My 9-11 Promise — Whither English?

by Zenster on September 12, 2013

in language, PC MC, political correctness, Zenster (team member)

Author’s note: Over the last few days I have begun investigating the subtle—and sometimes not-so-subtle—shifts in how English is used and appears to those of us in the Western world who regularly speak it. Needless to say (then why say it?), the results are as disturbing as they are enlightening with respect to how Liberalism’s ultimate power tool, Political Correctness—in all of its manifold guises—is influencing not just how we speak but our very thought processes as well.

From the Counterjihad perspective, most if not all of us have caught ourselves having to first scan our surroundings before launching into an anti-Islamic diatribe, no matter how factual it may be. Enough time spent hesitating about when and what to say will eventually modify behavior at a core level. Over time it can happen to such a degree whereby the thought patterns that originate such expressions are themselves attenuated. This form of voluntary self-censorship is a terrible turn of events which represent a least desirable outcome for those who cherish their Constitutional rights to Freedom of Speech and Expression.

Let us take pause to consider the role that Political Correctness played in purposefully subduing justifiable and automatic suspicion of Islamic organizations during those years leading up to the 9-11 Atrocity. Below is an illustration of this which shows how the derogatory slang term for Arabs, “raghead”, entered into English usage (in 1910) and languished in genteel neglect until the 1970s when—right about the time that Iran invaded the United States embassy in Tehran and took 52 Americans hostage for a total of 444 days—its popularity enjoyed a massive uptick.

Raghead - raghead - Composite - Prime

Now, take careful note of how, right after Bill Clinton’s 1993 election to the White House, “raghead” steadily declined in use until somewhere around the time that two of America’s larger African embassies were bombed in attacks by al Qaeda sponsored Islamic terrorists. The chart’s inset clearly shows that—subsequent to the 9-11 Atrocity—”raghead” regained its previous growth in popularity, something which has continued unabated to the limits of this search system’s timeline.

Not so for many other words that have been deemed politically incorrect. It is this sociopolitical banishment that the following series of essays will take into consideration. It wasn’t just some 3,000 innocent people who paid with their lives to assuage the whims of Political Correctness. Thousands more around the world continue to perish unnoticed and disregarded behind the Teflon Curtain™ of modern day Politically Correct Newspeak.

September 11, 2013

Whither English?

How Political Correctness is Mutilating Modern Thought and Expression

Any fan of George Orwell readily understands the significance of this. His concept of Newspeak embodies much of the subjects that I shall be covering in, what promises to be, a wide-reaching and sometimes disturbing examination of how the world’s most powerful linguistic tool is steadily being mutilated even as it is so often reborn into novel and unexpectedly dynamic expressions.

All of this came about while viewing a short video clip, “Where Do Deleted Files Go?“, over at the 1389 Blog. During this brief summary of why, despite our ostensibly best efforts, so few things—files and emails especially—ever actually get deleted, a passing reference was made to Google’s new search tool, the Ngram Viewer. As is so often the case, small things end up making a huge difference.

In a Herculean effort, Google Books has already scanned some 30 million plus books out of the over 129 million various manuscripts that have been published ever since Johannes Gutenberg got all fidgety with his type face. Lately, Google—whose unofficial motto is “Don’t Be Evil”—has managed to tarnish its reputation by helping the Communist Chinese Politburo to erect Internet filters, hilariously known as “The Great Firewall of China“, for such innocuous search terms as “Democracy”, “Falun Gong”, “Dali Lama” and “Tibet”.

No so amusing is how a company like Google, that made its fortune in Silicon Valley, this world’s preeminent Free Market and Capitalistic engine, has worked hand-in-glove with one of the planet’s most oppressive and vile regimes. In some respects, their introduction of the Ngram Viewer may well manage to, at least partially, absolve them of such unprincipled moneygrubbing. Time will tell.

In the next few weeks I will be penning a new series of essays based on observable trends in terms of how the English language is being curtailed both in use and, far more worrisome, verbally truncated in a naked attempt to alter not just how people talk and express themselves, but how they think.

Look no further than the Pentagon report detailing Nidal Hasan’s terrorist attack upon an assembly of American Army soldiers. Despite how the assailant held a semiautomatic pistol in each hand, jumped up on a table to obtain an unobstructed field of fire and yelled “Allahu Akbar!” before killing thirteen innocent victims and wounding another thirty bystanders, nowhere in the 86 page Defense Department report does the word “Islam” appear even once.

Instead, survivors, relatives and Americans everywhere were treated to the revolting spectacle of General George Casey, the Army’s highest ranking officer, blathering on about how:

““Our diversity, not only in our Army, but in our country, is a strength. And as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse,”

Never mind all the dead soldiers. Forget that murderer Nidal Hasan’s business cards had an abbreviation—SoA (SWT)—meaning “Soldier of Allah” and a reference to the Arabic phrase, “Subhanahu Wa Ta’all,” meaning “glory to God [Allah]”. Disregard how Hasan was portrayed as a “lone wolf” and his terrorist attack was a “one off”, an incident unrelated to any pattern of attack.

Nowhere in the media or government reports was there any disclosure of how Major Nidal Hasan and “underwear bomber”, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, both shared the same “spiritual adviser, radical Yemeni American cleric, Anwar Al Awlaki.

This is the level of Politically Correct revisionism that pervades even reporting on issues that are vital to national security. This is how Political Correctness kills. And it all starts with the spoken word and the printed page.

Stay tuned for what, at times, will be some disturbing albeit predictable articles that illustrate this despicable practice and how it has become de rigueur throughout the Mainstream Media.

Never Forget, Never Forgive!


{ 0 comments… add one now }

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: