... is what the press is doing when it runs to change the definition of a recession.
And, no, the title of this post has nothing to do with getting a separation from wife kitteh. That would be insane.
The idea that we're in the process of a divorce hit me when I saw the AP come out with this howler.
By one common definition — the economy shrinking for consecutive quarters — the U.S. economy is on the cusp of a recession.
— The Associated Press (@AP) July 26, 2022
Yet that definition isn't the one that counts. https://t.co/Bw1am1viQ4
I had hoped that the AP would cling to some amount of dignity and stay with the textbook definition of a recession which is two consecutive quarters of economic decline. When they pulled this stunt and it was obvious to all of us that they were simply shilling for the blues, I realized that they no longer cared what we thought. They're filing for a divorce right now.
There was a pundit, a CNBC analyst who was caught whoring for the blues as well.
The replies came thick and fast and were universally derogatory. Ben didn't even try to refute them. Why would he? He doesn't care about us any more. He's moved on emotionally.
After she walked out on the family, my first ex used to call me up and yell at me. If I hung up, she'd call back. This was before cell phones were common, so I didn't know an easy way to block her. I would put the phone down and walk away as she yammered. Her voice would get dimmer and dimmer until I was in another room and could no longer hear her. Once in a while, just for fun, I'd come back to see if she was still ranting and she would be. It was sad and funny at the same time.
That's how the AP and Ben see us. The same is true for all the other news media teams surrendering their integrity to the blues.
Go ahead and yell at them all you want. It doesn't matter.
I've blogged in the past about secession. This is a kind of secession right here. It's one where we stay in the same country, but the other side would be just as happy if we left. Disney is in this group as well. They don't care if we know they're trying to pervert our children. Go ahead, get angry, it's not going to change what they do.
A national divorce? We've already got one underway.
2 comments:
As far as I can tell, after the Great Depression nobody wanted to talk about "depressions" anymore, and so they started using "recession" as a euphemism instead. But now that they've been doing it so long, and we've had some humdinger "recessions" like the one in 2008, it now sounds just as bad to people as "depression" does. So I expect we are in a period where everyone will try to avoid the word "recession" while they look for a new euphemism. They might go with "downturn". This isn't a partisan thing, whichever party is in power tries to avoid using the word "recession" for as long as they can. It's still stupid to try to twist the definitions on the fly, but it unfortunately is just the way things are done.
I will note that this time they aren't being completely dishonest. They aren't denying that the economy is in decline, they just don't want to use the "R" word.
Tim & KT,
"The word "Newspeak" is sometimes used in contemporary political debate as an allegation that one tries to introduce new meanings of words to suit one's agenda." [Quote taken from the wiki page for Newspeak.]
I would posit that many of us have fallen into their trap. We are debating if they changed/why they changed the meaning of a clearly defined term. They got us to get worked up about the meaning of 'woman'. They have used the words, 'infrastructure' and 'bipartisan' in ways that are inconsistent with all prior usage. They have consistently refused to use the word 'crisis' - even after Psaki inadvertently slipped and used it once and which, by the way, the AP has instructed its correspondents to not use. And now they refuse to take the meaning of 'recession' as that which it has always had. These are just off the top of my head.
Truthfully I see no difference in this and that of the people who want to change their pronouns to some invented to word which supposedly reflects 'their true self', rather than the actual reality. It is all about confusing everyone's thoughts so that it will be impossible to even think clearly.
This is what George Orwell foresaw and warned us about. For him "linguistic decline goes hand-in-hand with a decline of thought, the real possibility of manipulation of speakers as well as listeners and eventually political chaos". This is why he devised Newspeak in 1984 and why we are seeing it implemented in front of our faces today. It is so that we can all "accept whatever one is told, regardless of the facts. In the novel, it is described as '...to say that black is white when [the Party says so]' and '...to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary'." [Quotes taken from the wiki page for Newspeak.]
This is the goal of today's Democratic party. All hail B̶i̶g B̶r̶o̶t̶h̶e̶r̶ Pedo Peter.
Post a Comment