Connect with us

Culture and Religion

PragerU Video: Control the Words, Control the Culture

Published

on

On why it’s critically important to use the proper words such as Leftist instead of Liberal.

PragerU has published a new video on a very important subject. Many argue that we are in a culture or civil war with the Left, thus it is extremely important that we don’t accede to their linguistic propaganda.


PragerU: Control the Words, Control the Culture

The culture war is first and foremost a war of words – and the left is winning. The consequences can be seen everywhere: in politics, in education, in media. In this video, Michael Knowles, host of the Michael Knowles Show, explains why we should not cede another syllable.

It should be axiomatic that one doesn’t concede ground to an enemy without making them pay a price for taking it. But in essence, that is what we on the Pro-Liberty Right are doing every time we use certain terms that help the Left in their deceptions. As mentioned, we are in a culture war with the Left and every time we use a word such as ‘Liberal’ to describe them or capitalism to refer to economic Liberty we are surrendering linguistic ground to the Left without ever firing a shot.

In an effort to defend Liberty these are the important word choices we all should use in our contentions with the Left.

1. Leftist instead of Liberal

Can anyone seriously argue that with the Left going after the 1st and 2nd amendments that it still promotes the idea of Liberty?

There are a number of words that signify freedom that have the same origin from Latin: liberalis
This is why they all at least partially sound the same. It is also why the use of Liberal has obvious as well as almost subliminal qualities for the Left.

Take these points into consideration when referring to the Socialist-Left:

Leftist clarifies the issue….Liberal confuses the issue.
Leftist identifies them as Socialists….Liberal compliments them as freedom fighters or Liberators.
Leftist doesn’t insult those who cherish Liberty….Liberal chastises the Liberty minded as part of the Socialist-Left.

2. Economic Liberty instead of Capitalism.

Often times the word Capitalism is used as a pejorative, not to mention that it obscures the fact that it is based on freedom instead of oppression as with the collectivist systems. This is once again a case of unnecessarily ceding ground to the enemy. Keeping economic issues termed as those of Liberty instead of money put us on the firmer rhetorical ground.

3. Red instead of Blue when referring to the nation’s Socialist Left.

There was a time when Red signified the Socialist-Left. It’s the reason certain Socialist worker’s parties incorporated it into their national flag. Literature from this time would refer to Red China or ‘The Reds’. Then the geniuses on the Left decided to switch these colours to confuse the issue as they did with their labeling as Liberal or Progressive.

Presumably the argument was that it was only fair to swap the colours, then they were never changed back. Once again, using this colour scheme confuses the issue and cedes important definitional ground to the enemy.

4. Liberty Control instead of Gun Control [Liberty Reform, Liberty Grabbers]

Finally, we should consider using this terminology instead of one centred on inanimate objects. The nation’s Left would like to distract attention from this being an issue of Liberty. Human rights are not based on a discussion of mere objects, so why should this be the case with the right of self-preservation? Free-speech is not referred to as ‘Pen control’ so why should the right of self-defence be any different?

The fact is, keeping it as an issue over mere objects of aluminium makes it easy to denigrate.
How can a gun have rights? People have rights, Guns do not.
So taking them away shouldn’t matter, but talk about taking rights away from people, that’s a different story.

Change the terms of the debate to one of Liberty and it will be a game changer focusing the mind on what is truly at stake. The Left cannot abide this change, thus they usually refuse to discuss the issue when couched in this way. They will protest over ‘Gun reform’ all day long, but let’s see them take to the streets to demand ‘Liberty reform’.

The takeaway.

If we are to win the culture war, we will need to use selected tactics of the nation’s Socialist Left. That includes using the correct words. There is really no cost to making these easy changes in how we debate the issues of the day. But the resulting dividend will be the survival of Liberty.

 

Differential equations teaches us that one can use the initial conditions of the present to extrapolate events in the near term balanced with the knowledge of the past. The interaction of technological advances and the march of history is fascinating. History can inform those willing to listen as to what will happen in the future because the laws of human natural are as immutable as the elegant equations of Newtonian physics.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

Video: What is a Classical Liberal?

Published

on

By

A short video making the point that the Left is no longer Liberal, having traded individualism for collectivism.

In one of their first animated video shorts, the Rubin Report discusses the vitally important topic of just who is a Classical Liberal.

OUR FIRST ANIMATED VIDEO! What is a Classical Liberal?

Liberalism has been confused with Leftism or progressivism, which is actually has nothing to do with classical Liberalism. Sadly the Left is no longer Liberal at all for it has traded individualism for collectivism.

