Dion has taken a page out of Toronto mayor David Miller's playbook in his recent plan to sell tax hikes on the Canadian people.
—
Early last summer, David Miller informed Torontonians that new taxes being proposed were, in fact, not taxes at all. Rather, they were "revenue tools" to help the city deal with it's mounting "financial obligations". This was probably the apex—in my opinion—of leftist intellectual condescension. It's the equivalent of saying, this isn't a "war", it's simply a state of "open, armed, prolonged conflict".
In Stéphane Dion's case, he wants there to be a "carbon price" not a "carbon tax". I'm not exactly sure how that works. But rest assured, they mean exactly the same thing.
This of course is not unprecedented. To call taxes something other than taxes is a popular leftist measure to obfuscate the issue, and sell big-government principles to people without offending the populace's sensibilities in that regard.
You'll remember that Dalton McGuinty insisted his taxes hikes were not taxes either, but rather, "health premiums".
I guess it's sort of a victory for the right, that we've managed to make the word "tax" a faux paux. But in this case, as in every other case, the left just invents a more sanitized word to re-sell their idealism, free of the baggage of the compromised word.
There's no socialists or leftists anymore, there are progressives.
There are no protests anymore, there are national days of action.
There is no more political propaganda, there are public awareness campaigns.
There's no sexual orientations or races, there are identities. You can even self-identify. Like Andrea Dworkin, who was a self-identified lesbian, yet only had heterosexual relationships in her lifetime.
It gets even worse...
It's not censorship and tyranny anymore, it's called a social contract, usually in the form of speech codes.
There's no affirmative action anymore, there are social equity programs.
The ways they criticize the right (and the West, in general) have also evolved...
There's no more Western media, it's Western cultural imperialism
Overthrowing the Taliban in Afghanistan, that's Western economic, cultural, and military imperialism.
No cultural assimilation. It's cultural genocide or imperialism.
There's no such thing as being successful anymore, it's called being privileged.
The underlying theories of political correctness, which date back to Vladmir Lenin's Soviet Communism, and adopted by socialists throughout the West, finally making it's way into the social sciences throughout Universities—is in itself—the basis for modern thought control.
You'll find that many academic leftists subscribe to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which essentially states that the words we use to describe things, directly influence our conception of what is being described.
All of these new words and phrases come from leftist academia, and enter the mainstream through the graduates who take them into the real world.
The words we use, have become the new battleground for forming public conceptions of wrong and right. What's most surprising about some of it, as in the examples we started off with, many of the people who engage in this obfuscation of meaning, think we're all idiots.
There is so much truth in what you said here. If I could summarize, the left considers themselves 'progressives'. Unfortuntely for humanity they believe all progress stopped in the late 1800's to early 1900's, with the publication of Das Kapital, and the rise of Lenin and Stalin. The fact they spew the propaganda of these killers of 100's of millions of innocents with such ignorance of history, is just so appalling and shameful.
David Miller lied to Torontonians. He wasn't the mayor-elect in 2006. He was the mayor-re-elect; an incumbent mayor. He knew the state of the city's finances but lied about taxes, knowing that if he proposed both the land transfer and vehicle registration taxes during the campaign that Jane Pittsfield would be mayor today.
Dalton McGuinty lied about the reasons for raising taxes, and the MSM gave him a bye on the issue in last fall's election. He said he had no choice because of a deficit he was left by the previous Tory gov't. But both Miller's tax increases were only possible as a result of Dalton McGuinty's City of Toronto Act, which is provincial taxation by proxy. The taxes were passed by Toronto city council at the end of January 2008 - in the POST deficit period in Ontario, making his reason for raising taxes in the first place - a deficit - a complete and utter lie. As well, McGuinty's reasons for bringing in his "health premium" were lies. On that he also said the deficit forced him to do it. But he says the tax will stay even with a balanced budget because the health care system needs the extra $2.6 billion.
""I'm being straight with you ... If you're looking to me to eliminate your health premium in 2009, don't look to me for that -- I need that money," McGuinty said.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070906/ont_libs_070906?s_name=&no_ads=
So by his own logic, had he been elected for the first time last fall with a balanced budget in place but no health tax, he would bring one in anyway, thus making his 2004 claim that he had to because of the deficit a bald-faced lie.
