Progressives used to be about educating, not catering to ignorance.

A true progressive still is about educating. Not many genuine progressives around these days.

I thought “progressives” were about educating, rather than catering to ignorance? Well, that’s the way it used to be. But not in the Century of Insanity.

Progressives have become an empty shell of their former selves, having abandoned much of what they were about. They have become more conservative — which is why I refer to them as former-progressives and former-liberals — and they have become more corporate. And this has happened with most people parked at microphones. It’s rare for me to not be annoyed by what someone says who’s sitting at a microphone these days.

https://images.newindianexpress.com/uploads/user/imagelibrary/2020/6/8/w1200X800/HEATHRO-AIRPORT.jpg

I had a round recently with a former progressive over the word international versus foreign. This person held to the strict far-right definition of the word and was adamant about using the word “foreign.” Fortunately, airports understand the difference. They have terminals called “International Arrivals” and not “Foreign Arrivals.” This is from Heathrow.

Without naming names, take AG, for example. They are her initials. She’s the Executive Director of her own programme, so she’s responsible for the language used on the programme. She’s taken on a more corporate approach when it comes to language. She sounds like the corporate media when hyping the word “DEADLY.” She also looks more conservative in drab black, grey and or dark purple clothing. She used to be quite the radical. You’d never know that about her from looking at her these days.

Why are Representatives called “Congress member” but Senators are not?

I asked someone I know that question and he said, “Yeah, that’s pretty fucked up, isn’t it? That makes no sense. Maybe we should really stir things up and start calling Senators ‘Congress member.’ It might catch on the way things do and then the playing field would be more equal at least with language.”

As for language, AG uses the sexist (for females) “Congressman” or “Congress member” — which is not any better since it’s not their official title — rather than their official title in the US House of Representatives: Representative, which is a gender-neutral word. Gender-neutral is what progressives once used. I should think that AG knows the difference, but often uses the sloppy language — to cater to idiots who don’t know what Representative means? — rather than the official title of the politicians in the House of Representatives. It’s odd. Senators are never referred to as “Congressman” or “Congress member” even though senators are part of the US Congress.

AG referred to “Congress member” Ocasio-Cortez. She should have referred to her as Representative Ocasio-Cortez. That’s her official title. They’re all “Congress members,” even though for some damn reason only the Representatives are referred to like that, not Senators even though — applying critical thinking skills — Senators are indeed “Congress members” because the Senate is part of Congress. We have one fucked up, inconsistent system. No wonder things are so corrupt and fucked up. They can’t even get the language correct of what to call each other. And these former progressives take part in it. But anyway, mi amigo/my friend pointed out that Representative Ocasio-Cortez uptalks. She puts a question mark at the end of her sentences rather than a period. It’s an insecure-sounding way of speaking. As if you’re always asking a question when you’re not. Since there is no way to write uptalking (it’s an audio thing; you have to hear it), here is an example of uptalking: “Hi, my name is Sarah?” (I don’t know, is Sarah your name. Don’t you know your own name?) Or “My brother’s name is Sam?” (Is it? Is Sam your brother’s name? Don’t you know?) Just other examples of our decaying language and decaying society.

AG is right up the coast from the District of Columbia yet she frequently says, “Washington DC” which is not the official name of the Federal District/capital of the US. She did a segment about statehood for the District of Columbia, the official name of the US capital city. Five minutes later she was back to referring to “Washington DC.” Such a disconnect in her mind, so she’s catering to the ignorant sheeple, rather than educating her audience by using District of Columbia (and or the District or DC) on a regular basis. When I lived in the District, the people I knew from New York City used the language “District of Columbia” and “the District.” They didn’t say “Washington DC,” because they knew better. That’s like saying “Boston, Boston” or “Chicago, Chicago” since there is no Washington in DC. They mean the same thing. It’s redundant. AG recently said “Washington DC” and then she immediately went to a guest in San Diego and he correctly used the language District of Columbia and the District, which was his way of covertly correcting AG’s catering to the sheeple language.

AG also uses the “lawmakers” language. Is she referring to Representatives and Senators — why not just say that? — or the justices of the US Supreme Court. They are all lawmakers. And if one is not that advanced in their political science language, this could be confusing to them, especially for international listeners.

I heard AG’s co-host use the outdated term “third world country” — rather than developing countries — which is not what I would expect to hear a genuine progressive use. Well, these days I suppose I would since language is heading back to the way it used to be in the 1950s. There’s one world that we all live on, so how can there be a “third world?” It’s archaic Cold War Era language.

Interestingly, AG uses “African-America” instead of Black. I prefer Black because not all people of African ancestry are “US Americans” or of the hemisphere called America. Therefore, it’s safer to say Black, which is what most Black people I’ve talked with in recent years have used. They don’t use the term “African-American.”

In talking with mi amigo/my friend about AG, he said “Well she’s about the best of them” of the decaying progressives who are becoming more conservative as time passes. He seemed to be trying to defend her which I didn’t understand by saying she’s in her 60s. But she runs her programme and she could retire if she’s not up to the task. I made this comparison: You have the US court system and they have standards, language standards. The same with courts all over the world. If a legal brief uses the wrong words or language, the brief is tossed back to the law firm and attorney. With briefs, they’re consistent in their legal official language — such as defendant and plaintiff; compare that to Representatives and Senators — coming from thousands of attorneys who know what the standards are. AG can’t do the same standards of excellence with her little radio show? Her staff is small by comparison to the US court system. They can do it, why can’t AG and her little radio show? It’s up to AG to set the standards and guidelines and her staff of between 51-100 people (according to my research) to follow the guidelines just like thousands of attorneys in the US court system do every day.

That is, unless AG prefers to continue on her path of being more sloppy with language, more conformist, corporatist and catering to sheeple whilst pretending to be progressive.

I’ll probably add to this article over time as I hear AG and or others use corporate and or sheeple language and cater to that ignorance, rather than educate and inform as she does on the other parts of her programme. Chau.—el barrio rosa