The Rubin Report
Published on Jul 10, 2018

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

$.02: When is it OK to quit church?

Published

on

Chris Sonsken of South Hills Church and founder Church BOOM penned a piece on Fox News that caught my attention on Twitter. It was a good column. Read the article here. The article addressed a Pew Research finding as to why people change churches. There finding as shown by Sonsken are:

  • Sermon quality
  • Welcoming environment/people
  • Style of worship
  • Location

Sonsken does a great job in arguing that there are biblically sound reasons for leaving a church and finding a new one.

1. It’s OK to leave if God calls us to leave.

2. It’s OK to leave for family and marriage.

3. It’s OK to leave a church if you have moved too far away to conveniently drive to your church.

4.  It’s OK to leave if you cannot follow the church’s leadership.

5.  It’s OK to leave if heresy is being preached.

Sonsken even mentions that unethical practices like abuse are reasons to leave, though not the norm for the majority of church swapping.

The reasons Sonsken gave are no cause for disagreement, and I’m sure his book Quit Church probably better articulates them.

Where I want to add my two sense on the matter is that I disagree with his assessment sermon quality is not a biblical reason for changing churches. The supposition that sermon quality is inherently a result of the person treating church like an object of consumption, as Sonsken suggests is not true. I believe sermon quality is an umbrella term for several reasons for not liking a Sunday message.

Too often people leave a church because of disagreement, not getting their way, or because the sermons are no longer deep enough. Often when we dig into the reason the sermons are not deep enough, it ultimately goes back to the person being offended or not having their faulty theologies endorsed from the pulpit. The same pastor who was previously deep enough becomes shallow once there is an offense. It’s incredibly difficult to hear from God in a sermon when we are offended by the person delivering the sermon.

This is true in many cases. A sin that is personal gets preached on and the offended party leaves. I don’t deny this to be the case. But I believe we should look deeper into the current trends of worship and focus on the mission of the church.

18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Matthew 28:18-21 ESV

The church is to preach the gospel, but people accepting Jesus as their Lord and Savior is only part of the mission. The Church is tasked with making disciples. The church is meant to teach. Not every follower is at the same level in their spiritual maturity or theological depth. Some churches, larger churches in particular dumb down the bible. In public education, this would be seen as lowering the bar. In church this practice could hold back believers in their growth. Small groups are a way to supplement this, and every church should employ bible study as a means to grow discipleship.

Many churches now are focused on metrics. This can lead to theologically watered down sermons and worship. Why risk offending that person who may leave with a sermon? But if a church is more focused on using a Sunday message to give a motivational speech using an out of context passage, what does it matter if they are doctrinally sound (in their written beliefs)?

There are a lot of heretical churches in America. We have issues like gay marriage to separate the sheep from the goats. But what about the sheep that suck? If a church has the right doctrine but is more focused on metrics than the power of the Holy Spirit, their head is in the wrong place. So it is biblically sound to change churches so that your head to remains in the right place.

That is not treating church like a consumer product. That is treating church like one’s means to grow spiritually, better recognizing the mission of the Great Commission.

That is my $.02 on the matter. I hope I added some meaningful word to this topic.


This post was originally publishd on Startup Christ. Startup Christ is a website for business and theology articles and columns.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Video: So, You Think You’re Tolerant?

Published

on

By

Leftists like to fancy themselves as being tolerant and Liberal, but they fall way short in both qualities.

Leftists will tell you that they are the most tolerant people who have ever lived, they will also scream at you for being a racist, xenophobic troglodyte if you happen to mention that you’re a conservative. They are supposedly ‘Liberal’, being in favour of Liberty while demanding it’s polar opposite – socialism.

Yes, if there is one constant in the universe, its that Leftists cannot be honest about who they truly are. This is what we love about our wonderful opponents on the nation’s socialist Left, for they are nothing like another group that went by the same nomenclature who also screamed at people in the streets with the motto: Common Good Before Individual Good. [Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz]

But let’s not talk about the epithets they project on their enemies, let’s talk about how they get along with everyone who just happens to agree with everything they say. A new PragerU video featuring Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report looked at who is really tolerant. He is a true Liberal that discovered that it is actually the Pro-Liberty Right that is more tolerant, go figure.

Dave Rubin
Jul 9, 2018
Are you tolerant? You probably think so. But who is tolerant in America today? Is it those on the left, or those on the right? In this video, Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report analyzes this question and shares his experience.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.