3 ms·
Thanks for posting this. Many are also persistently pushing to change what is 'acceptable' vocabulary to change how people think, as Orwell described in the Ne
by nickff 10y ago
Thanks for posting this.
Many are also persistently pushing to change what is 'acceptable' vocabulary to change how people think, as Orwell described in the Newspeak appendix.[1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four#The_Newspeak_appendix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four#The_Newsp...
- joeframbach 10y agohttp://alexjs.com/ http://alexjs.com/ for example.
- sqeaky 10y agoIn 1984 they weren't trying to adjust the vocabulary to be more inclusive and make every feel more comfortable about open discourse in a fully optional way. They wanted to erase words that could denigrate the party, change the meanings of words that could be used against the party or add new words that could only say good thing about the party. Things libel laws that stop free speech, how many politicians wiggle through the truth or how people who try to mandate political correct speech like extreme SJWs seem like the problems indicated here.
- tehwalrus 10y agoMy only beef is when the law comes down hard on language, as per the Italian courts (or minitrue). People arguing about acceptable language (or, essentially, what is ethical and what isn't) is not a bad thing.