Words mean what we say they mean but we must agree on that meaning otherwise communication fails. Words evolve, sometimes naturally over time and sometimes intentionally. Intentional shifts in meaning are often efforts to influence or manipulate people.
Words like genocide typically held weight because of the scale of atrocity. Applying ‘genocide’ to events that are not even close in scale waters it down to the point that when the real event occurs it won’t be recognized. That’s my fear with the overuse of these words.
Excellent job highlighting the misuse of language. It is astounding how many people who claim that words constitute violence are so eager to twist the meaning of words to fit their worldview. Putting my conspiracy theory hat on, I might suggest it is intentional: if everything is a “genocide”, then the original genocide (I.e the holocaust) is really not that bad.
Already responded to this on your Substack, but I'm glad it's now accessible to Wrong Speak readers.
The use of "genocide" and "war crimes" as focal point examples is a strong choice, and the phenomenon has spread to myriad other terms as well. It is now common to refer to right-wingers as "Nazi", even though Hitler was his own brand of Socialist (National Socialist German Workers' Party). Republicans are now "Fascist", even though they call for LESS government intervention while fascism by definition is a centralized autocracy.
We also hear elected officials like Rashida Tlaib et. al. refer to Israel as an "Apartheid" state. Do she and her supporters even know what Apartheid actually was, when a 20% white population had government control over South Africa and oppressed the 80% black and mixed race population? (Israel, by contrast, accepts people of all faiths and allows Arab Israelis to serve in government positions and the Knesset; Palestinians are mostly self governed, despite the fact that many are intent on destroying Israel. Is Israel perfect? No, but Apartheid? Please.)
It's become so pervasive that there are no baseline standards for communication anymore, and the impact of these labels has deteriorated. This (as you said regarding actual survivors of genocide) minimizes the impact of those who can truly be defined by such words, lessening their actions down to equal status with those who are mislabeled to push an agenda, while it simultaneously causes further damages to those who are their legitimate victims. Great post Philip.
Its activist speak. I don't think there's a long-term goal aside from convincing you that their agenda matters. No lie too large to advance the agenda.
Words like genocide typically held weight because of the scale of atrocity. Applying ‘genocide’ to events that are not even close in scale waters it down to the point that when the real event occurs it won’t be recognized. That’s my fear with the overuse of these words.
Excellent job highlighting the misuse of language. It is astounding how many people who claim that words constitute violence are so eager to twist the meaning of words to fit their worldview. Putting my conspiracy theory hat on, I might suggest it is intentional: if everything is a “genocide”, then the original genocide (I.e the holocaust) is really not that bad.
Already responded to this on your Substack, but I'm glad it's now accessible to Wrong Speak readers.
The use of "genocide" and "war crimes" as focal point examples is a strong choice, and the phenomenon has spread to myriad other terms as well. It is now common to refer to right-wingers as "Nazi", even though Hitler was his own brand of Socialist (National Socialist German Workers' Party). Republicans are now "Fascist", even though they call for LESS government intervention while fascism by definition is a centralized autocracy.
We also hear elected officials like Rashida Tlaib et. al. refer to Israel as an "Apartheid" state. Do she and her supporters even know what Apartheid actually was, when a 20% white population had government control over South Africa and oppressed the 80% black and mixed race population? (Israel, by contrast, accepts people of all faiths and allows Arab Israelis to serve in government positions and the Knesset; Palestinians are mostly self governed, despite the fact that many are intent on destroying Israel. Is Israel perfect? No, but Apartheid? Please.)
It's become so pervasive that there are no baseline standards for communication anymore, and the impact of these labels has deteriorated. This (as you said regarding actual survivors of genocide) minimizes the impact of those who can truly be defined by such words, lessening their actions down to equal status with those who are mislabeled to push an agenda, while it simultaneously causes further damages to those who are their legitimate victims. Great post Philip.
ZL
Thanks ZL!
Thank you! I hadn't seen that homicide study before. That's key data to refute trans activist/woke lying.
Its activist speak. I don't think there's a long-term goal aside from convincing you that their agenda matters. No lie too large to advance the agenda.
That's the long-term effect. Activists hope that the short-term effect is to get you to behind their agenda.