on here) who reads your posts will know your attempt to look like the sensible one here is ludicrous

 

[chuckbert]

I don't think there's any change you or the likes of QR will accept that the left wing have weaponised language even if I provide multiple examples, so what's the point?

Really? That’s debate? I want you to give examples. Why would you expect to be able to change my mind without them?

 

[Big Ron]

With respect, you’re not having a debate. I made a point, with some examples. You said the opposite was true, but won’t give examples. That’s not debate, it’s just assertion.

(I’m now sounding like John Cleese in the “is this the right room for an argument” sketch).

There seem to be similarities with Lucy Frazer's fabulous Kay Burley interview on Sky - Frazer keeps on accusing the BBC of bias, whereas Burley keeps pointing out the difference between perception and actual evidence.

BBC: Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer tells Kay Burley 'on occasion the BBC has been biased'

'Do you think the BBC is biased?' Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer tells Kay Burley 'on occasion the BBC has been biased'

news.sky.com

 

[chuckbert]

There seem to be similarities with Lucy Frazer's fabulous Kay Burley interview on Sky - Frazer keeps on accusing the BBC of bias, whereas Burley keeps pointing out the difference between perception and actual evidence.

BBC: Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer tells Kay Burley 'on occasion the BBC has been biased'

'Do you think the BBC is biased?' Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer tells Kay Burley 'on occasion the BBC has been biased'

news.sky.com

lol. That’s a cracker. “There is only perception”.

 

[Wandering Yellow]

Really? That’s debate? I want you to give examples. Why would you expect to be able to change my mind without them?

I don't believe it would be a debate in good faith, because despite their attempts to seem reasonable, many people on here have a worldview and have no interest in gathering any evidence that goes against their worldview.

I'm shocked you can't identify the newspeak which has developed over the last decade or so. On a daily basis I come to the conclusion 1984 has become reality.

I find it interesting how posters on here I consider moderately left, ignore posters who come out with the same kind of left-wing hyperbole which they would call out from a right-wing poster (not that m/any of them exist on here.)

 

[chuckbert]

I don't believe it would be a debate in good faith, because despite their attempts to seem reasonable, many people on here have a worldview and have no interest in gathering any evidence that goes against their worldview.

I'm shocked you can't identify the newspeak which has developed over the last decade or so. On a daily basis I come to the conclusion 1984 has become reality.

I find it interesting how posters on here I consider moderately left, ignore posters who come out with the same kind of left-wing hyperbole which they would call out from a right-wing poster (not that m/any of them exist on here.)

I'll have one last go then. I don't disagree about the mangling of language for propaganda purposes but I don't see the left-right weaponisation thing there. I'm still looking for examples of words that people on the left wing have attempted to twist and weaponise to stigmatise those on the right, in the manner of "woke", "socialist", "liberal" etc. No one is spitting out "capitalist", "conservative" as perjorative terms. What are the examples? Please don't do the "if you can't see it, I'm not going to show you" thing!

 

[Marston Road yellow]

I don't believe it would be a debate in good faith, because despite their attempts to seem reasonable, many people on here have a worldview and have no interest in gathering any evidence that goes against their worldview.

I'm shocked you can't identify the newspeak which has developed over the last decade or so. On a daily basis I come to the conclusion 1984 has become reality.

I find it interesting how posters on here I consider moderately left, ignore posters who come out with the same kind of left-wing hyperbole which they would call out from a right-wing poster (not that m/any of them exist on here.)

I’m shocked you are so obtuse
All he asked for was something to back up your point and you won’t because we’ll disagree with you and maybe tear your argument apart?

But it’s ok to call my views hysterical or thick.

 

[Marked Ox]

There seem to be similarities with Lucy Frazer's fabulous Kay Burley interview on Sky - Frazer keeps on accusing the BBC of bias, whereas Burley keeps pointing out the difference between perception and actual evidence.