I'd have more respect for Dion if he'd stop being such a weasel and just say what he means in this regard. We all know he means carbon tax, so why doesn't he just have the courage of his conviction and just say it.
Oh I get it. Dion's concern with the environment went out the window when he had multiple chances to defeat this government (even over specific environmental concerns) and chose to sit instead. Once again, the Liberals and their hapless leader choose political expediancy over their so-called principles. Typical.
An old joke asks, "How can you tell if a Liberal is lying?" Answer, "His lips are moving".
Quite apart from the progressive "mistruths", "factual inaccuracy" etc. A consumption tax on anything as vital as fuel is as useful as using a butterfly net to catch the wind. We have just gone through massive increases in the price of gasoline and no one has seriously reduced their driving. The fact is that fuel is one of those base costs upon which every other cost rests. If you raise the price of gas the cost of everything else increases in corresponding amounts.
Back in the 70's the price increased and inflation followed. Recent price increases have been passed along and the driving habits of Canadians have not changed.
There are no unborn babies only fetuses.
Notice... It's not Global Warming anymore, it's Climate Change.
There are no unborn babies only fetuses.
Well, to be fair. I'd say that "unborn baby" is a politically charged phrase, too. Its phrased in a way meant to convey a point of view. It is therefore, not a neutral term. Just like the words "pro-choice" and "pro-life" are not neutral terms.
Just curious Mike. What would you call "it"?
It's unfortunate that you choose to cast an otherwise interesting discussion into the exhausted "left/right" mold. It really gets tedious, although I guess cheap provocation stirs up the dust a bit.
Since you've chosen NOT to frame this as a neutral discussion about the politicization of language, and since you prefer your familiar frame, may I respectfully remind you that it wasn't "the left" who replaced "dead civilians" with "collateral damage", "torture" with "enhanced interrogation", "people" with "human capital", "kill" with "light up", "recession" with "negative economic growth", "invasion" with "pre-emptive attack"...get my drift?
Neither "side" has the franchise on weasel words.
Anyone actually interested in the use of language in political dialogue - as opposed to another cheap lefty/righty trollfest - is urged to read George Orwell's "Politics and the English Language", one of his best essays, and a mandatory read for pundits, politicians and bloggers.
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm
The left's language can also be used against them.
We all know about "a woman's right to choose", in the abortion debate.
When the Tories called their $100 per month payments to preschoolers "Choice in childcare", it was a clever way to turn the tables on their lefty opponents.
Since you've chosen NOT to frame this as a neutral discussion about the politicization of language, and since you prefer your familiar frame, may I respectfully remind you that it wasn't "the left" who replaced "dead civilians" with "collateral damage", "torture" with "enhanced interrogation", "people" with "human capital", "kill" with "light up", "recession" with "negative economic growth", "invasion" with "pre-emptive attack"...get my drift
I've never heard anyone call dead civilians in war "collateral damage". I've heard people refer to non-human damage as collateral damage. I usually hear the phrase "innocent casualties". Where do you hear this? The Bush Administration? If so, I should warn you, I very seldom follow US news.
I'm assuming that "enhanced interrogation' is some other Pentagon phrase, I would have never heard of either.
I'm assuming that "light up" is some in-theater military jargon. So I won't give that one much weight.
I've heard the term "negative economic growth". But I'm not sure how that's much more politicized that "recession" or "economic downturn", of which I hear far more than the former.
And for your last point, I'm assuming this is another Bush Iraq war-ism. In which case, I've heard the phrase "Iraq invasion" much more than the phrase "pre-emptive attack".
...
Comon Balb, at least my examples were more dramatic, and have widespread use in Canada :)
This might be a narrowing down to the carbon tax part of it all, but has anyone ever considered that the policy on increasing taxes on gasoline and other oil based fuels is not really necessary from a deterrent standpoint, as the market has already done so in the form of prices rising over double in the last five years?
Very good article Brock. Every once in a while we do have to gather together a summary of the latest twisting of the language.