|
BURNINGBIRD
|
|
a node at the edge
|
|
July 01, 2002
 Verbal Weaponry in the War Against Terrorism
I knew something was up when I kept getting all these hits from Josh Trevino's weblog. Seems Josh has been using me for an adjective again. (I do seem to generate all these strong feelings, don't I? How nice to know that I generate such love/hate - leaves me all warm and tingley all over, as if I've been rubbed down with a loofah sponge, or licked with a particularly rough tongue.) Since Josh was kind enough to open up a conduit to this weblog from the bible totin, gun packin, flag wavin, war lovin, All American crowd, I thought that now would be the ideal time for me to roll out the first installment of The Bird's Tips to being a Good American: Verbal Weaponry in the War Against Terrorism. Before proceeding with the tips, it's essential that you keep one thing in mind - a Good American has a duty to find and root out evil; to correct the misinformed; to stifle disagreement; and to do all that's possible to prevent the weakoning of America's resolve in this our War Against Terrorism. Now, pay attention: -- Tip 1: Never whisper when you can shout Never use clash, when you can use near-riot. Never use near-riot, when you can use riot. Try to work violence into the mix if you can. Whatever degree of adjective is used by the neutral, up the ante by adding at least five decibles (plus or minus) of noise when describing the event. Don't leave your audience confused about possible viewpoints and opinions - if you yell loud enough, they won't be able to hear themselves think, a state preferred for Good Americans. Tip 2: Never retreat - Attack! Attack! Attack! When your opponent uses reason, use passion. When your opponent disagrees, no matter how gently, use extreme prejudice and take him or her down. Grab the person by the privates, trash them, bash them, and make them bleed. Verbally, of course. If you respond mildly to another's writing, your reading audience may assume that the person has a legitimate opinion. This might lead to your audience listening with an open mind. Do not allow this! Good Americans do not have Open Minds. An Open Mind might lead to people questioning the government's current actions, and other subversive, dangerous activities. Tip 3: Degrade and Mock The most effective weapon against respect is to degrade and mock. This is also an effective way to make the opponent seem less human, and therefore less sympathetic. If you feel you're losing the battle, resort to a personal attack, and don't forget to add a sneer to your voice - do a good job and you get bonus points. Tip 4: What facts? Why use fact when innuendo will do?. Nothing better than a cold rumor presented as argument stated as heresay published as fact. As a precaution, use one of the following phrases to cover your butt: - could be And if you're caught out, say "...I'm just a weblogger expressing my opinion". Works everytime. Tip 5: If you're not Pro, you're Anti - If you're not with us, you're ag'in us This one is my personal favorite because it's practically indefensible. If a person says, "Well, I don't support all of Israel's moves", you label them anti-Semitic or pro-terrorist. If the person doesn't support Bush or Ashcroft, you call them a bleeding heart liberal and anti-American. If the person just plain disagrees with you, call them a moron or an idiot (interchange these or people will catch on that you're using a script - note this is interchangeable with Tip 3). And if the person says "I want to understand all the issues", then you bring out the big guns and say (all together class, you know what's coming): Moral Equivalency! Since no one knows exactly what "moral equivalency" is, they can't fight the term, and you can't be sued. Slick, eh? -- That's it for the tips. Study them. Use them. Sadly for all Good Americans, there is one defense against all of these verbal weapons, and this was provided by MIke Sanders, a long time ago, in a universe that's now far far away: It is impossible to be objective about ourselves. Others can see things that we never can. If we want to improve our writing and thinking it is helpful to be judged by others. If what they say is valuable, we can apply it. If it is without merit, we can ignore it. Remember: Only You can prevent Moral Equivalency Posted by Bb at July 01, 2002 02:19 PM Trackback Count (0) Comments
