05-27-2015, 07:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-27-2015, 10:44 PM by FireIceTalon.)
You could have stated things clearer that you were referring to my analysis of her statement, and not her statement itself 
*Sarcasm mode on* And yes, we all know wikipedia lists are comprehensive and all knowing. *off* Though the wikipedia definition would actually agree with me if you read it carefully enough. You kind of shot yourself in the foot there, did you not?
Anyone can make a list of words and call them such, but the only way to really tell if they are is to understand how each word or phrase is actually used in an abstract sense, and then compare it to its material application. This is what interests me more than the lists themselves.
You mentioned the "pursuit of happiness". This bourgeois tagline is a perfect example of a buzzword phrase. Lets look at this term in its idealist context (myth), and in its material form (reality).
Myth/ideal of the statement: Everyone has equality of opportunity, or should at least. Everyone should succeed if they just work hard enough, and the State is there to keep order and protect everyone equally. Yada yada yada.
Reality/translation of the statement into what it ACTUALLY means: If you are wealthy and powerful enough, you can enjoy and are entitled to the necessities to survive. And to top it off, your elite social status is protected by a State apparatus - the police and the courts have your back. If you are poor, well, that's YOUR fault and you are SOL - and the State will suppress you should you become too unruly for the liking of your rulers because you abhor your miserable conditions.
One thing the wikipedia definition certainly got right is that it appeals to rhetoric over reality, because almost all political buzzwords are used to mask a particular agenda or ideology, or present said agenda/ideology to be something that they really are not. This is done to keep any political debate or conversation within a specific framework, as anything perceived as radical or unorthodox could be a threat and it therefore must be shut out from all discourse. Buzzwords are one of the most convenient ways to ensure this. If we follow this to its logical conclusion, it is pretty easy to see how words like "freedom", "entitlement", and "democracy" have come to be buzzwords - especially among many types right-winged pundits of both the republican and democrat variety. Where is my evidence you say? Just turn on the TV and watch any of the current political candidates spout their jargon, and you will have all the evidence you need.
*Sarcasm mode on* And yes, we all know wikipedia lists are comprehensive and all knowing. *off* Though the wikipedia definition would actually agree with me if you read it carefully enough. You kind of shot yourself in the foot there, did you not?
Anyone can make a list of words and call them such, but the only way to really tell if they are is to understand how each word or phrase is actually used in an abstract sense, and then compare it to its material application. This is what interests me more than the lists themselves.
You mentioned the "pursuit of happiness". This bourgeois tagline is a perfect example of a buzzword phrase. Lets look at this term in its idealist context (myth), and in its material form (reality).
Myth/ideal of the statement: Everyone has equality of opportunity, or should at least. Everyone should succeed if they just work hard enough, and the State is there to keep order and protect everyone equally. Yada yada yada.
Reality/translation of the statement into what it ACTUALLY means: If you are wealthy and powerful enough, you can enjoy and are entitled to the necessities to survive. And to top it off, your elite social status is protected by a State apparatus - the police and the courts have your back. If you are poor, well, that's YOUR fault and you are SOL - and the State will suppress you should you become too unruly for the liking of your rulers because you abhor your miserable conditions.
One thing the wikipedia definition certainly got right is that it appeals to rhetoric over reality, because almost all political buzzwords are used to mask a particular agenda or ideology, or present said agenda/ideology to be something that they really are not. This is done to keep any political debate or conversation within a specific framework, as anything perceived as radical or unorthodox could be a threat and it therefore must be shut out from all discourse. Buzzwords are one of the most convenient ways to ensure this. If we follow this to its logical conclusion, it is pretty easy to see how words like "freedom", "entitlement", and "democracy" have come to be buzzwords - especially among many types right-winged pundits of both the republican and democrat variety. Where is my evidence you say? Just turn on the TV and watch any of the current political candidates spout their jargon, and you will have all the evidence you need.
https://www.youtube.com/user/FireIceTalon
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (on capitalist laws and institutions)
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (on capitalist laws and institutions)