As the children's song goes, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.” This old schoolyard song may soon need an update. Words don't always mean what you think they do.
The political world is increasingly prone to strange uses of language. Nicola Sturgeon recently said:listen“We paid the top dollar to get 10% of Scots to pay a bit more tax.” Ask? Demand an answer? What this word now seems to mean is “demanding money by threat.” Because we are never “asked” to pay taxes, it is demanded of us by the power of the state, ready and willing to enforce the demand. “Asking” is a deceptive word used to hide the truth that we are talking about a demand backed by threats of violence.
If we think further about this request, it becomes clear that there is a calculation behind the words. This request is not directed at any individual, but at the electorate as a whole. Moreover, the question is not “Are you willing to pay more taxes?” Rather, are 90% of you willing to pay more taxes? receive “We'll collect more taxes from the nasty 10 percent for you.” And remember, we're talking about the last remnants of the middle class here, not the 1 percent of the 1 percent who are using the system to protect their status, so that the benefits of increased productivity no longer go to everyone but only to the elite. What we see here is the mechanics of a system that divides and plunders people. The plunder is concentrated in the parts of society where further monetary gains can be made. Today, it is limited to the highest-paid 10 percent, because the rest of society is barely getting by. The division that is being exploited is the old favorite rich vs. poor, which exploits human jealousy. And this whole nasty mix is cloaked in the word “demand” to make it look sensible, rather than exploitative and plundering.
“Access” is also a popular term: access to child care, for example, or access to birth control. It is a word that, like “ask,” is meant to disarm or show rationality. What does access mean? Is it still “the freedom or ability to obtain or use something”? No. It now means “something for free.” No politician talks about access to buy milk at the supermarket. No, access means a good or service that the recipient can obtain without payment, the cost of which is covered by wealth extracted from someone else.
“Care” is a further term that has made this crossover. The dictionary definition is “close attention”, but in the Liverpool Care Pathway “care” is now defined as “deathThis applies to both the elderly and unborn children. When this linguistic subterfuge became known to the public, there was so much outcry that the program had to be discontinued. StoppedOr has the name simply changed? We are now seeing reports that the Liverpool Care Pathway is continuing in a new form. Appearanceor be replaced by something bad.
Or consider the SNP's heartfelt desire for “independence”. Does this mean “not being controlled by others and not relying on others for support”? Not anymore. Utopian Studies AssociationMike Russell of the SNP said independence was “Practical Utopianism“
For me, the independence debate is about the powers we need to tackle the deep challenges we face – challenges like child poverty and educational attainment gaps that have never been adequately addressed under the British system, and under governments of any party. But more than that, it is a debate that starts with the question of what kind of Scotland we want to live in. And that is a truly utopian project.
In the spirit of Owen, this is practical utopianism, broad in its ambition and scope. In this sense, every Scotsman is an independence negotiator. The question that will be asked of every Scots in 14 months' time does not simply require a yes or no answer. It does not simply ask you to side with one party or another. Rather, it asks you to imagine a better Scotland – a Scotland that exists in the future – and to think about how you can work with your fellow citizens to make that vision a reality. And you will hear more of these visions announced in the coming weeks and months.
So Scottish independence would by definition be a socialist utopia based on the model of Robert Owen, perhaps a place like New Harmony, Indiana. This was described by Josiah Warren, who saw that the lack of personal sovereignty and personal property there doomed the enterprise to failure. He said:
“We had a reduced world, so that we rekindled the French Revolution, not with corpses but with despairing hearts. … It seemed to be nature's own law of inherent diversity that conquered us… Our 'united interest' was in direct conflict with the individuality of individuals and situations, and with the instinct of self-preservation…” (Periodic Press II 1856).
How many Scots who voted for independence did so because they thought it would preserve the original definition, without realizing they were voting for a “pragmatic utopia”? How many of them know the bloody history of humankind's quest for utopia?
And then there is political violence, which, as Thomas E. Woods has pointed out, involves a shift in meaning.
Social media thread after thread is filled with post defending the practice of punching “Nazis,” when the actual definition of a “Nazi” is now “anyone who happens to be punching you right now.”
Acts of political violence are now considered noble by definition, because the perpetrators may wear black clothes, carry red-and-black flags, cover their faces, and smash glass and heads. Another man Fascists. If you wear a tweed jacket and a cap, you're a well-dressed fascist, if you wear jeans and a T-shirt, you're a crypto-fascist, etc. Everywhere, violence is justified by the false definition: “We're anti-fascists, so it's OK.”
Ennio Flaiano, an Italian screenwriter, playwright, novelist and journalist, concept Italy in the 1960s:
“In Italy I am fascisti si dividono in my natural category. I am fascisti e gli antifascisti” (There are two kinds of fascists in Italy: fascists and antifascists).
So words like fascist and Nazi have come to be used by people who exhibit all the characteristics of fascists and Nazis, right down to the black shirts they wear. They are being used as weapons, and weaponized language is sparking violence in the streets.
Words matter, words have meanings. Too often in the hands of politicians, these meanings are distorted to hide the truth, distract attention, and change thought patterns. Increasingly, words are used to incite violence. If we are aware of the true meaning of their words, we can avoid being fooled. And by sharing it with others, we can save them from false beliefs. Once we clearly understand how and why words are manipulated to deceive the masses, we can fight back with our own weapons. What weapons, you ask? The most succinct explanation is, Lou Rockwell He said:
Never miss an opportunity to tell the truth
