Listening to the debate, right now, I'm finding myself struck with fear again at the usage of the term "The Homeland" . . . . when they say we need to protect the ''homeland'', how is that easier to say or more meaningful than saying ''we need to protect AMERICA"? This ''homeland'' word play is deeply disturbing to me in a way that is difficult to pin down. I don't want to be so simplistic as to say it roots from the old Nazi "Fatherland" terminology, though that is a disturbing parallel. But it seems some kind of psychological propoganda manipulation to try and plant a new word for America, instead of just using ''America'', or "USA". Any thoughts?
Many people have noticed the same thing. Look at the laws that have been passed since 9/11 and look at how they have affected our rights. Most notably, the Patriot Act. There have also been several smaller piecez of legislation to limit our use of the Betamax decision. The INDUCE act was only dropped because it is so close to election time. The words from the goverment lately our 'trust us, we know what is best'.....
Americans need to understand the difference between patriotism and nationalism. A patriot loves his land and his people. A nationalist loves his government. The patriot voluntarily does what is necessary to protect his land and his people. A nationalist blindly obeys his government. ~ Charley Reese
Yeah I've always kind of disliked that term too. I hadn't considering the "fatherland" think but yeah, maybe that's why I don't like it. I would guess that the term is used because some focus group determined that it raised numbers somewhere.
Yeah, it just doesn't make any sense - "America" is easier to say than "Homeland" and "America" is a word that resonates deeply with most of us, and is powerful and meaningful. Feeling the need to replace that word in the context of security discussions - strikes me as there possibly being some nasty and manipulative intent underfoot. I mean . . . its so simple. "We need to defend America" not fucking "We need to defend the Homeland"! I mean, WTF?
Defending our Homeland makes it out to sound as if everyone is out to get us as if we're the victims. - N
Welcome to doublespeak 101. Changing the language, changing definitions, enables the phrasers to recreate meaning to suit their purposes. Stalin did it to Marxist vocabulary, Hitler did it. US has been doing it for a while. Bush camp does it in overdrive. I agree it is scary. Reminescent of the most evil gov'ts in history. Other Orwellian phrases/items: Freedom isn't Free Fight for freedom Defend liberty Protect liberty Bringing peace and security to ____. (insert new colony here) Peacekeeper missile Patriot act leave no child behind Clear skys initiative democratization globalization .....just to name a few.
The Third Reich's Joseph Goebbels was the original master of double-speak. Realizing that for the purposes of short term power consolidation and manipulation of public opinion - it doesn't matter what the leader actually DOES, only what he SAYS. -- Pass a law allowing more logging, roads into wilderness and other deforstations . . . but *call* it the "Healthy Forests Initiative ". -- Push through legislation allowing more pollution, but *call* it the "Clean Air Act". -- Get a new program going that in fact reinforces and magnifies the gap between the educational options for rich and the poor, but *call* it "No Child Left Behind". And there is much more of this. These are evil and cynical sociopaths, and we are pretty screwed if they are allowed to keep doing this! The history of the USA will be just another interesting chapter in history books.
Nothing new for me, I've been reading about these days we are having for quite some time!!. http://www.peikoff.com/op/home.htm Godless.
I call the USA under Bush the new Soviet Union more then Nazi Germany. Because America's mission isn't a racist one, it’s a universalistic ideological one. Democracy (note America is not really a democracy) is good for everyone; Communism (note that the USSR was not under any terms communist) is good for everyone, Adam Smith makes sense, Karl Marx makes sense, you are at the shackles of “evil” dictators we will give you freedom, you are the shackles of “evil” bourgeoisie we will give you freedom…like the USSR I predict the US will eventually eat itself into oblivion.
My, my - intense, and well thought out sarcasm with a clear justification and meaning. Coupled with the creation of a new word! Now THAT is provocative.
Gravity, That’s a low blow, picking on someones spelling, for all we know wesmorris has a mental handicap or is missing some fingers. I think "the Homeland" is a little odd, perhaps someone could find a link on to when and why this administration started using that term.
Oh, it was really more of a slap at him ducking out of actually dealing with the issue, and instead wimping out and simply posting a smarmy, sarcastic, and meaningless tiny reply. The ''provocative'' bit was just a silly little aside of my own. And tongue in cheek, I mean hell, is ''smarmy'' even actually a *word*? I don't know! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Oh, I just looked up ''smarmy'', and it is a word. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Damn, even when I try to be Bush-like and coin new words I fail! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! WordNet Dictionary - "Smarmy" Definition: [adj] unpleasantly and excessively suave or ingratiating in manner or speech; "buttery praise"; "gave him a fulsome introduction"; "an oily sycophantic press agent"; "oleaginous hypocrisy"; "smarmy self-importance"; "the unctuous Uriah Heep" Synonyms: buttery, fulsome, insincere, oily, oleaginous, unctuous
WCF wrote: Well I found these but it does not necessarily explain it, lots of opinions really and I don't now how reliable anything is. http://www.metrostate.com/library/stories/02/nov/GuelphMercury.shtml http://www.spectacle.org/1201/bartlett.html http://www.homelanddefensejournal.com/about.html http://www.amarillonet.com/stories/120802/usn_homeland.shtml http://www.rc3.org/cgi-bin/archive.pl?year=2002&month=06&day=15 Not that I think government should be trusted, but for sake of argument. Is it entirely possible that people are so caught up with analysis, blame and paranoia that we think there always has to be an underlying thing going on? Not that we shouldn't and not that there isn't...just a thought.
But, its just plain weird that they felt the need to replace the word "America'' in their statements! Its a word that has worked fine for a long time! And, their publications are way to tightly scripted to believe that its just an aside or afterthought. I'll bet there was a great deal of thought, planning and ambition behind the language choice.
