baywax
Gold Member
- 2,175
- 1
Pelt said:Too bad.
Once again, I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm asking specifically about your theories regarding the phrases "war on terror" and "war on cowardice." I'm not interested in your broader thoughts on rhetoric and social psychology. I'm also not interested in anything less than actual research on this issue. For example...
...I have no response to these words independent of the context of our discussion. Either your hypothesis is messed up or your test is less than satisfactory gauge.
Once again, I'm looking specifically for scholarship on a phrase that has been used widely and attracted a great deal of scholarly attention for six years now. Absent that, I'd love to see other research that at least allows me to reasonably the phrase's impact.
No, it's merely irrelevant to the question I asked.
This may help you "reasonably the phrase's impact". Its a close shot anyway.
Linguistics professor George Lakoff dissects the "war on terror" and other conservative catchphrases
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/08/25_lakoff.shtml
You've said that progressives should never use the phrase "war on terror" — why?
There are two reasons for that. Let's start with "terror." Terror is a general state, and it's internal to a person. Terror is not the person we're fighting, the "terrorist." The word terror activates your fear, and fear activates the strict father model, which is what conservatives want. The "war on terror" is not about stopping you from being afraid, it's about making you afraid.
Next, "war." How many terrorists are there — hundreds? Sure. Thousands? Maybe. Tens of thousands? Probably not. The point is, terrorists are actual people, and relatively small numbers of individuals, considering the size of our country and other countries. It's not a nation-state problem. War is a nation-state problem.
Although Mr.Lakoff doesn't touch on my own reasons for abolishing this phrase, his are just as valid and in the same vein. His reasoning is that the word "terror" is only an enemy within an individual, not a physical group or entity with which to be at "war". Whereas, cowardice is a physical behaviour exhibited by cowards. The kind that make a statement or gain control at any cost - sometimes destroying the lives of innocent, unarmed,unprepared and uninvolved people.
Last edited: