Just One–of Many–of the Dangers of Democracy

[N.B. I’ve seen ironically elitist criticism of José Ortega y Gasset for being an elitist. Most folks who criticize him for noting some of the serious problems that must necessarily ensue from allowing democratic memes too much cultural influence are pseudo-intellectual snobs who don’t even bother–or are unable–to read and grasp some of the core ideas in his most scathing rebuke of “Mass Man” in “The Revolt of the Masses”. Here, I am not going to make direct reference to Ortega, but just note that his articulations of issues do inform what I want to try to convey here, in some very small part. The deficiencies in this blogpost shouldn’t be attributed to his influence though. No, those deficiencies are all mine.]


 

 

 
Democracy as a political system has its own problems. One, of course, is that time worn warning that once some of the People discover they can vote themselves largesse from the public purse, corruption inevitably ensues, and the road to the failure of democracy as a political system is not long following. But societal effects can be harmful, too. When popular culture is ever more democratized, the process of dumbing down society to the lowest common denominator becomes a process of self-perpetuating debasement.

Let me illustrate this debasement using a very, very limited example which the reader may use to draw his own examples. Lexicographers eventually bow to even the basest misuses of words and finally legitimize the misuse by denoting it in a dictionary entry. Here is one such example: “healthy”. “Healthy” was once a word–and still is among literate persons–with a primary denotation of an organism that enjoyed good (vigorous, robust) health. Its misuse for years has now brought it to the point where is is used to refer to both live and dead materials that may promote (often only in the minds of the promoters) good health. Whereas once, in referring to the health of an organism, it referred primarily to the state of being or condition of something that was alive, now it may refer to some inanimate material to be consumed or even inanimate object designed to act upon or be used by some animate being to promote that being’s health. Once, the word used to denote that latter meaning was “healthful” and so the two words provided useful information in distinction to each other when used. Not so nowadays.

Losing useful distinctions means losing useful meanings, and language is first and foremost about conveying meaning (here I usually insert my rant about those utter idiots who blather about semantics as though distinctions in meanings were… meaningless, useless twaddle, but I am to tired to the bone to deal with useless idiots right now), and anything that broadens distinctions to the point of removing useful distinctions dumbs down the exchange of meaning.

Every time someone is allowed to misuse a word without being corrected, allowed to spread its misuse, society becomes stupider. And that, dear reader, is especially dangerous in a society governed via any elements of democracy. People who do not even have the words to express themselves with clear and full meaning will not be able to rule themselves wisely… or chose wisely when selecting/electing those they represent.

Oh, this thing with dumbed down language as a result of validation of misused is just the tip of the iceberg, as it were, that wrecks overly-democratic societies. Largely, it’s not so much the misuse of words that destroys communication but the very democratic tendency to accept that just because many people do such and so then that makes such and so acceptable. (Didn’t your mother ever warn you about jumping off a cliff just because “ALL” your friends were doing so? Hmmm?)

This dumb-down spiral applies all across the board: clothing fads that make slovenly (or slutty or stupid… or slutty and stupid and slovenly *sigh*) attire normative, popular entertainment–whether it be the mindless circuses of spectator sports, the pernicious drivel of TV and movies or the musicless grunts and moans and banging around of most contemporary fake music–the acceptance of stupid expressions of stupid people as (graphic) “art”: all this and more works to debase society in a society that values the opinions of stupid and subliterate people as highly–and in many cases nowadays more highly–as someone who can actually tell the difference between a well-written book and what Holly Lisle calls “Suckitudinous” writing–or even just badly-written schlock; someone who can actually hear the difference between music and… top 40 crap, someone who has actually read The Founders and can tell when such as Nancy Pelosi is blowing smoke up folks’ skirts defending unconstitutional legislation as a legitimate exercise of governmental authority, etc.

Yes, it does make a difference that fewer and fewer people in our society can discriminate between classes of objects, events, statements… or even know that there can be good things about discrimination.

I could have used more politically charged examples than the less than life-threatening “healthy” word misuse, but discussing the misuse (and even misunderstanding by subliterate morons) of “racist”–for example–probably would have resulted in some SPAM comments accusing me of racism. Oops. *heh*

DGARA. Accuse away. 😉

Continue reading “Just One–of Many–of the Dangers of Democracy”

Why Good Grammar?

And why word usage that reflects understanding of the words used, or proper spelling and punctuation?

Neither can his mind be thought to be in tune, whose words do jar;
Nor his reason in frame, whose sentence is preposterous;
Nor his elocution clear and perfect,
Whose utterance breaks itself into fragments and uncertainties.
– Ben Johnson, Discoveries, 1641

Well-written prose is a reflection of clear thought. It’s just that simple. Continue reading “Why Good Grammar?”

The Zero Fears His Superpower

Or, at least The Zero would if he could count to five without taking his shoes off.

