Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
How right-wingers use semantic tricks to kill government - Loaded terminology like "entitlements" and "welfare" skews the debate and alters America. Here's how it works
4 views
Skip to first unread message
chatnoir
May 18, 2013, 8:13:30 PM5/18/13
to
http://www.salon.com/2013/05/18/how_right_wingers_use_semantic_tricks_to_kill_government/
headline:
How right-wingers use semantic tricks to kill government
Loaded terminology like "entitlements" and "welfare" skews the debate
and alters America. Here's how it works
“Semantic infiltration” is a term coined by the foreign policy expert
Fred Ikle and popularized by the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
Ikle defined it thus:
Semantic infiltration means one undermines one’s own position in
negotiations by adopting unknowingly the terms which the adversary
“infiltrates.”
As a conservative, Ikle drew most of his examples of semantic
infiltration from liberal usages that became mainstream, like
“affirmative action” for race- or gender-based preference policies.
But in recent years, it is arguably the center-left that has suffered
the most from the successful semantic infiltration of public discourse
by loaded conservative terminology.
Witness the two terms “the welfare state” and “entitlements.” The
right has managed to turn “welfare state,” once a neutral description
for a modern system of economic security for individuals, into a
pejorative phrase.
An even greater triumph of semantic infiltration by the right has been
the universal use of the term “entitlements.” As used by conservatives
and liberals alike, “entitlements” usually refers to three social
insurance programs — two of them universal (Social Security and
Medicare) and one means-tested (Medicaid).
There is a certain logic to lumping together Social Security, Medicare
and Medicaid, because they are the biggest items in the federal
budget, apart from defense spending. Nevertheless, the concept of
“entitlements” is an example of semantic infiltration that skews the
debate in favor of conservatives and libertarians, for several
reasons.
The most important reason is that the term “entitlements” as commonly
used refers only to government programs for individual economic
security that are directly funded by the federal government. But much
of the U.S. economic security support system consists of subsidies for
the affluent in the form of tax breaks, like those for private
retirement savings plans such as 401(k)s and private employer-provided
health insurance.
Why aren’t 401(k)s and tax-favored health insurance, including
traditional employer health insurance as well as individual insurance
under the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), “entitlements” as well as
Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? After all, you are just as
entitled by law to your 401(k) tax break as you are to your Social
Security check in retirement. True, Congress could alter or abolish
the 401(k) program. But it could also cut or eliminate Social Security
benefits ... (cont)
headline:
How right-wingers use semantic tricks to kill government
Loaded terminology like "entitlements" and "welfare" skews the debate
and alters America. Here's how it works
“Semantic infiltration” is a term coined by the foreign policy expert
Fred Ikle and popularized by the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
Ikle defined it thus:
Semantic infiltration means one undermines one’s own position in
negotiations by adopting unknowingly the terms which the adversary
“infiltrates.”
As a conservative, Ikle drew most of his examples of semantic
infiltration from liberal usages that became mainstream, like
“affirmative action” for race- or gender-based preference policies.
But in recent years, it is arguably the center-left that has suffered
the most from the successful semantic infiltration of public discourse
by loaded conservative terminology.
Witness the two terms “the welfare state” and “entitlements.” The
right has managed to turn “welfare state,” once a neutral description
for a modern system of economic security for individuals, into a
pejorative phrase.
An even greater triumph of semantic infiltration by the right has been
the universal use of the term “entitlements.” As used by conservatives
and liberals alike, “entitlements” usually refers to three social
insurance programs — two of them universal (Social Security and
Medicare) and one means-tested (Medicaid).
There is a certain logic to lumping together Social Security, Medicare
and Medicaid, because they are the biggest items in the federal
budget, apart from defense spending. Nevertheless, the concept of
“entitlements” is an example of semantic infiltration that skews the
debate in favor of conservatives and libertarians, for several
reasons.
The most important reason is that the term “entitlements” as commonly
used refers only to government programs for individual economic
security that are directly funded by the federal government. But much
of the U.S. economic security support system consists of subsidies for
the affluent in the form of tax breaks, like those for private
retirement savings plans such as 401(k)s and private employer-provided
health insurance.
Why aren’t 401(k)s and tax-favored health insurance, including
traditional employer health insurance as well as individual insurance
under the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), “entitlements” as well as
Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? After all, you are just as
entitled by law to your 401(k) tax break as you are to your Social
Security check in retirement. True, Congress could alter or abolish
the 401(k) program. But it could also cut or eliminate Social Security
benefits ... (cont)
Werner
May 18, 2013, 10:09:01 PM5/18/13
to
What semantic tricks do you left wingers use when you take from Peter to pay Paul?
Alias
May 18, 2013, 10:25:35 PM5/18/13
to
On 5/19/2013 4:09 AM, Werner wrote:
> What semantic tricks do you left wingers use when you take from Peter to pay Paul?
>
It's called "bank bailouts".
> What semantic tricks do you left wingers use when you take from Peter to pay Paul?
>
--
Alias
Werner
May 18, 2013, 10:30:49 PM5/18/13
to
What the hell are you doing up at 4:30 AM?
Alias
May 19, 2013, 5:51:16 AM5/19/13
to
On 5/19/2013 4:30 AM, Werner wrote:
> What the hell are you doing up at 4:30 AM?
>
Couldn't sleep.
> What the hell are you doing up at 4:30 AM?
>
--
Alias
rumpelstiltskin
May 19, 2013, 6:34:36 AM5/19/13
to
I have chronic insomnia, but I don't work anymore
so I'm not worried about it.
0 new messages