Newspeak to English Dictionary

Confucius taught that the first task in creating good government is “the rectification of terms”—making sure words mean what they are supposed to mean. I think his point was the same point George Orwell made in his essay “Politics and the English Language” as well as in 1984: the meaning of words can be subverted for political ends.

They say in China that the first to get thrown in prison by any oppressive government are the poets and writers. They are a danger, because they understand language too well. But when it comes to ordinary people, it is easy enough, by manupulating language, to make the bad appear to be the good, to, as Plato said of the Sophists, make the weaker argument appear the stronger, and so get away with just about anything.

To change the meaning of a word, to deliberately use it where it does not fit, is to tell a lie. And in a sense, it is the lie that makes all other evil possible; for if we call a sin what it is, our conscience begins to hold us back. This is why the devil is called “the father of lies.”

To manipulate the meaning of common words is therefore, in and of itself, deeply evil; the proper use of language is, as Confucius said, a moral issue.
So we need someone to step forward and make the ways streight for the Lord. We need a systematic “Newspeak to English dictionary” to point out where a term has been subverted. I offer a few terms that should be included:

Liberal – this is supposed to mean a bedrock belief in individual liberties; a true liberal believes in free trade, small government, the right to work, and loose immigration policies. It has been perverted since the 1950s and the communist scare into a euphemism for Marxism, socialism, or social democracy. If you want to sell socialism, okay; but don't pretend it is liberalism. That would be gross fraud if a corporation did it: selling Pepsi, say, under a fake “Coca-Cola” label.

Social justice – the term was coined by a Jesuit scholar in the nineteenth century to refer to a belief in basic human dignity, the social contract, and the doctrine of human rights. It had nothing to do with the redistribution of wealth, but has been hijacked by Marxists, socialists, and social democrats to imply this. Whether it is justice to take money from Peter and give it to Paul, simply because Peter has more money than Paul, or because Paul is of a different race, is not self-evident.

Anti-racism – now means what the old term “racism” already covered: systematic discrimination for and against specific groups on the basis of their supposed ethnicity. Yet the prefix “anti-” is supposed to mean “against,” not “more, more; faster, faster!”

Affirmative action – in itself, the term is perfectly meaningless, a bit of nonsense worthy of Humpty Dumpty in Alice in Wonderland. But its vagueness usefully obscures something the proper name of which is less appealing: discrimination on the basis of sex, race, etc.

Gender – properly refers to the classification of nouns into more or less arbitrary groups grammatically. It is now used to replace the term “sex” in order to force into the very language the obvious lie that the sexual differences between man and women are arbitrary human inventions, not inborn.

Homophobia – a phobia is an irrational fear; this term tries to subvert debate with the nasty ad hominem that anyone who objects to homosexuality is insane. It is also illiterate. “Homo” does not mean “homosexuality.” “Homophobia” would make more sense as an irrational fear of living in Kansas.

Gay – “homosexual” was never a pejorative; it was a technical term. Seeking to replace it with another term with a universally favourable meaning is plainly dishonest, whatever you think of the morality of homosexual sex.

Progressive—properly means someone who believes in overall human progress, or at least human material progress, as in the old “Whig view of history.” It is now commonly used for the exact opposite: for those who believe the world is hurriedly heading for hell in a handcart, and those who oppose all material progress as “unsustainable.”

Invest—deceitful when used for government spending. A notable innovation by Bill Clinton. The term is fair if and only if there is a reasonable expectation that a given government expenditure will lead directly to higher government revenue in future. One might oppose government spending, but it is hard to oppose government “investment.”

Peace – everyone wants peace, which makes it dishonest to co-opt the term for a specific theory on how best to achieve it. Which is just what has been done, when people on the left refer to things like “Peace Studies.” These rarely speak favourably about collective security and the need for a strong military as a deterrent.

Abuse—a term far too useful for the Pharisees to leave alone; it can be trotted out to apply to anyone doing anything the speaker disagrees with. It started with “drug abuse,” already a nonsense term; went on to “wife abuse,” “child abuse,” “emotional abuse.” I have even heard of “financial abuse.” Call anything “abuse,” and you get to pass a law forcing people to conform. Call someone an “abuser,” and you have stripped them of all humanity.

Rape – has a good strong connotation, and so it is useful to exploit—to the point at which “all heterosexual sex is rape.” The term should be restricted to coitus achieved by physical force, and nothing else.

Working class – contemporary Marxists have twisted this concept and term to the point at which the “working class” is the professional, managerial class. Writers and artists even become “cultural workers.” Marx’s working class of manual labourers? They’re not working class; they're “rednecks,” or at best are designated “middle class.” By this sleight of hand, teachers, professors, and civil servants become a victim group oppressed by the manual labourers who must pay their salaries whether they like it or not.

Choice—As in “pro-choice,” and “a woman’s right to choose.” There is no such thing as a “right to choose,” to begin with. And here the term is deliberately vague to disguise the true referent: abortion. “Choice” means “abortion”: it is that simple. “A woman’s right to choose” = “A woman’s right to abort.”

Evolution—evolution is, properly, the belief that species evolve into different species over time. This is quite distinct from “Darwinism” or “Darwinian evolution”; it is false to claim that, if you reject Darwin, you reject evolution. Darwin's contribution was the idea that evolution is due to natural selection of random mutations in an ongoing struggle for survival.

Sexual predator – a predator is an animal that kills what it eats—a carnivore. There is simply no relationship to someone who seeks sex with children. But using the term, again, strips the person of all humanity and justifies any punishment.

All for now—a child has jumped in my lap. I could go on.