 

 

 

 

Check out The Zero’s face in this video. “WTF?!? What’s he talkin’ ’bout, Willis? Is that MATH?!?” If you’ve ever wondered what Odumbo’s face looks like when confronted with numbers, well, here ya go:

http://youtu.be/o1yTY2MciOk

Oh, and during all the demonizing of Ryan and his budgetary proposals, do remember that they guy who was THE ZERO’S PICK to head up his “deficit committee” and represent the administration’s policies, Erskine Bowles (Clinton SBA head, later WH chief of staff), über-Democrat, had a different view:

Just sayin’. Serious policy wonks don’t share the views of Mass MEdia Podpeople like Rachel Maddow and Michael Moore. *sigh* The only real negative I can see in having Ryan as a vice presidential candidate is that he’ll be wasted “debating” Cwazy Unka Joe (if The Zero’s campaign even lets that massacre happen). At the top of the ticket, he’d have a chance to obliterate The Zero, metaphorically nuking him from orbit.

Oh, fun. Jerry Pournelle suggests (in my words, not his) that with the Romney/Ryan strengths on  economic policy against The Zero’s (and zero-cubed, Cwazy Unka Joe) profound weaknesses, some Dhimmicraps might be tempted to play the “no foreign policy experience” card… and that that would be a real tarbaby for the Dhims, as

 

“…anyone including Elmer Fudd has more experience in foreign affairs than the current President had on taking office.”

Bazinga!

THIS Is Why America Is Currently in Decline

Well, it’s part (a large part) of the reason we’re in trouble. The following is a partial response to a tech site article, written by a professional “reporter” of tech news, if you can believe it. No, I won’t link it. The parts I don’t point out are as badly-written (or worse) and would only serve to improperly influence anyone not as thoroughly inoculated against linguistic drivel as I seem to be.


  • “At the time there were many different OS’s [sic] on the market…”

    Good Godfrey! Is there no editorial staff? No proofreading? No literate person to put an end to atrocities like this? An apostrophe IS NOT USED TO FORM A PLURAL!

    Apparently, there are no literate gatekeepers between writers and publishing; witness, earlier:

    “Common users also were quite skeptical to [sic] this new fancy gadget called a ‘Mouse’.”

    Not “to” but “about”. Learn the meanings of words!

    And,

    “IBM they [sic] named it PC-DOS and it quickly became a popular and widespread system.”

    WTF?!?

    And, “While back in their ‘lab’ secretly developing their new battleship, that would grow to conquer the world.”

    sic-sic-sic-sic-sic-sic-SICK!

    Sentence, please! Make a sentence! And what’s with the quotation marks around “lab”? And the comma between “battleship” and “that”? It’s just plain stupid, quite apart from being completely, totally and absolutely uncalled for.

    And the hits just keep on (and keep on) coming:

    “Windows 1.0: changing computers for ever…”

    No! No! No! Not “for ever” but “forever”–ONE WORD.

    How about,

    “Windows 1, [sic] was not the first of its kind but it introduced several improvements, among others were [sic] multi-tasking.”

    Dude! Lose the extraneous, meaningless, WRONGLY PLACED commas! They only serve to make you look stupid. And it just makes me sick to read the rest of the sentence. I gag just contemplating that abortion.

    The whole thing continues with one egregiously stupid comma, subject-verb disagreement and word mis-usage after another. *gag* And the guy actually does this for his day job.

    Thief.

    And unwitting subliterate products of “public education” (AKA “prisons for kids” and “remedial failure academies for young adults”) will read this dreck and have their subliterate ignorance reinforced. It’s evil, I say, just evil.

    See Inigo Montoya

    A “professional tech writer” (yeh, she gets paid for this kind of thing) vomited this one:

    “Microsoft is continuing to eke out the Windows 8 news.”

    That usage is so far “off list” that one would need a fully functioning Hubble telescope to gain a view of its meaning from that sentence. Even in the closest proper use of the phrase “eke out,” that is “to make (a meager supply) last, esp by frugal use,” the sentence misses the mark. One “ekes out” a meager supply to avert complete lack. There’s certainly a wealth of news M$ could release, now, but they choose not to, thus “eking out” a meager supply–the closest one could come to making that sentence work–simply does not apply here.

    *sigh*

    Literacy is more than just being able to laboriously convert those strange squiggles on a page into words or string some of them together in some sort of nearly sensible order. Understanding the words, having a store of well-written texts one has read and understood, is the next step to literacy. Things like this in text written by someone who makes her living with the written word are both disappointing and disturbing.

    An “F” for Test Design

    Lovely Daughter sent me the photo below (modified to obscure personal information of both student and teacher). If I had been grading the pictured test, the student would have been credited with 100% correct answers and the test designer with a big fat zero for amphibolous (equivocal) wording. Just sayin’.