BBC: Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer tells Kay Burley 'on occasion the BBC has been biased'

'Do you think the BBC is biased?' Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer tells Kay Burley 'on occasion the BBC has been biased'

news.sky.com

Luzy Frazer demonstrated she was over-promoted based on that.

 

[holdsteady]

I'll have one last go then. I don't disagree about the mangling of language for propaganda purposes but I don't see the left-right weaponisation thing there. I'm still looking for examples of words that people on the left wing have attempted to twist and weaponise to stigmatise those on the right, in the manner of "woke", "socialist", "liberal" etc. No one is spitting out "capitalist", "conservative" as perjorative terms. What are the examples? Please don't do the "if you can't see it, I'm not going to show you" thing!

Facist would be one wouldn’t it? Gammon? Boomer?

Tory is definitely thrown out as insult in this country.

Don’t think any one side has the moral high ground in this, but then it’s been going on as long as I can remember so other than a change of words it’s nothing much new.

 

[Sheik djibouti]

And as if by magic, the new(old) face of the right side of the UK political spectrum pops up for its "chaotic" launch. And look at the language they're using folks . . .

"left-wing extremists"
"pandering to the anti-capitalists"
"the wokery that is going on is nonsense"
“taking power away from families and giving it to the state”
“leftist groupthink”
“activist judiciary” who are an “out-of-touch oligarchy”, according to Moggy (of all people)
"only “odd weirdos” care about achieving net zero in the battle against climate change", according to 30p Lee
also a good dollop of Trumpish conspiracy theorising when describing the "left" as "been on the march" in government institutions.



https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...onservatism-farage-lee-anderson-b2491427.html

You're right - language really does matter. And someone really ought to tell the Popular(or is that populist?) Conservatism movement that.

 

[chuckbert]

Facist would be one wouldn’t it? Gammon? Boomer?

Tory is definitely thrown out as insult in this country.

Don’t think anyone side has the moral high ground in this, but then it’s been going on as long as I can remember so other than a change of words it’s nothing much new.

Thanks for giving some examples! Does fascist count? I mentioned before that you can throw around "woke" at me, and I don't care. People aren't saying "how dare you call me woke" are they, in the same way they say "how dare you call me fascist"? Maybe WY's right and that's just my bubble and people are happy to own being a fascist.
Gammon is a good shout, but it's just more a rude insult. It's not a vanilla political term that has been weaponised, its a direct attack.
Boomer has nothing to do with left right.
Is "Tory" on its own used as an insult? "Tory scum" and other epithets sure, but its the word scum that's doing the heavy lifting. I could be missing that, though because I'm in Oz (where everything gets confused because the tories are the liberal party).

I'm not looking for or claiming high ground, but I have noticed a lot recently, especially in the US and often enough here in Oz, where someone with political influence will describe someone as "woke, socialist, radical left, liberal" with the full intent that those words are considered insults and are given meaning beyond their definition. The flipside that I don't hear is "conservative, reactionary, authoritarian" etc as anything more than descriptive (not sure what the equivalent opposite of "woke" is?). There are of course hyperbolic attack words that get used like "nazi", "gammon".

 

[holdsteady]

Thanks for giving some examples! Does fascist count? I mentioned before that you can throw around "woke" at me, and I don't care. People aren't saying "how dare you call me woke" are they, in the same way they say "how dare you call me fascist"? Maybe WY's right and that's just my bubble and people are happy to own being a fascist.
Gammon is a good shout, but it's just more a rude insult. It's not a vanilla political term that has been weaponised, its a direct attack.
Boomer has nothing to do with left right.
Is "Tory" on its own used as an insult? "Tory scum" and other epithets sure, but its the word scum that's doing the heavy lifting. I could be missing that, though because I'm in Oz (where everything gets confused because the tories are the liberal party).

I'm not looking for or claiming high ground, but I have noticed a lot recently, especially in the US and often enough here in Oz, where someone with political influence will describe someone as "woke, socialist, radical left, liberal" with the full intent that those words are considered insults and are given meaning beyond their definition. The flipside that I don't hear is "conservative, reactionary, authoritarian" etc as anything more than descriptive (not sure what the equivalent opposite of "woke" is?). There are of course hyperbolic attack words that get used like "nazi", "gammon".

You see Tory thrown out over here as insult, mostly by younger people, but then I might of done that myself pre New Labour as when a party has been in power a long time its understandable young people who have known nothing else see it as the cause of all problems not just (the many) it has caused.
With fascist its more using it for anyone on the right, same as using communist for anyone on the left, not many people are going to want to claim to be either of those given what happened in the previous century but they have both been weaponised against people who, for example, think you should pay to go to university or not, its hardly the death camps that those two ideology's are associated but they that's how overused they are.

 

[Big Ron]

Luzy Frazer demonstrated she was over-promoted based on that.

She is supposedly a barrister - I wouldn't want her arguing in court for me based on that evidence (and not perception).

 

[RyanioBirdio]

She is supposedly a barrister - I wouldn't want her arguing in court for me based on that evidence (and not perception).

Some of the thickest people I’ve ever encountered have passed the Bar.

 

[tonyw]

I'm not looking for or claiming high ground, but I have noticed a lot recently, especially in the US and often enough here in Oz, where someone with political influence will describe someone as "woke, socialist, radical left, liberal" with the full intent that those words are considered insults and are given meaning beyond their definition. The flipside that I don't hear is "conservative, reactionary, authoritarian" etc as anything more than descriptive (not sure what the equivalent opposite of "woke" is?). There are of course hyperbolic attack words that get used like "nazi", "gammon".

So I would argue that liberal and conservative are used roughly equivalently. If you lived in Portland OR, it would be pejorative to be called a conservative but noone would object to being called a liberal. If you're in Jackson MS, the opposite would be true.
(the fact that it's perfectly possible to be both.....a libertarian, for example, would be economically conservative but socially liberal.....seems lost on everyone)

For every 'radical leftist' there's an 'extremist right winger'

I'd say the equivalent of woke is probably alt-right.
Someone who is genuinely left wing likely would wear being called 'woke' as a badge of honour.....but someone more centrist might consider it an insult. Same would be true of the alt-right label.

The only one which doesn't quite translate is fascist. And in my head, the reason is that we have two words for radical left wing ideology - socialism and communism - that are separated by extreme. There's not really the two-level equivalent on the right, which means that noone can quite agree what fascist means. Do you have to go for full-blown Mussolini-style dictatorship to qualify, or is it just enough to be anti-immigrant, anti-liberalism and pro-social conformity? We probably need a new word to help us distinguish the two.

 

[bashamwonderland]

So I would argue that liberal and conservative are used roughly equivalently. If you lived in Portland OR, it would be pejorative to be called a conservative but noone would object to being called a liberal. If you're in Jackson MS, the opposite would be true.
(the fact that it's perfectly possible to be both.....a libertarian, for example, would be economically conservative but socially liberal.....seems lost on everyone)

For every 'radical leftist' there's an 'extremist right winger'

I'd say the equivalent of woke is probably alt-right.
Someone who is genuinely left wing likely would wear being called 'woke' as a badge of honour.....but someone more centrist might consider it an insult. Same would be true of the alt-right label.

The only one which doesn't quite translate is fascist. And in my head, the reason is that we have two words for radical left wing ideology - socialism and communism - that are separated by extreme. There's not really the two-level equivalent on the right, which means that noone can quite agree what fascist means. Do you have to go for full-blown Mussolini-style dictatorship to qualify, or is it just enough to be anti-immigrant, anti-liberalism and pro-social conformity? We probably need a new word to help us distinguish the two.

Fascism is really about dictatorship, so could apply to right or left. Stalin and Hitler were both racial fascists, it just so happens that Stalin was also a "communist" (in name only) at the same time.

Fascist has definitely been commandeered by the left to describe the right, when arguably there have been more fascist "left" dictators than fascist "right" dictators, in history. Most of them Soviets, mind you.