Re: Do the enemies of society bicycle?

On Jan 28, 5:40 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Paul Johnson called those who abuse words "the enemies of society",
pointing out that the first order of business of those who wish to
undermine society is always to undermine the meaning of the language.

In newsgroups, it appears that the first order of business for bullies is to
take on those who make use of common, well-understood phrases as being
ignorant, uneducated slobs with nothing worthwhile to say.

--Mike--     Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com

It's not clear whether you agree with me, Mike, but either way I have
news for you: The criminals who undermine the language are not, repeat
not, ignorant, undereducated slobs -- they are educated people, very
often in universities, who might aspire to some power, and undermining
the language is one way to achieve their goals.

I've recently been victimized by a gang of bullies on this newsgroup
and all of them wrote perfectly acceptable English, nor do I suspect
that any of them is personally a slob, though we have seen much
immorality and brutality, and I and others have questioned the
rationality of their arguments (again, I suspect deliberate and
malicious misrationalization rather than stupidity or lack of
education). But they do abuse the language by weaseling the meaning of
words, as in my example. It is a dishonest. sleazy method of gaining
power or some small, temporary "victory" in a dispute that doesn't
quite rate as high as a storm in a pisspot.

I'm with Paul Johnson on this, though I would put the feminists and
the politically correct brigade before his first choice of language-
criminals -- IIRC, Johnson pointed the finger first at high-level
civil servants and their sidekicks, the politicians...

Andre Jute
Do your duty for society: run over a sociologist today

"Andre Jute" <fiul...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:99b289e4-024b-4ff8-a1a4-aa86b45b02a8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jan 26, 8:27 pm, Tim McNamara <tim...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

There can be little doubt that Mr. xxxx is lying.  The overwhelming
whiff of troll has been evident for quite some time.

Trolling a fishing term for offering a tempting morsel to capture a
tasty fish which has migrated to the internet.

But how does trolling automatically become implausibility? And how
does implausibility automatically become proof of a lie? And now
trolling is suddenly equivalent to lying!

I am absolutely amazed at the misuse of words on this conference (1).
Paul Johnson called those who abuse words "the enemies of society",
pointing out that the first order of business of those who wish to
undermine society is always to undermine the meaning of the language.

Andre Jute
Linguist

(1) Though the slack language does not pass without comment. I seem to
remember seeing Tom Sherman challenging these perverse usages.

.

Relevant Pages