A liar on Twitter using the facetious handle "LJTruthTeller" didn't like my above meme, which I had sent to California's top political criminal in response to some anti-gun bigotry he'd posted.The liar said "Your meme is a meme of lies and distortions of the 2nd Amendment. This is the TRUTH about it..." and posted this:
This is what the anti-gun bigots imagine is true? No wonder they keep getting everything wrong.
I would invite anyone with historical literacy and the ability to think rationally and logically to compare what I posted to what they posted and judge which one is honest and which is the lie.
And that's ignoring the fact that the liar skipped right over the truth that rights don't come from documents or governments, but are inborn in individual human beings-- which is shorthand for saying no one has a right to stop you from doing these things.
Again, I am left wondering, are these people really this ignorant or are they simply evil?
Language, like law, is a social tool and it evolves and develops, shifts and changes in its structure and sound as well as in meaning, and the words that comprise it can be defined in various ways thus allowing virtually contradictory meanings to be applied to terms by different people in different times and conditions. In consequence of this inherent ambiguity, language, like the old complaint about statistics, can be used to ‘prove’ anything; it all depends on how you use it and for what purpose. Actual ‘communication’ requires the conformance to the same ‘meanings’ of language by the parties attempting to discuss a subject and since people are separate and unique individuals and also participating members of groups with varying agendas, I have come to believe that any true ‘understanding’ between them is a futile and unlikely prospect even absent willful deceit and essentially impossible given the ubiquity of conscious deception in the human species. Most people don’t use language to mutually communicate but only to advance their particular agenda. I fear ‘understanding’ through ‘communication’ is a chimera but some of us still try because it is the only tool we have.
ReplyDeleteYes, language evolves, but to understand something written you have to be able to know what the words meant when the passage being discussed was written. The anti-gun bigots are either unwilling or unable to discuss the topic honestly because they want to use more modern definitions that would change the meaning. Actually, they don't even do that very well.
DeleteIf nothing means anything, then what would that mean? It's like the argument that rights are imaginary. OK... so then you have no right not to be robbed, raped, and murdered, so why would you complain about it happening to you or someone you care about?
I know I'm preaching to the choir.
I won't feel bad about ignoring any dictates, or acting to defend myself if necessary. I feel it is polite to warn them of what they are facing, but maybe it's better to let them find out when they've gone too far. Let actions speak since they won't be honest about using words.
It's not only the words they redefine-- they get historical context completely wrong. Actually, they ignore it. It doesn't help their agenda, so out the window it goes.
DeleteI believe you and I share the same ‘meanings’ and even if we may not completely align about particular ‘words’ we don’t have any serious disparity regarding actual ‘concepts’. The Twitter responder you noted above not only speaks a different language by using a different vocabulary but doesn’t share the same ethic or personal philosophy, doesn’t believe, acknowledge or interpret history in the same way, in fact interprets reality itself in a subjective not an objective sense. His agenda is his reality. No genuine ‘communication’ is possible with such a person and they don’t really want to communicate or even understand, but only to dictate. As you noted above; “….but maybe it's better to let them find out when they've gone too far. Let actions speak….”. I think this is essentially the only thing that actually will register on their attention and deter their intentions.
DeleteYou acknowledge above that “I know I'm preaching to the choir.” Irrespective of this particular individual and his ilk; I don’t mean to disparage this activity at all. In a world filled with such twisters of truth in the service of an erroneous agenda, the reinforcement and confirmation that someone else out there ’gets it’ is comforting and reassuring.
It makes me feel good when I run across someone else who I know gets it. It's great both online and in person-- in person would be better, but is much more rare.
DeleteIt's why I wade in to defend someone I see arguing against a statist-- I want them to know they aren't alone. I know there's no way to "win", but they aren't going to lose. Liberty is never a losing position.