Leftist Word Games

[Trump's Chosen]

Languages should be logically based

Then use a more logical language than English.

There is no reason for language to be logical first. English is one of the most poetic languages precisely because it has so much baggage, which is close to the opposite of being logical.

People think they can control language but they can't. Social justic warrior starts as a compliment, but becomes an insult. His is thoroughly by people having to deal with them. You see the same in how they tried to cancel norm macdonald for saying "person with down syndrome". He wanted to say retarded, realised it was a no no word, substituted it, and it was still unacceptable. It doesn't matter what word you use for a retard, the new word will become contaminated because people realise what you mean with it. And some people are very overprotective of retards that they can't stomach it being the punchline of a joke.

There is a constant march of words going out of vogue for being vulgar this way, but it doesn't matter how kind the new one ia, because it will get filled with all the same content and meaning over time.

Of course the list of words above is more calculated and intentional chnaging of language, but there too control is limited and people in general intuit and figure out what things are like and end up filling the words with the meaning that they have anyways.

 

[snowdunes]

Ever use Grammarly? That fucking thing actually suggests you use more common words.

I got have to dump this little nooticer moment I had that has been bothering me since I saw it. Warning, the sources are in Swedish but I will summarize it in English.

There was a company called NoBias, it was a project collaboration between Vinnovas (gov. company) and Luleå University of Technology (+ Teknikkvinnor, some feminist "tech. union"). Their goal was to make a software to detect if the language "inclusive" enough in documents and it was supposed to eventually become a realtime autocorrect/text generator in the end (the projects original deadline was December 2025. but their official site is now dead, so IDK if it's abandoned or outsourced). But the Swedish government was invested in it and there was some "hype" about it. I don't think they have stoped developing these tools tho. The main point here is that there are projects out there dedicated just for this and they are goverment funded. The whole goal here is to create an autocorrect and a text detection for stuff that doesn't adopt the globohomo retard language.

> "Your text has a strong male bias [check the text] [copy text]"
This is their example for how the software was/is supposed to work.

If a small project like this got resources from the Swedish government, just imagine what USA is doing with their major softwares (Microsoft Words, Google Docs and Apples iOS autocorrect and so on).

Spoiler: Links

Most of them are in Swedish

• https://www.avanceraddigitalisering.se/projects/nobias-2-0/ (archive)
• https://www.ltu.se/forskning/forskn...---inkluderande-kommunikation-med-hjalp-av-ai (archive)
• https://tromb.com/kundcase/nobias/ (archive)
• https://se.linkedin.com/company/n0bias (archive)
• https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/norrbotten/ai-ska-locka-fler-kvinnor-till-teknikbranschen (archive)
• https://www.nobias.se/ (Official site, but it's just a dead Squarespace page, yeah... Squarespace for a IT company, that's a really good sign)

 

[Drain Todger]

Not a joke, this is their example for how the software was/is supposed to work.

Grammarly checks for offensiveness/biases, too, and can flag things like “insensitive“ text that refers to disabilities in a disparaging way, for example. Word’s own editor can optionally look for and flag “non-inclusive” language as well. The political correctness bullshit absolutely is creeping into proofreading tools. The good thing is, most of them currently let you disable those features, or else they would be totally useless for writing prose, where offensiveness may just be an intrinsic part of the story. There does seem to be a strange obsession with nudging people away from using various kinds of slurs.

 

[HairyBadger]

So, a thread full of shite.

 

[snowdunes]

let you disable those features

Only problem is that you don't know if it will "be honest" when you write "offensive" texts, it wont help you write with "offensiveness" as much compared to a "woke" text. I think that if you type stuff on Google Docs, it will correct a text, but as soon you type offensive stuff, suddenly it won't help you anymore and all the previous red lines are now gone.

Call me skitzo, but I don't think Google wants antisemitic manifestos and nigger documentations to be grammarly correct.

 

[ENDTOPII]

Some additional words to my little list here.

---

"Socio-economic factors" - The phrase is designed to make you avoid thinking of biological or cultural factors. A better choice of words would be "Bio-cuiltural-economic factors". Since culture is what shapes a social structures, biology is what shapes culture, and lastly economy to drive the whole thing. These three things would make more sense if you where to "scientifically" constuct a summary word for a persons background and their accessibility/potential to do something. So in short, it's political buzzword and doesn't mean shit.

---

"Misinformation" - It either means information that is true but used for ill intent purposes ("Malinformation") or false information that is used for ill intent purposes ("Disinformation"), but in practice it really is an umbrella term for "Shit the government doesn't like". I want people to think about this and dwell on the fact that we now have words for "using true information is something bad". In a supposed "democracy", this word shouldn't exist since people are supposed to have as much infromation as possible about somehting (the truth) before making a voting decision. Academia is now psyop'ing people into thinking truth is bad for you, and they decide what lies you should follow by. They sometimes even say that you can "unconsciously" spread "misinformation" because you "didn't think enough" a.k.a you are not "educated" enough to talk about something, or you are just a bad actor/disruptive spy or something along those lines to shut you up (censoring you).

