19 ms·
> if you let rich people keep more of their money, they have more of the money. If you simultaneously take from poor people, they stay poor. Not to join the de
by AlexB138 8y ago
> if you let rich people keep more of their money, they have more of the money. If you simultaneously take from poor people, they stay poor.
Not to join the debate here, but the use of language here really interests me. When talking about the rich, it's that we "let [them] keep more of their money" as if "we" (the government) has a right to every cent a person makes. When talking about the poor, we "take" from them, as if it's unjust theft.
Not trying to argue against you, it's a perfectly normal view, I just find it funny how much ideology paints language.
- arcticbull 8y agoThat's a really interesting insight! I hadn't caught myself doing that, thanks for pointing it out.
- AlexB138 8y agoYeah, it's funny how we work. Heck, read my comment, you can probably just as easily pick out my ideology. I wonder if linguistics has a term for that. It's something like "spin", but not exactly because it's not intentional or malicious.
- arcticbull 8y agoYeah, it's a great example of how subconscious bias shapes linguistic constructions. I'm sure we all do this all the time :)
- sbenitoj 8y agoIt’s not a coincidence — you use “we” because you’re a progressive and progressives view themselves as part of the government. Conservatives use “they” because they (rightly) understand they’re NOT in power.
- arcticbull 8y agoWell, in a democracy we all are, that’s kind of the idea for better or worse.