3 ms·
> You have to make a case as to why it’s dehumanizing if you want people to listen; you can’t just say it. He (and his fellow travelers) assert it, therefore t
by palmotea 2y ago
> You have to make a case as to why it’s dehumanizing if you want people to listen; you can’t just say it.
He (and his fellow travelers) assert it, therefore that is the way it is. It's an obnoxious but super-common way of driving ideological change (and keeping people on the outside).
For the most part, all these formulations (illegal, illegal immigrant, undocumented immigrant, person experiencing un-documentation) have an objectively equivalent meaning. The newer ones are kinda foolish attempts to use language games to change people's beliefs and perceptions, and really only function as shibboleths.
- _bin_ 2y agoCorrect, we could ban undergrads reading Wittgenstein and half of this BS would go away. I generally ignore this because these changes both carry some level of significance in how people think, linguistic determinism wise, and because they turn into Havel’s Greengrocer type situations.