 

[ENDTOPII]

I know double posting is bad forum etiquette, but I can't edit the previous post and I use this (dead) thread as a way to document these words. I came across this one today, one that pedos often use use very maliciously:

"Sexual debut" - It means "Losing virginity". They want to make it sound like you "started something" and didn't "lose something" . The official excuse to use the word "sexual debut" is to be "sex positive" and to "destigmatize" sex it due to it's previous religious/sacred meaning that is now "outdated/suppressive/bigoted/patriarchal".


If you look at how progressive/lefty organizations often write about sex and so on, when they talk about minors, they use this word (or similar ones) to make it sound like they are "helping/guiding the youth" instead of "taking something from them". To make it sound less predatory, they sometimes use the "spectrum" meme (like they always do...) to include mastrubation for plausible deniability if they get caught for pushing it.

Don't trust those "sex education" retards that are in schools, they are fucked in the head!

 

[AidsNiggerSupreme]

I remember the word racism being redefined in dozens of online sources dozens of times over the years, often at the demands of college age activists. I'm not sure what the solution is and I think the tactic has been one of several that has dissolved the right wing "debate culture". In such an environment younger right wingers familiar with the dishonest tactics that take place on the internet just make alt accounts and use the brute force of memes and slurs to get their point across which has been marginally more effective given that all illusions of good faith debate have been abandoned.

 

[ENDTOPII]

I remember the word racism being redefined in dozens of online sources dozens of times over the years, often at the demands of college age activists. I'm not sure what the solution is and I think the tactic has been one of several that has dissolved the right wing "debate culture". In such an environment younger right wingers familiar with the dishonest tactics that take place on the internet just make alt accounts and use the brute force of memes and slurs to get their point across which has been marginally more effective given that all illusions of good faith debate have been abandoned.

I have mentioned this before, there is no point of using your enemies language, it's designed so you can never win. The word "racist" is pretty much an end/quit phrase to end the debate/discussion, because in their consensus. it's "evil" and can't be debated. If you are "based", you are not afraid of being judged or shamed by your enemies, but normies still have that shame and judgement mentality that was formed by these lefty activists. If you got a good point, their lingo forbids them from ever internalize it.

Never use newspeak:


The only reason for why there is a "break through" now for right wing opinions is simply because of the "nothing to lose mentality", younger and younger people are realizing that being passive/hiding in conformity is going to ruin their lives too, so that's why we are seeing more unhinged and based takes since every other option is pozzed.

In addition. the reason for why right wing memes are so successful to break through this conditioning is because it's unfiltered anecdotal experiences as the basis for them. When a lefty makes a meme, they have to do "pre work/make shit up" for the meme to "make sense" (hence the 'wall of text' meme itself), this is why lefty memes are never organic. You can never meme diversity, democracy and other shit as good thing if you are honest, and that's why right wing memes are so effective to break through the normie/NPC conditioning, it's just raw anecdotal experiences that are relatable. Make no mistake, the left has caught onto the memes, on a surface level (using the lingo, such as "based", using wojak and pepes and so on), but they are pretty easy to spot since grifters often make excuses to exlude blacks or jews to be blamed for something and are fine with only going after trannys in a polite manner.

TL;DR
The era of having debates are over, nobody is interested in compromises (the left has made that very clear by now), you either talk your own language (that they deem as unhinged) or you move over to other "no talk measures".

 

[Meriasek]

Then use a more logical language than English.

co'a lo lojbo cu se spofu.
Lojban, the most autistic constructed language.

I remember the word racism being redefined in dozens of online sources dozens of times over the years, often at the demands of college age activists. I'm not sure what the solution is and I think the tactic has been one of several that has dissolved the right wing "debate culture". In such an environment younger right wingers familiar with the dishonest tactics that take place on the internet just make alt accounts and use the brute force of memes and slurs to get their point across which has been marginally more effective given that all illusions of good faith debate have been abandoned.

That's the most common redefinition these days. Lefty activists just straight up redefined the word to suit their needs, and assume everyone just goes along with it. "Racism isn't just prejudice, it also has to have an element of power in it", like, no, why? Who said that? You literally just use that definition because it makes it impossible to be racist against white people. And no, just because a minor subsection of academia started to use a word differently doesn't mean it's the valid way to use the word now. Invent a new word for what you want to say, and popularize it. Don't try and redefine a common word claiming that "this is how languages evolve".

 

[Trump's Chosen]

Lojban, the most autistic constructed language.

It's impressive that there is a more autistic language than esperanto.

That's the most common redefinition these days. Lefty activists just straight up redefined the word to suit their needs, and assume everyone just goes along with it. "Racism isn't just prejudice, it also has to have an element of power in it", like, no, why? Who said that? You literally just use that definition because it makes it impossible to be racist against white people.