    For All Those Who Think We Need to “Save” Public Schools

    Fine. Save ’em. Go ahead. Here’s one thing that would help:

    Freedom. Freedom from the edicts of remote educrats, politicians and “edumacators” (who generally know bupkis about actually teaching anything worthwhile).

    Freedom to fail or excel exercised at the lowest possible level: first the parents, then the classroom, the school, the district. State and federal standards and requirements for the local school should be relegated to a strictly advisory role, with standardized tests used solely as a metric to allow the users of the schools to evaluate their own schools’ performance.

    Schools run according to the demands of the patrons (the parents, the community that pays the bills, etc.) would either suck, excel or fall somewhere in between. The parents of schools that suck would KNOW they suck because, well, that’s what the parents wanted. If they want their kids to continue to be abused with poor education, then they can choose to do so. If they want to better their children’s education, then they’ll have the examples of schools that are better to study and emulate, if they wish.

    Oh, and Freedom to Choose. Don’t like the poor quality of schooling afforded by the tastes and desires of the parents at “your” schools? You should be free to take your children to the school of your choice. (And that school should be free to bill the district or school your taxes support.)

    Sure, this wouldn’t solve all the problems, but just this one small *heh* thing would place both the responsibility and authority in the hands of those to whom it properly belongs: the parents of the children in the schools (and the surrounding community, which both has needs for useful workers and a right to control how their tax dollars are spent).


    I can already hear objections from some, “But what about poor communities? Won’t they need resources (tax dollars) from elsewhere in order to afford decent schools?”

    No, they won’t. Parents–often single income parents making below average incomes–have been able to offer superior education at home on a shoe string. I know we did for a while. (Yes, my single income at the time wasn’t very much below the national average for a family of four, but it was below that mark, in an average-expense locale. *shrugs* We made it, despite “gummint” harassment and paying for other folks’ kids education as well. *heh*) There have been absolutely NO (that’s a big zero with the rim kicked off) credible studies linking higher education costs with effectiveness. In fact, I suspect that removing remote edicts, and the additional costs they require with only partial funding from the bureaucrappy that issued the edict, would significantly improve the cost issue for most schools, while allowing dramatically improved instruction.

    Just ONE of the Things Wrong With “Public Education” (Sadly, Often Better Known as “Prisons for Kids”)

    Teachers are often required to attend “workshops” and “seminars” run by “education professionals” to maintain so-called “continuing education” credits necessary for their certifications/licenses. All too typically, such events feature know-nothing (or worse, know wrongly) educrats telling the teachers what they MUST do in their classrooms in order to be in compliance with some governmental regulation. Example: a workshop not long back featuring a remote educrat who said, “I have never taught in the classroom, but here is how you do xxxx.”

    A know-nothing dictating to those who already know how to teach… but who often simply aren’t allowed to do so.

    Remote educrats and the admins who enforce their edicts: F-n’ idiots.

    One of the better things about rural schools is that some are often in quiet rebellion against city folks running their lives, and they’re small enough and sometimes remote enough to get away with a wee bit of foot-dragging on some of the stupider edicts. Just one reason that rural schools in general outperform many urban school systems in useful education. Review the principles of subsidiarity and accountability for reasons why this may work better in rural settings…

    Oh, Great… for Kids Who Can Get Their Parents to Move East for the Summer

    TD Bank is offering kids (18 or younger) $10 for reading 10 books this summer.

    Great, right? Here’s the deal:

    1. Read 10 books this summer. See suggestions.
    2. Print out the Summer Reading Form
    3. Write down the names of the books they’ve read
    4. Take the form to the nearest TD Bank
    5. Watch $10 be deposited into a new or existing Young Saver Account

    Oh, wait. Notsogreat.

    1. Locate the nearest TD Bank location (WTF?!? I thought TD Bank specialized in online banking!):

    “There is no listing found based on your criteria. Please change your criteria and try again.” (IOW, “Move to a location where we have a physical presence, sucker!”)

    2. Move there.
    3. “Here’s your money kid, only… we’ll keep it for you. Howzat for a sweet deal, eh?”
    4. 10 books? *feh* Sub-par. Way, way sub-par. (Of course, “par” to me is the last Summer Reading Program I participated in as a kid. My total? 235 books for the summer. Yeh, yeh, Mom did shoo me outa the house, and visits to grandparents involved lotsa outdoorsy stuff, too. IOW, wasn’t 24X7 w/my nose in a book. I used to read a lot more than I do even now.)

    Of course, if parents would simply stop playing “event planners” for their kids entertainment schedules and just, well, parent while letting doing whatever they can to compel their mentally lazy kids to create their own entertainment, then encouraging them to read, making sure they can get to a library, etc., could go a long way toward improving our future citizens.

    Just sayin’.