Freedom Is Isn't Free. Multiple meanings for many words and phrases exist. Some are intentionally purposed to advance proprietary ideas and values. Use-truths in organizations were something Sartre wrote about in The Critique of Dialectical Reason. I recall that is was a chapter on colonialism and the way the insiders viewed the natives. Free people are free and may say what's what while the rest need to fear violence, starvation, exile, ostracism etc.
There is an old bumper sticker that reads; "Freedom isn't Free". One knows what it means, yet it is still somewhat onerous. Free is free basically. If one must sacrifice for one's corporate CEO or die in war to keep the administration happy, then one at least is not as free as a wandering native hunter in North America circa 1200 a.d. who would recognize the sophism and nonsense of social reality wherein enslavement occurs. In the sophist world freedom is closer to meaning something like the Nazis of Auschwitz had for the Jews "work will make you free".
If one must use Orwellian lexicons in order to exist socially then the society is not one with real actual freedom. It is conditional freedom where one is free to do as demanded yet not otherwise. In a real Democracy all the citizens serve militarily speaking if they need to, yet in a corporate society the pros of war paid by globalists, corporatists and such, are motivated to force narratives and ideas consistent with the will of ruling powers and creators of the right social lexicon. One of the reasons for the decline of quality American political leadership is that bright people in the corporate world need to shut up and keep their heads down or be fired much less dissent with any sort of corporate policy. In China though they just jail ya-even Christians sometimes. ISIS are more inclined to be head choppers however, while U.S. elites like financial sabotage to suppress dissident ideas.
The ability to have equal social standing cuts in all directions lexically. Blacks and women want equal power with white men and proscribe speech that would not support that. Corporations sometimes want to control electorates to silence environmentalists. Administrations want to annex Ukraine and perforce action novel writers make Russia and efforts to control their ancient homeland villainous. Even President Obama would not stand with Israel and veto a U.N. condemnation of settlements. On occasions politically correct speech is used to drive actual political movements. What else is new?
No comments:
Post a Comment