I've pointed out before that one of the sharpest swords in the Socialist toolbox is twisting the meanings of words. I cannot begin to tell you how sick of that game I am. I heard the other day that the original purpose of Webster creating the dictionary was to assure we all knew the meanings of words in order to keep us all on the same page. I decided to look this up and found this little blurb below:
Noah Webster claimed to have coined only one word - demoralize, which he defined: "To corrupt or undermine the morals of; to destroy or lessen the effect of moral principles on; to render corrupt in morals."
That's interesting. The common usage of "demoralize" today seems to mean "discourage," or to make someone feel down and frustrated. Obviously, that is not the original intent of the word. Makes me think I need that dictionary. The word also describes what has happened to our entire society; demoralized. It's a good word with Webster's meaning intact.
Another source here
This takes me to what has happened to our laws. When legal isn't moral, we are definitely working with chains of corruption wrapped around us. It occurred to me today that the Constitution has been under assault from the moment it was signed, sealed, and delivered. It is a very moral document. Immoral people would not like to be held to the standards set in it, or the rules a moral people rely on for civil society. The relentless assault on the Constitution has escalated under Obama. I can't help but wonder if we have reached the point of no return, though in my heart of hearts I hope not. Part of the assault is on our language. Hence, a Communist was elected to the Presidency using two words: Hope and Change. Vague and ambiguous, meaning different things to different people, but a clever sales pitch, nonetheless.
Words mean things. The left doesn't like the meanings, so they abominate the words to their own benefits. Things have become so bad lately that I believe we have become confused beyond ability to communicate. It would be good to get back to the basics with language.
Just a couple of examples:
"Livability" What the heck does that mean to you? You see, the word is ambiguous. It implies something without actually defining it. There are people who swallow comprehensive municipal plans using that word, and in truth, they have no idea what that means. So when you go diving into the description from the Smart Growth crowd, you find out that "livability" means high density, discouraged use of cars, buildings with green certification, restrictive rules and regulations for everything. Does that sound enticing to you? No. So they use an ambiguous word, i.e. "Livability" to make you think it must be just great to live in a city that uses "Livability" as a goal.
"Connectivity" How does that sound?? Another ambiguous word. Left to interpretation, it implies we should all be so happily connected to everything. What it actually means is no privacy, connecting streets so there are no cul de sac neighborhoods, greenways in your backyard, and light rail at your doorstep. So the facilitators sell the plan as this wonderful idea, but it turns into laws and regulations that undermine private ownership control over your own property. Zoning doesn't even come close to what "Connectivity" can do. Zoning actually allows for appeals and compromises. "Connectivity" is dogma. You can't get away from it.
So, here's to Noah Webster and his valiant effort to make sure we all understood the meanings of words. I vote we don't fall for ambiguous and vague soundbites, empty promises, and shyster political speak. I vote we all buy Webster's original dictionary and start using it. Otherwise, we are communicating in foreign languages that no one in America even grasps. You can see how well that is working out lately.