Before anyone can attempt to make sense of the world and his or her place in it, one has to grapple with the foundation of all extrapolations: reality itself.
Why does the establishment of reality matter? Because the unrelenting existence of physical reality embodies truth and exposes falsehood upon sincere scrutiny.
How does one establish reality then? Is it by measuring and logging the tangible? Is it by seeking a universal perception of said tangible?
One of the most essential tools for the establishment and conveyance of reality is language.
Humans are unique in the known universe with their ability to utilize structured language to communicate ideas. There is a special region of the brain devoted entirely to this ability. This means we are hard-wired for the conception and utilization of spoken and written language.
Instead of belaboring the complexities of language itself, let's just agree that language exists, humans use it, and it is vital to communication across a network, be it mechanical or biological.
When language is practiced with integrity and is consistently honest, confusion is reduced to a minimum. When the practice of language is riddled with falsehood, it generates chaos that exponentially increases as the falsehoods propagate across the network.
Most people alive today in the western hemisphere have been bamboozled with language without even knowing it. This is a historically recognizable sophistry designed specifically to alter worldview and personal opinion (e.g. the Bolsheviks of the early 20th century).
In terms of contemporary bamboozlement, I'm referring to any new words or phrases or redefinitions of existing words or phrases designed specifically to alter the original meaning the word or phrase was created to convey.
Once the redefinition takes hold, then the perception of reality as it pertains to the conveyance of that particular information has been permanently altered.
Here is an example of a currently ubiquitous word defined by Merriam-Webster. The first pair of definitions are from 1991 and the latter three definitions are the most recent (2024 at the time of this writing):
racism n (1936)
- a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
- racial prejudice or discrimination
racism noun
- a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
- behavior or attitudes that reflect and foster this belief : racial discrimination or prejudice
- the systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another;
specifically : white supremacy
Notice the approximate date of origin. Does this mean people didn't see each other differently due to skin color before 1936?
Of course not; they surely did based on historical documentation. However it does speak to the fact that race as an issue wasn't on the top of the list of cultural importance before then, no matter what your humanities professor is insisting you acknowledge.
Instead of lifting up the current third definition to support politically biased talking points, perhaps consider the way in which the word was given a completely new additional definition based on Marxist class-based principles that have nothing to do with skin color.
Also and more importantly, take a closer look at the way your own perception of reality was altered by these changes.
The more recent third definition was entirely unnecessary and included for political reasons because the original second definition already covered the negative real-world results of the original first definition.
Furthermore, the newer second definition was also altered in a way that distorts its original meaning.
Including the preface of "behavior or attitudes that reflect and foster this belief" treads into mind-police territory, as it lays the groundwork to arbitrarily accuse others of racism based on subjective opinions of what others might be thinking.
Additionally, it is worth noting that the additional third more recent definition would be the direct result of Frankfurt School ideologies derived from the now infamous Marx-Engels manifesto. Before the Frankfurt School implemented and proliferated these political philosophies, there were zero university professors extolling their alleged value.
How can I justify these sorts of assertions regarding the sources of this chicanery? Look no further than the expositions included alongside the current three definitions of racism:
racism noun
- a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
- Ladino elites used racism to justify the displacement and enslavement of the indigenous population, and these beliefs, along with the resentment created by the continued exploitation of indigenous land and labor, culminated in the Guatemalan Civil War (1960-1996).-- Mariana Calvo
- ...how do we begin undoing the processes of internalized hatred and internalized racism? -- bell hooks
- behavior or attitudes that reflect and foster this belief : racial discrimination or prejudice
- The kind of trenchant racism to which black people have persistently been subjected can never be defeated by making its victims more respectable. The essence of American racism is disrespect. -- Imani Perry
- From racist graffiti in schools to daily microaggressions and police profiling, rally testimonials highlighted that issues surrounding racism are still very much local issues. -- Ryan J. Degan
- The War on Drugs, cloaked in race-neutral language, offered whites opposed to racial reform a unique opportunity to express their hostility toward blacks and black progress, without being exposed to the charge of racism. -- Michelle Alexander
- the systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another;
specifically : white supremacy
- One of the many ruses racism achieves is the virtual erasure of historical contributions by people of color. -- Angela Y. Davis
- ...the report described institutional racism as a form of collective behaviour, a workplace culture supported by a structural status quo, and a consensus often excused and ignored by authorities. -- Reni Eddo-Lodge
- Discriminatory housing practices, redlining neighborhoods, underfunded education, lack of access to healthcare, racial profiling, police brutality and mass incarceration are just a few examples of cage wires that all together contribute to structural racism. -- Sylvia Luetmer
- "People of color, low-income people, and Indigenous peoples have been made especially vulnerable through decades of environmental racism: policies that intentionally concentrate pollution and toxic hazards in our communities." -- Michele Roberts
How can one reasonably assume, after comparing the previous definitions with the current ones including the expositions below them, that the culture isn't being deliberately manipulated?
The original definitions were all that were necessary for an English speaking population to understand that racism was a negative practice that would be better left uncommitted. People well understood this truth even before Martin Luther King Jr. made his important mark on history.
A bitter irony here is we have always assumed, since institutions called universities and colleges were first created, that one attends them to experience the privilege of acquiring higher knowledge that those who don't attend are typically not exposed to on an average basis.
Instead, what universities currently produce are students who may or may not fall for the Marxist gambit of overthrowing existing cultural structure with the poison pill of resentment.
To make matters even worse, once-legitimate institutions such as Merriam-Webster have prostituted themselves to the caustic whims of the globalist elite for the sake of maintaining their ESG scores.
|