Has started to grind my gears, since there is no way to quickly explain that I’m happy with the current situation (I live in the nordics, not the US). Historically I would be considered a conservative, since I don’t see a need to progress (atleast at an accelerated rate). However that term is now used to define reactionaries, which are people who reacting to the changing society wants to regress to a earlier time.

Why must we change the meanings of such obvious words?

  • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Living in the US, I think a large part of why we can’t seem to agree on anything politically is because we’re using separate definitions depending on which perspective it’s from. It makes conversations impossible.

    • StinkyFingerItchyBum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      That is the deliberate strategy of the right. They weaponize language and use it disingenuously to obfuscate meaning and confuse debate.

      Everyone else more or less tries to communicate honestly.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      We agreed on pro-life/pro-choice rather then having people insist on pro-life/anti-life and pro-choice/anti-choice.