The Liberal Stranglehold on the English Language

A reasonable human being knows this to be acts of unrestrained violence with the primary intent to instill fear amongst a civilian populace with no regard to rules of engagement, targeting usually, but not only, non-combatants. What does it mean in the modern age though? Well, in the modern age it means someone who is fighting the good fight against capitalism, or more specifically, the unjustified influence of Western control over a culture that should have every right to expand without the encroachment of the evil, tyrannical ways of the West. The term terrorist is synonymously used today with freedom fighter, and often times the Left attempts to blur the line between the two until it is impossible to make a distinction.

What is evil?

Once more your inherent reaction may be to say that it is the choice of wrong over right. It is behaving immorally when the option to behave morally is available, and when your own personal desires and actions conflict with the well being of another human. Once more, however, evil's simple definition is broken down, and it becomes a question of philosophy, simple and obvious ideas like Nazi Germany's evil is called into question by those who wish to draw a moral equivalence between the tragedy at Drasden and the calculated bombings of factory workers in London. Evil, it is reasoned in a frightening new era of Orwellian Newspeak, is simply the spin one side puts on it, and there are no rights or wrongs; absolutes are a lie. I have heard this described simply as "moral nihilism". I call it nonsense.

The tragedy of it all is that these are the results of the willful allowance of the Left to simply develop a proverbial stranglehold on the English language. It should be obvious that no one, no matter of their political party or affiliation, should be allowed to designate themselves moderators of speech, but unfortunately with the advent of the Political Correctness movement, words have taken on entirely new meanings - and failure to conform results in a whole new scale of political or verbal badgering.

Consider the attempts to assign a title to the advent of Islamic influenced terrorism. To avoid Muslim sensitivities, people have been asked to avoid equating Islam with terrorism, therefore it has been ruled that you are unable to refer to terrorism carried out by Muslims as "Islamic terrorism". Therefore new terms were coined - such as Islamofascism. This was met with the harshest of criticisms, particularly that it encouraged racial profiling and discrimination against Islam, even though the term had been coined to differentiate Muslims from radical Muslims.

Therefore the idea of Islamic totalitarianism was brought to bear - but once more this was shot down. It implies, the Left reasons, that once more, Muslims are attempting to take over the world, and we should avoid labeling them, after all, offense is always worth avoiding. The only acceptable terminology, evidently, has been coined in the formerly Great Britain. Namely, any terrorist activity carried out by Muslims is deemed not terrorism, but "anti-Islamic activities". This is an interesting idea posed of course, because in addition to absolving those guilty of terrorism of the title, it also asserts that a secular nation such as the United Kingdom is able to make religious determinations as to what constitutes "Islamic activity" or "anti-Islamic activity".

But these are all simply symptoms of the advent of a Newspeak eerily predicted by George Orwell in his dystopian novel 1984. In it, the government felt that the only way to effectively control man was to control how he thought, and thought was best controlled by making one use language that brought about this thought. Therefore it is not difficult to see the similarity between requiring one to title an action sanctioned by Muslim sheiks as "anti-Islamic activity" in the hopes that by repeating it enough, it will eventually become truth in your own head.

Perhaps more so than any other habit of the left, the absolute stranglehold on the English language needs to be averted. It is one thing to look out for one's sensitivities - however, one must also be fully willing to point out the absurdity in not wanting to make someone feel bad for being called what they are. This means, of course, that there are Islamic terrorists, science isn't ruled by a consensus, and terrorists are evil.