I'm often mystified how people think that their definition of a word, for example racism, is the correct one after they learn that people try to redefine it. Like, you think it wasn't redefined right before you learned it? Why?

 

[Rome vs Judea]

Leftists do not believe in definitions. Words are persuasive tools for obtaining power and dominion over others. Definitions are for normal people. You accept the meaning of a specific word and you make conclusions with meanings. “If X, then Y”. Instead they say “X is Y, actually, and that’s a good thing. If you don’t like that face the wall now.”

If your long term plan is trying to reason with these people, you're NGMI.

 

[Cnidarian]

Populism is an inherent feature of Democracy, treated as a slur for any democratic leader doing his job, and it is especially clear when they name it by regurgitated objections to democracy:

Their defining characteristic is a claim to represent an “organic” people or nation, rather than specific interests or groups. Such representation has two worrying implications: first, the nation has to be defined, usually in terms that exclude vulnerable groups from the definition of the “people.” This is majority rule without minority rights. Second, those who disagree with populist representation of “the people” are obviously not the “real” nation. The opposition (whether elite or popular) is considered treasonous and treacherous.

The Left and Uniparty love this word for making a scary ism out of the idea of a democracy having people within it that speak effectively to their prospective voters. When you hear some redditor faggot say this word, that is how you know that he is an elitist cocksucker, and would probably vote to ban bottled water if the Democrats said it was contaminated with 'hydroxylic acid'. And populism is just as normal and healthy as drinking hydroxylic acid.

 

[ENDTOPII]

Populism is an inherent feature of Democracy, treated as a slur for any democratic leader doing his job, and it is especially clear when they name it by regurgitated objections to democracy:

The Left and Uniparty love this word for making a scary ism out of the idea of a democracy having people within it that speak effectively to their prospective voters. When you hear some redditor faggot say this word, that is how you know that he is an elitist cocksucker, and would probably vote to ban bottled water if the Democrats said it was contaminated with 'hydroxylic acid'. And populism is just as normal and healthy as drinking hydroxylic acid.

> *most people wants this thing
> "actaully, that's a bad thing"

Good catch, never thought of that one before. It's funny how most people who use that word in a negative way is also most likely to consume mainstream media, agreeing with what their celebrity is endorsing. I have had teachers in school telling certain historical leaders where "populists" and then for became dictators, so "populism " was ingrained in kids brain as "fascist" and le bad for democracy. Funny how twisted and contradicting that rhetoric is, yet nobody calls it out. It's like they do want a minority (opinions) to control the majority, which defeats the whole purpose of said democracy.



I googled the word "populist", to see the consensus definition a normie would see (they all use google...). Seems pretty clear that it's about appealing to the majority (no shit, that's how you get votes). Very interesting how this can be considered a bad thing... in a "democracy".

 

[ToroidalBoat]

A lot of "woke" buzzwords seem to be interchangeable doublespeak for "wrongthink" -- "misinformation", "radicalization", and "sexism" as examples. Our Democracy™ has the same feel to it as "People's Republic" and other euphemistic names used by all communist regimes.

also from the Current Year terms thread:

fragile masculinity, white fragility

Such BS seems to be what SJWs claim the negative reactions of males and whites -- to SJW BS demonizing them -- is. So SJWs claim "all whites are genocidal colonialists", a white person calls BS on that, and then the SJWs claim that calling of BS is "white fragility"?

 

[ENDTOPII]

I forgot I had saved this one from a few years back. Thought I can dump it in the thread, it got some very interesting points.

 

[ToroidalBoat]

SJWs like to frame straight male sexuality as a disease or as "dehumanizing": and to that end, they use terms like "sexualization", "objectification", "the male gaze", etc.

Does the word exist in other languages?

In Chinese or Japanese, they may use hànzì or kanji that mean parts of the word together to mean a translation of a "woke" buzzword. For example, "racism" in Japanese is 人種主義 -- jinshushugi -- which is built from 人種 for "person seed" ("race") and "主義" for "principle" or "doctrine", to get an equivalent word. SJWs are infiltrating Japan.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

A classic one is Altruism. Originally it meant a philosophy of the greater good and justifying sacrifice of individuals for this good. Following Ayn Rand, commies changed it to be about the person making the choice of self sacrifice, making the term basically meaningless in order to "own the objectivists".

There's multicultural which is really monoculture but with different food and clothing so it looks like it has variety.

Diversity never means diversity of political thoughts, or even economic status within a community, only skin color.

 

[ToroidalBoat]

misogynist:

Used to mean "hating women", now it seems it means not worshiping women as a "marginalized group"?

Also notice how it seems they never say "woman" unless "transgender" is involved? I think that betrays collectivist thinking.

 

[Trump's Chosen]

misogynist:

Used to mean "hating women", now it seems it means not worshiping women as a "marginalized group"?

Also notice how it seems they never say "woman" unless "transgender" is involved? I think that betrays collectivist thinking.

We have the word transmisogynist for that.