Truth, Lies, and Politics

We live in a postmodern world where often "truth" is just a label used to justify one's position or to smear another's by claiming that their truths are just lies.  We hear people talk about "their truth" or claim "That is just true to you, but not to me", as if truth is just a matter of opinion with no basis in reality.  How about some clarity?

Truth

Truth is that which corresponds to reality.  This includes actual events, actions taken, and objective facts.  It does not include claimed motivations, or whether one thinks something is good or evil.  It is not subjective truth, which is really nothing more than preference or opinion. 

Lies

Lies are a deliberate, intentional distortions of the truth intended to mislead others.  A difference in opinion or assignment of blame is not a lie.  Philosophical viewpoints that one disagrees with are not lies either.  To lie, one must knowingly tell an untruth with the intent to deceive.

Rhetoric

Rhetoric is the art of how one persuasively engages in debate or speech.  This can include exaggerations, ridicule, bragging, or using extreme examples (i.e. reductio ad absurdum) to make a point.  Saying "Everything my opponent said is a lie" is really not a lie, but it is a tactic.  Likewise fear-mongering to motivate one's base is a tactic used to scare people into accepting a position or candidate.

Media

The modern media has a lot of power, since many people only get their information from the mainstream media.  They have been rightly criticized for being unabashedly biased toward progressive agendas and liberal viewpoints.  In many ways, they are the embodiment of 1984's Ministry of Truth.  They tip the scales by biased reporting, MDM (mis-, dis-, mal-) information labeling, one-sided fact-checking, gaslighting to hide the truth, selective reporting, and even redefining words to support their agendas.  

 

Opinions

Differences of (political) opinion and perspectives are not necessarily lies!  Even if the following are objectionable, debatable, or misleading, they are not lies:

• Belief in who was responsible for the security situation prior to/during the riot at the capital. 
• Claims about what the position of each party is on various issues (e.g. abortion limits or lack thereof). 
• Blame for who is responsible for the current immigration situation -- whether it is ultimately good/bad, the integrity of the vetting process, the demographics of border crossers, and the level of danger from it. 
• Why inflation happened and who was responsible.
• Who gets the credit or blame for the economic situation?
• How the status of America in world standing has been affected by different presidents.  Is it respect or is it embarrassment?
• Who caused or got us into wars?  Did they enable it, show weakness, or even enable/pay off terrorists?
• Who will actually destroy "democracy" if elected?  Strictly speaking, do we even have a true democracy or is it actually a constitutional representative republic?

So the next time you hear one side or the other claim that the other is only telling lies, it might be a good idea to push back and actually ask them what they mean by that.

 

No, Karen, America is not a Democracy!

But wait, the liberal media constantly tells us that we are a democracy and that the evil insurrectionists are out to destroy it.  Well, surprise!  Once again the mainstream media is gaslighting by telling you that you must believe something that is actually not so.

The United States of America was founded as a Constitutional Republic in which elected representatives of the various states make decisions, promise to defend the Constitution, and to govern the country faithfully -- with checks and balances.  Our representatives are selected via a democratic process, which consists of one vote per eligible citizen (properly registered and verified).  A pure democracy is one in which a bare majority rules over the minority (e.g. 50.01% can vote to take all the money from the other 49.99%).  Note: the electoral college was setup in view of this reality, to protect our system of government from rash public opinion and mob rule.  

Generally the right to vote is contingent on meeting certain eligibility requirements.  These include: 

• being a citizen of the United States 
• being a valid resident of the appropriate country/state/locality 
• being of legal age (generally 18 years of age) 
• and to be legally registered to vote by the established deadline(s).  

The right to vote is for eligible citizens, not just residents or those otherwise in the country, legally or not.  You do not have the right to vote multiple ballots for the same election, after death, or for another person.  When political groups refuse to enforce identity verification or other reasonable voting checks and balances, one has to wonder "Why?"  

