|
Defend Marriage, Defend the Language, Defend Freedom by Harry Goslin Earlier
this week a student asked me what the word “morp” meant (it’s a
traditional annual dance at our school).
Since it’s “prom” spelled backwards, the traditional
dating ritual is also reversed. The
girls ask the guys to the dance and typically pay for dinner.
I doubt this tradition is unique to our school, although other
schools may not refer to it as morp.
I also doubt the addition of morp to the English language is
imminent. Surely the field
of etymology is plenty busy keeping up with technological terminology
wrought by the internet age. If
that’s not enough, there’s always politics.
Language
corruption is a given so long as politicians don’t have their mouths
sewn shut, eyes gouged out, and hands cut off.
As long as government continues to exist, it will do more than
steal, enslave, and murder. It
will likewise obfuscate its criminal endeavors through the
misapplication of words and phrases, using context as a smokescreen,
rather than as clarification. George
the Elder reminded us that “read my lips,” a phrase suggesting
unequivocal clarity, really means the exact opposite of what is being
said. Thanks to George
Stephanopolous and the Clinton administration, more affluent Americans
can be comforted that they did not pay higher taxes in the ‘90s;
they made “increased contributions” to the public welfare. All
that seems trivial since Sheriff George rode into Washington.
Pretty soon, the term “Orwellian” will become obsolete, to
be replaced with “Bushian,” and rightly so.
The once hyperbolic images and terminology associated with
Orwell’s 1984 that have since become a part of our political,
economic, and social discourse will likely be supplanted with the very
real and ever-expanding doublespeak of the Bush administration.
As
the president and his minions scramble for legitimacy and relevancy in
the waning days of this first, and possibly, last term, the linguistic
proclivities of Americans might be forced down the Memory Hole.
The following is a sampling of additions and/or changes that
could easily be made to the English language since George the Younger
took office: Liberation.
The process of freeing a people from a tyrant (see
below) through the use of massive aerial bombardment, sea-launched
guided missiles, tens of thousands of heavily-armed troops and armored
vehicles, all to be followed by an indeterminate period of military
occupation. Tyrant.
Any foreign leader, formerly on the U. S. government payroll,
who no longer kowtows to the demands of his former employer. Free
elections.
A farcical electoral process, not unlike those held in the
United States every few years, in which a liberated people (see
above) are permitted to vote for their leaders, provided the outcome
conforms to the liking of the occupying power. Homeland
security.
Systematic diminution of civil liberties shielded in legalese
ultimately designed to safeguard government buildings, property,
employees, and especially, elected officials. Hero/patriot.
Any person who wears a uniform and carries a gun in the service
of government (firemen and postal workers excepted).
Terrorist.
We could probably trace this one back to the Reagan
administration. Regardless,
it would still mean any person or group that uses terror, intimidation,
explosives, mass murder, and torture to achieve their ends.
Note: Although terrorists’ methods are also
employed by governments, only Axis of Evil governments are
terrorist-oriented. Coalition
of the Willing governments, when they use the same tactics, act in self
defense; or, to promote democracy in parts of the world with no
democratic tradition. Evil.
Mystical force most likely originating in the Arab-speaking world
that works through individuals, radical Islamic groups, and some foreign
governments (coincidentally enemies of Israel, located in and around oil
rich regions of the world), impelling them to hate, slander, and even
attack the United States for unexplained reasons. Goof.
Any intentionally misleading and false reference (formerly a lie)
uttered in a nationally televised speech, designed to incite fear and
images of imminent nuclear attack among an audience of political idiots
(approximately 45% known to be afflicted with this idiocy).
When exposed as a complete fabrication, a goof reverts to
“faulty intelligence.” Defending
freedom.
Most accurately defined in Terrorism and Tyranny, by James
Bovard, who describes the Bush administration defending freedom “by
destroying the power of judges to release people who have been jailed
without charges, by refusing to inform Congress of how new federal
powers are being used, by giving itself the right to impound millions of
people’s email, by carrying out thousands of secret searches, and by
seeking to lower an iron curtain of secrecy around all federal
agencies” (348). This
frightening trend must be stopped. No
longer can we allow words and phrases to literally disappear overnight,
only to materialize the next day with unrecognizable meanings.
It is time for at least one brave soul to step forward and jam
the gears of this out-of-control linguistic juggernaut.
A new storm brewing on the political horizon offers hope for our
disappearing language. The
controversy over gay marriage can quickly be resolved in a way that
satisfies the demands of all parties concerned and avoids an unnecessary
and polarizing national argument, purposely thrust upon the electoral
stage to distract from the abuses and failures of the Bush
administration, both foreign and domestic.
Furthermore, as a colleague of mine pointed out, this issue could
be nothing more than a trap to bait Democrats into defending a suicidal
moral issue, with no political significance to the policies of the last
three years. Exactly the
fight Bush’s evangelical base would relish to draw moderate and
remaining conservative Republicans, disaffected by Bush’s statist
rule, into the fray. But
we need not be drawn to battle over this issue, because at heart, it is
not a moral issue. It is a
language issue, and that is how we should look to resolve this growing
crisis. My sense of civic
duty requires that I offer a solution, hopefully implemented in the
event that no etymologist steps forward and falls on a sword in defense
of the English language. The
meaning of marriage has been long established and must remain so.
Sorry all you gays and lesbians, but our language preservation
right now is more crucial to what little remains of our freedom than any
sense of fairness you think is rightfully yours.
It pains me to say this, but I think we have to heed the words of
President Bush, who recently said that the nation must prevent “the
meaning of marriage from being changed forever,” as a catalyst for the
defense of the entire English language.
No more multiple meanings that confound tradition and common
sense. We need to designate
new terms to recognize political, social, and moral changes, whenever
and however they are thrust upon us. I
propose the addition of the term “egairram” to the English language, to be officially defined as “the
legal union of two people of the same sex.”
The meaning of marriage is preserved, as it should be, and gays
and lesbians get official recognition for their partnerships, with their
own exclusive term to boot. Sorry,
but you folks will have to corrupt the political process for the
economic and tax benefits that are at the heart of this controversy.
My only concern is turning back the corruptive surge against the
language. That
process being initiated, we can return existing words to their original
meaning and put recent political corruptions in their proper context.
Consequently, President Bush would properly be identified as a tyrant,
homeland security would be exposed as the blueprint for fascism
that it is, and defending freedom would rightly be defined as the
ongoing process of kicking government the hell out of every aspect of
our lives. Isn’t clarity
of language a truly liberating experience?
discuss this column in the forum Harry Goslin lives in Northern Arizona and teaches high school seniors to reject the state, embrace the market, and worship the individual as the highest order of society.
|
