Goodthink and Crimethink (words are important)

[Winesalot]

I couldn’t see this article posted but this is a great starting point for anyone who still believes that women should be ok with giving up their words to understand that it is actually not ok. And those who are of the belief that all meanings change and it always is a good thing.

I first noticed it decades ago when the word ‘war’ become a catch all catchphrase. It felt like it was devaluing words in the constant attempt to grab more headlines.

Now it really feels more pervasive. And the legal and political ramifications are disturbing. What Konstantin says about the word ‘safety’ also struck a chord.

So thank you Konstantin. If you read this, would you approach your interview with Kellie-Jay differently if you did it this week vs 2019.

standpointmag.co.uk/issues/august-september-2020/goodthink-and-crimethink/

Reading through Mumsnet threads you see so many similar words repeated over: abuse, abuser, abusive, narcissist, trauma, trigger warning (are a few examples).

It is almost as if we can no longer respond with a varied vocabulary that mirrors the nuance of human experience but instantly assign a problem or person to a category. Where did this narrowing come from and why do we participate?

It is a type of propaganda. Repeat, repeat, repeat.

At first when I read your reply I was ‘well of course we know so much more about abuse and mental health’. But to a degree, you are right. When does something become abuse (if it is simply someone disagreeing for instance)? Has the meaning of abuse been devalued somewhat? And when does it become trauma.

And do we become desensitized because of the usage?

On the other hand as I have matured, I have appreciated the greater depth of awareness Through so much increased discussion of abuse and the effects of trauma. I am able to apply it to understand myself and other people and their actions.

So thank you Konstantin. If you read this, would you approach your interview with Kellie-Jay differently if you did it this week vs 2019.

Exactly!

This is an excellent article. KK is clearly a lot smarter than he comes across on Triggernometry.

@Cuntysnark

So thank you Konstantin. If you read this, would you approach your interview with Kellie-Jay differently if you did it this week vs 2019.

Exactly!

Kellie-Jay interviewed Konstantin and Francis on her show earlier this year. It seems they have changed their views on this over time:

(Not that that stops them having the odd lighthearted dig at Mumsnetters on their live stream...)

For me the daftest example of this is 'violence', when TRAs claim that misgendering them is 'violent'. It wouldn't be too bad if they used it metaphorically, but they usually add 'literal'.

It makes them seem pathetic and weak rather than victims. Do they really not understand the difference? Because five minutes of the real thing would make it glaringly obvious.

Thank you for sharing that article Winesalot that is very clear and makes so much sense. I am concerned about where we are heading as a society, suppression of freedom of thought and discouraging the development of critical thinking skills is a recipe for disaster on a grand scale.

‘Violence’ is definite another that has been devalued certainly.

‘Literally’ makes me cringe like hearing a fingernail dragged on a blackboard these days. It makes me laugh and at the same time question how old that tweeter/poster is.

Thanks EdgeOfACoin for that link. I had missed it and it does clarify some things.

Thanks for the article op, and also for the interview link Edge, which I hadn't seen. I've not watched it all yet but I found it so refreshing to hear them say they didn't know a lot about it before but have thought about it and clarified or even changed some of their views; and also to acknowledge that, as men, they're not at the sharp end.
It shouldn't be so hard to do but for some reason it is so good for them.

Winesalot

Thank you for the link to that excellent article. Konstantin makes an interesting point that these linguistic changes have been imposed without majority consent and yet these new definitions now dominate public discourse. As he says, revolutionary movements share a Year zero fanatical desire to obliterate the past in order to remodel the present. And control the future. This demand for submission? It is a clear indication of authoritarianism.

^Those who shriek at dissenters to “educate” themselves do not mean that they should conduct their own research and use facts and data to reach their own conclusions. Indeed, the meaning is exactly the opposite: educating yourself now means unquestioning acceptance of dogma
This linguistic revisionism is not unique to our time, of course Cultural revolutions of previous centuries have always been accompanied by a deliberate drive to reframe public discourse in order to further the revolutionary narrative. For instance, few now remember that the term “political correctness” had nothing to do with ensuring sensitivity to the feelings of others or protecting vulnerable groups. In fact, the term first appeared in Marxist-Leninist vocabulary following the Russian Revolution and was used to describe adherence to the policies and principles of the Communist Party. Soviet citizens, including my great-grandparents, who made statements which were regarded as problematical by the authorities were told: “Comrade, this may be factually correct but it is politically incorrect.”^

The part about educate yourself is rather a stark reminder of the hypocrisy. When people say it, it usually means you need to read more propaganda and fall in line.

And in the case of identity campaigners, it is often the case that people who ‘educate’ themselves learn that the campaigners are usually ill informed and pushing pseudoscience.

The part about educate yourself is rather a stark reminder of the hypocrisy. When people say it, it usually means you need to read more propaganda and fall in line

Exactly. It's interesting, isn't it? It's a command, a dictate. But it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with 'education.' It means indoctrinate yourself. Chant the slogans. Douglas Murray is scathing about 'Unpacking the knapsack.' A foundational text apparently for the intersectionalists.

Yet I rarely see women use the term ‘educate yourself’. We tend to ask people to provide links to studies and statistics so we can keep on ‘educating’ ourselves on a broad scale to understand the arguments and where they are coming from.

I rarely see a study or statistics being presented that I haven’t read before (and read a balanced review of). And I am sure the many people reading these boards would probably be able to say the same. It is like so many of the usual posters who come to admonish and shame think we haven’t done any research to allow critical thinking. And it usually is just projection of their own lack of research and drawing from ‘ the person I know...’.

There are words which have been lost altogether into rightspeak.

When I was a child we would be told to "show some discrimination" about things, which meant show a bit of sense and judgement rather than accepting everything at face value; someone who was unable to tell good from bad was said to show no discrimination.

Now the word means always and only a prejudicial judgement of a human being on the grounds of a superficial characteristic, usually the colour of their skin but sometimes whether they have chosen to present as a gender not aligned with the sex they were born with.

I'm not sure what the word to replace its previous meaning may be.

No, we need to claim discrimination back! I am a discriminating shopper. I can discriminate high quality items from expensive tat.

I agree. Discrimination can be a good thing just as well as a negative.

I wish that were right, but I haven't seen it used in its older sense for ages. It always seems to be connected to the Race Relations Act when it's in a paper.

I'm not sure what the word to replace its previous meaning may be.

Discernment is close, maybe?

I find 'educate yourself' the most troubling because, as others have said, it has nothing to do with education at all. We've read the material. We disagree with the conclusions the wokesters have reached - but that isn't acceptable to them. To be 'educated' is to believe what they tell you to.

Interesting article. Agree that discrimination is often a useful thing.

you're right, I had forgotten about that meaning!

1. recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another.

"discrimination between right and wrong" · [More] synonyms: differentiation · distinction · telling the difference the ability to judge what is of high quality; good judgement or taste. "those who could afford to buy showed little taste or discrimination" synonyms: discernment · judgement · perception · perceptiveness · perspicacity · [More] psychology the ability to distinguish between different stimuli. "discrimination learning"

Good thread OP. That interview was very interesting.

So thank you Konstantin. If you read this, would you approach your interview with Kellie-Jay differently if you did it this week vs 2019

does anyone have the link for that interview handy please.

This is the interview EyesOpening.

[quote NonnyMouse1337]This is the interview EyesOpening.

[/quote] thank you