The Mystery of Leftist Thought, Part 2
(Unpublished in May, 2007**)
Why is it that liberals often have such difficulty with simple English vocabulary? Words that the average fifth-grader can easily comprehend often seem to confuse Leftists and Democrats. They frequently misunderstand the proper meaning and usage of such words as:
MAJOR, USE, PUBLIC (that one is especially troublesome) , PRIVATE,
MASS, COMMON, WEAPONS, GENERAL, PROVIDE, SPEECH,
FREE, CENSOR, PROMOTE, FAIR, FREEDOM, DISCRIMINATE.
Take, for example, a simple phrase from very early in our nation's history: "...provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare..." which is from the preamble to our Constitution. Now, this example may represent more than just a simple misunderstanding of a few words. The liberal misinterpretation of the words provide and promote may be symptomatic of a common leftist ailment, constitutional dyslexia. In their view of the government's role in our lives, they often transpose the two words, and think it proper for the government to provide for the welfare (consisting of all basic needs) of people (housing, food, clothing, medical care, education, job training, employment, transportation, daycare, etc.) and they seem satisfied, increasingly so, with our government merely promoting our common defense.
Worse yet, they have obviously changed the use of the word common to mean individual, to accurately describe the type of Welfare that the government is now providing for millions of people.
Another pair of words that liberals have come to interpret for the opposite of their original constitutional meanings are public and private. Owing to their collectivist worldview, liberals tend to desire that nearly all property be as publicly accessible as possible. This is related to, but not the same as, their confusion with large private properties (like shopping malls or many sports stadiums) actually being privately owned, even though the "public" is usually the primary visitor to these places. They would prefer that the government just go ahead and take as much private property (the good stuff, anyway) away from selfish, greedy capitalists as possible, since government would be much wiser and fair in determining the use of that property.
**(I think this piece was prompted, in part, by the atrocious Kelo vs. City of New London decision at the US Supreme Court.)
Why is it that liberals often have such difficulty with simple English vocabulary? Words that the average fifth-grader can easily comprehend often seem to confuse Leftists and Democrats. They frequently misunderstand the proper meaning and usage of such words as:
MAJOR, USE, PUBLIC (that one is especially troublesome) , PRIVATE,
MASS, COMMON, WEAPONS, GENERAL, PROVIDE, SPEECH,
FREE, CENSOR, PROMOTE, FAIR, FREEDOM, DISCRIMINATE.
Take, for example, a simple phrase from very early in our nation's history: "...provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare..." which is from the preamble to our Constitution. Now, this example may represent more than just a simple misunderstanding of a few words. The liberal misinterpretation of the words provide and promote may be symptomatic of a common leftist ailment, constitutional dyslexia. In their view of the government's role in our lives, they often transpose the two words, and think it proper for the government to provide for the welfare (consisting of all basic needs) of people (housing, food, clothing, medical care, education, job training, employment, transportation, daycare, etc.) and they seem satisfied, increasingly so, with our government merely promoting our common defense.
Worse yet, they have obviously changed the use of the word common to mean individual, to accurately describe the type of Welfare that the government is now providing for millions of people.
Another pair of words that liberals have come to interpret for the opposite of their original constitutional meanings are public and private. Owing to their collectivist worldview, liberals tend to desire that nearly all property be as publicly accessible as possible. This is related to, but not the same as, their confusion with large private properties (like shopping malls or many sports stadiums) actually being privately owned, even though the "public" is usually the primary visitor to these places. They would prefer that the government just go ahead and take as much private property (the good stuff, anyway) away from selfish, greedy capitalists as possible, since government would be much wiser and fair in determining the use of that property.
**(I think this piece was prompted, in part, by the atrocious Kelo vs. City of New London decision at the US Supreme Court.)
posted by Brad @ 12:32 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home