TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Hernando Today

Words Can Often Be A Moving Target

ADVERTISEMENT

By JOHN REINIERS, More Than Words

Hernando Today

Published: August 29, 2008

George Bernard Shaw quipped, "England and America are two countries separated by the same language." Little did he know at the time he said this, that it would be a perfect description of the Democrats and Republicans from the 1960s into the new millennium – two parties separated by the same language.
This is not really a commentary on whether words mean something. Bill Clinton amused the world with his now legendary response to the question about his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky, when he said, "There is no improper relationship ... It depends on what the meaning of "is" is." (The distinction being between "is" and "was.") Clinton brings to mind Joseph Conrad's observation that "Words, as is well known, are great foes of reality" – a very telling observation given that English was Conrad's third language, and Clinton's first and only.
What is more germane and interesting, is when the meaning of a word changes – so it is possible for people to think they are speaking "the same language," but they are not. This is both critical and confusing to any analysis, because partisans often purposely misspeak, but they may also do so without guile. For example, in the olden days classical liberalism meant a maximum of individual freedom, a free market and a belief in a constitutionally limited government. (It makes sense. Think of freedom, bare bones government: Liberalism!) But modern liberalism is anything but. Rather it means a preference for a big government with social programs and extensive regulation of business and personal life. It sounds like European socialism. The point is that over time words can lose their original meaning.
"Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg is an excellent new perspective on differentiating between "liberal" fascism and the "right." At times it seems like a play on words, but it is an instructive history lesson. How could liberals be fascists? He demonstrates that the original fascists were really on the left; that modern progressivism and classical fascism shared the same intellectual roots. This may sound weird, but that is because we either have forgotten what fascism is all about, or if we're young enough, we really don't know. We just know it's bad. So the left loves to hurl the word "fascist" at conservatives. What does it mean? Gilbert Allardcye, an expert on fascism said, "We have agreed to use the word without agreeing on how to define it."
Cutting through the lengthy scholarship demonstrated by Goldberg, he notes that the early American progressive movement admired Mussolini and shared the same philosophical roots with European fascism. So was Mussolini a fascist? Not really. He was an ultra-nationalistic socialist. His socialist party was essentially a form of populism, imposing a progressive tax rate, establishing secular schools, a minimum wage, expropriating property from landowners – a political religion seeking unity of thought, or as Benito Mussolini said, "Everything in the state, nothing outside the state." That sure sounds like the big government American Democratic Party. (It is ironic George Bush is likened to Adolph Hitler by liberals. Hitler was the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeitepartei), a philosophical clone of Italian socialism.)
Most scholars would agree that conservatism with its limited goals for government, its opposition to radicalism, its reverence for our Constitution and its realization that man is quite fallible, is the antithesis of fascism.
So what's going on here? I think it's that fascism is considered a code word for evil – given the memories of World War II, which lives on in our lexicon. So that's the label of choice for Democrats describing conservatives. (Something like Bush is a Nazi; Cheney is Darth Vader, and so on.)
Here's the point. Words are what give thoughts traction. So while our thoughts remain the same, the words we use change. This accounts for Goldberg noting that "there is a fundamentally undemocratic passion running through parts of contemporary liberalism." (Liberals undemocratic? Are you kidding? He has in mind the Clinton/Obama new world of change where nobody is oppressed, everyone is happy, government is doing everything for them, or as he says, "They're being nannied almost into nonexistence" because of their penchant for regulating personal behavior – paternalism. If Americans are unhappy with gasoline prices, well then let's nationalize the oil industry. Arteries getting clogged? Well then regulate fast food. If fossil fuels are polluting the atmosphere, price them out of existence with taxes – the list is endless. The goal may or may not be laudable, but the opportunity for character building personal choice is eliminated or limited.
Goldberg tells us that liberal fascism is pacifistic rather than militaristic, but nevertheless it "seeks to increase the power of the state and overcome tradition in sweeping crusades pursued with the moral fervor of war." (I have trouble squaring this with the 1960s when the radical left was "taking it to the streets," taking over campuses, glorifying violence, blowing up things and supporting the Black Panthers.)
Strangely though, this heavy-handed paternalism hasn't found its way into the classroom. According to progressive academics, it seems that the most desirable outcome is the self-esteem of the student, rather than a measurable educational result.
The liberal fascist drumbeat sounds to urge little Johnny not to drink Cokes or eat that greasy stuff for his cafeteria lunch, but don't "lean" on him to get him to learn to read and write at his grade level. And above all, don't challenge him by testing.
Better a trim and fit functionally illiterate high school drop out, than a weight-challenged graduate with a diploma.

John Reiniers, a regular columnist for Hernando Today, lives in Spring Hill.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT