Understanding the rhetoric

When we engage in political debate these days it is a must that we clarify the very terms we are to use. So often people use terms incorrectly and because they lack understanding of the terms, they can’t use reason to formulate coherent ideas.

Below are terms and their actual definition.

Conservative, Conservatism:
( tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions)
This is a very misunderstood term. The reason for this is that it is a relative term.
A conservative in Russia wants to conserve the Marxist-Leninist ideas of the past.
A conservative in America during the revolution was a loyalist that wanted to remain under the tyrannical dominion of the king.
A conservative in America today wants to conserve the liberal ideas of Americas founding fathers as outlined in the U.S. Constitution and in especially the first ten amendments.

Liberal, Liberalism:
(not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms)
Again, this is a relative term.
A liberal in a totalitarian society wants freedom or “change” from oppression of the state or king. Thomas Jefferson was a Liberal in that he wanted change or freedom from King George. If you are a Conservative today in the U.S., you have beliefs in line with a liberal in the 1700s. If you were a conservative in the 1700s you were one that wanted things to remain under the tyranny of the crown.

So, you can see how these terms “conservative and liberal” are often misused. The terms are paradoxically; synonyms and antonyms both opposite but interchangeable.
Weird aint it?

Facist, Facism :
A fascist government believes that only one race or subgroup is fit to rule, hold power or exist.
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date: 1921
a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Dem-wits call Bush a fascist and that is a misuse of the term. However One could say that Islamic beliefs are fascist because they advocate one particular religion should rule and that infidels either be killed, converted or subjugated.

Etymology: German, by shortening & alteration from Nationalsozialist, from national national + Sozialist socialist
Date: 1930
1: a member of a German fascist party controlling Germany from 1933 to 1945 under Adolf Hitler

You’ll hear this term thrown all over the place. Typically by leftist bomb throwers. Nazi, a real Nazi is just a person that believes in nationalized socialism but you have to also know that the Nazi of Germany was also fascist. The Baath party of Iraq and Syria are modeled after the Nazi party and they too are fascist.

1 : centralized control by an autocratic authority 2 : the political concept that the citizen should be totally subject to an absolute state authority

You have to know and understand totalitarianism to appreciate the next two words on the list.

Communism and Socialism:
Many people will try to make a distinction between these two terms but they are the same. The only difference is in degree. IE a socialist state is partly communistic.
The U.S. is quasi-socialistic in that we confiscate half the income from the hard working, enterprising person to provide food and housing for the lazy, dimwitted person. Communism is such a bad idea that there are a few necessities for a communist government in order for it to stay in power.
1. Totalitarianism (see above)
2. a secret police to report and crush dissenters.
3. state control of the press to spread it’s propaganda

Examples of True Communist states are :
North Korea
China, China has become somewhat of a hybrid in that they have adopted a degree of capitalism in a business relationship to the U.S. firm Wal-Mart. They came to the realization that pure communism was starving it’s people and would never generate the kind of revenue they would later need to build a military capable of dominating the world which was Mao Tse-Tung’s ultimate goal.

People tend to use this word just for when they need something negative to call someone, but it does have a proper use.
(a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings)
Here are some good usages:
Jimmy Swaggart is a hypocrite because he cavorts with crack whores while preaching chastity and fidelity.
Al Gore is the model of hypocrisy because he burns a thousand times more energy than the average person but preaches conservation.
Democrats have hypocritical views because they preach to us how precious human life is when we want to execute a murderer who has brutally raped and butchered a child but killing a baby for convenience is not only okay but lauded.
By the way I must inject here that I think abortion is great. Any women that would willingly murder her baby definitely should not carry on her murderous genes
There is also hypocritical reasoning like when some idiot says The world is over populated and if we don’t check population growth we will deplete the worlds resources and we’ll all starve then with the next breath they say “the worst problem facing man is the AIDS epidemic The U.S. needs to spend more to save those lives.” For goodness sake which is it moron do you want to stop over population or do you want the government to provide free health care, cure all disease, stop tobacco use, and end all war. I guess in their idea of utopia we could control population with abortion. Now I get it.

This word isn’t misused but I want to go over it’s meaning and some examples of it.
Definition: contrary to what one would intuitively expect.
Example 1
Liberal democrats want to raise taxes. They think that by doing so government coffers will overflow but in reality when taxes are lowered people keep more of their money.
People tend to spend money, they love to buy new stuff. Money just seems to burn a whole in their pocket. Now you have to understand that the government only gets a chance to tax us when money changes hands. And every time money changes hands more people make money they in turn pay taxes so you can see why every time we lower taxes the economy booms government revenues go up the jobless rate goes down.

Example 2
Gun control, some people think that gun control lowers murder rates but the truth is the states and towns that have less gun control have lower murder rates. You have to remember that only law abiding citizens obey the gun laws in the first place. Murderers laugh at them and love it when their prey is unarmed. “Gun Control is a de facto bill of rights for the murderer. By it’s very nature anti-gun laws guarantee that the murderer has plenty of unarmed people to slaughter”.

Example 3
Education spending
Many moon bats think that the way to better education is by spending more money on it. Hey that sounds good but here again places that spend the most on education have the worst results. It is a clear example of inverse proportion. Lets compare Washington D.C. with Salt lake City
While Salt Lake city spends near the lowest per child, they have near the highest Graduation rate and near the highest SAT scores.
Washington D.C. on the other hand spends near the most yet they have nearly the worst graduation rate and nearly the lowest SAT scores.

Democracy is one of those words that is mostly misused and misunderstood .
Lets look at the definition:
“Demos: mean common people
“kratos”: means rule
so democracy means “ruled by people”
There probably are few purer examples of democracy than a lynch mob,
As a matter of fact though most Islamic countries are fascist they are better examples of pure democracies than the U.S..

Now let me try to explain that. If the vast majority of a population desire their government to impose sharia law and they believe that infidels should be killed or converted there is nothing undemocratic about that, though the infidel might disagree.

The U.S. is not a democracy.
It is a hybrid “constitutional representative federal republic”
This is far from a pure democracy. The U.S. is governed by a constitution of laws not of people.
Early in the history of the U.S. it’s founders agreed on a set of rules that would limit not only the power and discretion of the government ( it’s self and it’s law) but also it’s people and it’s subsequent elected leaders. Why did they do this? Well they knew that absolute power is corrupting and oppressive in any one entities hands. So, they basically spread it out .
Constitutional ( we are ruled by law )
Federation (we are made up of smaller sovereign countries or “states” )
Republic ( we are ruled by consent )
Representative ( we vote for our leaders )