To challenge illegal voting methods and irregularities is not insurrection.  Rather it is a right, and really an obligation, to 

• challenge questionable election tactics and violations of law
• file legal challenges to illegal changes to voting laws and practices
• demand effective partisan and nonpartisan poll watchers and fully open ballot counting
• require verified chain of custody of ballots and all voting systems 
• insist on objective and effective recounts, when deemed necessary
• expect the government to aggressively go after and look for voter fraud, instead of just allowing them to claim that there is nothing to see 
• object to election certifications when there is credible evidence of fraud or irregularities

All of the above are rights and responsibilities under our system of government.  However, the real danger to our system of government lies in the abuse of power by those who are supposed to faithfully execute the laws of the United States.  

We are currently living in such dangerous times. 

When courts judicially make laws and rulings that usurp powers constitutionally granted to other branches of government -- we are in danger!  When a president, or his executive branch, bypasses Congress and effectively implements laws by fiat -- we are in danger!  When members of Congress make expedient or political decisions, or fight among themselves, rather than acting in our best interest -- we are in danger!  When a Commander in Chief cannot effectively govern and lets radical extremists make policy and implement regulations -- we are in danger!  When the judicial system is abused and used to persecute political enemies, and lawfare is allowed to run unchecked -- we are in danger!  

So when you are gaslighted by claims that a change in leadership would lead to totalitarianism, and hear the Karens scream that the end of "Democracy" is coming, realize that they are just really looking in the mirror and fear their loss of power and control.  

It is time for a change!

Newspeak Dictionary (Recent) (A-L) (M-Z)

Ministry of Truth Daily Update - 22 May 2024 - Revolutionary Suicide

 

Revolutionary Suicide

Self-immolation to support radical change.  Martyrdom is a small price to pay for freedom from injustice and evil in our world. 

More info: 

• https://freebeacon.com/campus/revolutionary-suicide-ucla-psychiatrists-cheer-self-immolation-in-leaked-audio/

Newspeak Dictionary (Recent) (A-L) (M-Z)

How Far Will We Go? 

(In honor of the cancellation of Dr. Seuss)

We can cancel a book or silence a blog

We can redefine words or wipe out a job

We can purge all of history, its statues and docs

We can re-tell our truths while still in our socks

We can walk with Big Brother and Newspeak all day

We can lose all our freedoms and have justice delayed 

How far will we go when we get to the end?
What must we not say, which thoughts must we end?

We can have a New Deal to make the world green again

We can see weather change and claim crisis at hand

We can stop all the gas, all the jobs, all the coal

We can make it all green, no matter the toll

We can drive from the mountains down to the sea

We can power our cars with free gravity

How far will we go when we get to the end?

Will the future be bright, or bring darkness again?  

We can spend without limits for the future to pay

We can limit their reach so they have no say

We can open the doors and let everyone in

We can give freely to all, except those from within

How far will we go when we get to the end?

It doesn't much matter how big we can spend.  

We can change what it means to have sex or a race

We can shut down all laughs or be put in our place

We can signal our virtue by masking or speech

We can make it so girls cannot freely compete

We can demand equity, fairness, and love, as a start

We can judge others by color, but not of their heart

How far will we go when we get to the end?

Are we confused yet?  Don't want to offend.  

We can all become woke and feel good to ourselves

We can all just do something but make sure we compel

We can redefine words like truth, gender, and justice

We can have civil discourse, but just to affirm us

How far will we go when we get to the end?

They say Right is Wrong, for you but not me. 

We can say cops are bad and injustice abounds

We can defund and mock them until trouble surrounds

We can riot and protest for public display

We can decry the violence should things not go our way

We can be run by Ministries: Peace, Love, Plenty, and Truth

We can bow to our betters, watch our rights be removed

How far will we go when we get to the end?

Will we have peace or division again?

We can see the whole world through progressive eyes

We can choose not to see all the media lies

We can have unity and live as we're taught

We can purge all dissent and have uniform thought

We can be entertained by Netflix and bread

We can be empty inside and lonely instead

How far will we go when we get to the end?

We need to keep busy, but can I visit my friends?

How far will we go when we get to the end?

I fear we don't know. I guess it depends.