Friday, April 17, 2015

On SJWs and language

How can I teach my students to write decently when the English language has become a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Academic-Industrial Complex? Our language used to belong to all its speakers and readers and writers. But in the 1970s and ’80s, arrogant ideologues began recasting English into heavy artillery to defend the borders of the New Feminist state. In consequence we have all got used to sentences where puffed-up words like “chairperson” and “humankind” strut and preen, where he-or-she’s keep bashing into surrounding phrases like bumper cars and related deformities blossom like blisters; they are all markers of an epoch-making victory of propaganda over common sense.
And when someone spouts "PRIVILEGE!" at you,
Call: “Check your privilege!”
Response: “What you call ‘privilege’ is just me being better than you.”

Apparently, telling the .gov not to loot what you worked your life to build is 'creating an aristocracy'. 

So "Now that you're dead, we're going to steal a third of your estate" is fairness, or something.

Hope! and Change!!
Yesterday, President Barack Obama announced that the United States would be removing Cuba from the U.S. State Sponsors of Terror list as part of his push to normalize relations with the communist dictatorship. But just hours later, a terror group long fostered by Cuba — even today, the Castro brothers are harboring several wanted members of the group — murdered 10 Colombian soldiers and wounded 17 others in a terror attack on a military base.

1 comment:

AndyN said...

So "Now that you're dead, we're going to steal a third of your estate" is fairness, or something.

I've been saying for years that conservatives missed a big propaganda opportunity when US v. Windsor was in front of the Supreme Court. As I understand it, Edith Windsor had standing to sue because the feds wanted to confiscate 1/3 of an estate that was left to her by someone who the state of NY considered her spouse.

Every Republican in government should have sprinted to the nearest TV camera and made the case that Thea Spyer shouldn't have needed a marriage license to prevent the government taking $363k worth of her stuff when she died. Of course, that requires us to continue pretending to believe that professional Republicans actually want smaller government.