I reacted quite sharply and angrily - and in fact STILL feel that way - about your argument re the Pledge of Allegience. Oh, and again, please refrain from calling it the 'Oath of Allegience'. When you do, and insist on capitalizing it, you are 100% incorrect. Same as if I were to write 'The United States of North America'. I also gather that - at least relativee to your political stance - I qualify as conservative. I won't argue that. I probably consider myself more middle of the road, and try to be fair on things. So in that context, I have to say everything you said here is totally on the mark. Worse yet, these intended audience to which you are writing can't see how acting in these ways weakens everything they may be accurate about. And that pains me. We DO have enemies that would like nothing more than strike at us and cause a paralysis of our society. There ARE terrorists in this world and in this country. And in a perverse way, when our officials and their backers insist on using over melodramatic words and phrases they end up aiding the cause of their enemies. Actually, this happens on both sides of the political spectrum. In fact, taken out of context (please note I'm speaking OUT of context), your words can do exactly that. They are so sharp and direct to (again OUT of context) sound very pious. Fortunately, the context of ironic sarcasm can easily be understood... something that many times gets lost in this medium. Great post! Posted by: Dave on July 1, 2002 07:03 PMAh, well, urh, thanks, Dave. Posted by: Bb aka Shelley aka Weblog Bosswoman on July 1, 2002 07:42 PMWho gave you the handbook on 'How to Destroy Intelligent Discourse on Metafilter' that they seem to have been handing to new members for the last 6 months or so? One of the unfortunate side effects of freedom of speech is that a lot of fools start a-talkin', and the bloodthirsty gang of shitbags known as 'warbloggers' (now, I'm just being offhandedly slanderous here, but why not sink to their level huh? (Yes, I know why not...)) are nothing if not lowest common demominator. The loudest voice is often the one that's heard, and no one ever went broke sticking their tongue up the government's collective ass, even if that government is a murderous gang of drooling thrillkillers and cheesy third-rate petty criminals that ought to be taken out back and lined up against the wall. Fuck 'em, and the moral equivalency they rode in on. Crikey. Haven't even had my first coffee of the morning! Bring it on! Posted by: stavrosthewonderchicken on July 1, 2002 09:04 PMFull of passion, fire, and intense emotion, Stavros! I like it! (BTW, Rageboy left you comment - said something about Olive Oil) Posted by: Bb aka Shelley aka Weblog Bosswoman on July 1, 2002 09:11 PMShelley--this is awesome. I know a few people I wish would read it, but then, it would only loop back around to their taking it the only way they know how to take it. Posted by: jeneane on July 2, 2002 12:27 AMHeh. I said 'demominator'. Sounds like a new Schwarzenegger movie : [Movie Promo Voice]"He's coming, and he wants only one thing. To totally wreck your mom! He's the Demominator. Coming to your mom's house, this summer."[/Movie Promo Voice] Posted by: stavrosthewonderchicken on July 2, 2002 02:36 AM(sorry, that was a bit of a thread derailer, wasn't it?) Posted by: stavrosthewonderchicken on July 2, 2002 05:57 AMMy goodness, Shelley, got your panties all in a twist, didn't they :). Interesting that you use the tactics you decry to, well, decry their tactics. And it's difficult to respond to your claims of no substance on the right when, well, you have no substance in your post. Gosh :). Maybe you should set aside your horror of "bible-thumpin'" long enough to explore the parable of the mote and beam. It might, perhaps, be illustrative for you. Posted by: susanna on July 2, 2002 10:55 AMHow's this Link Lovers thing work, Shell? I gotta mote, I gotta beam, an' I wanna sail my dugout canoe machine. I found Josh down in the swamps where I sent him las' time and gave that boy a whippin' like he ain't ever gonna fergit. Actually, it weren't that bad as I figgered yer'd done a pretty good job of it herself. Yippety yo, I gotta mote, I got a beam, I done got me a castle-building machine :) Posted by: Mike Golby on July 2, 2002 11:42 AMSusanna, you're exactly right. In fact, that was the point of the post. Posted by: Bb aka Shelley aka Weblog Bosswoman on July 2, 2002 12:00 PMMike, I think I'm going to drop the link lover thing - I think it's an idea whose time hasn't come yet. Posted by: Bb aka Shelley aka Weblog Bosswoman on July 2, 2002 01:37 PM"Ah, well, urh, thanks, Dave." Was that really called for? I may not be in complete agreement, but my comment contained no disrespect. It even contained some honest compliments, and not backhanded either. But since my way with words doesn't compare to yours and since I don't feel the same you do, did you really have to react like this? Surely you don't mean to imply that one cannot comment here unless they only have non-critical things to say about your positions! Because that is how one could take your response. Posted by: Dave on July 2, 2002 01:50 PMDave, that wasn't a slam - that was a "well, ah, thanks Dave". Believe me, I'm not that subtle - if you were going to be slammed, you would know it without a doubt. Posted by: Bb aka Shelley aka Weblog Bosswoman on July 2, 2002 02:40 PMWell, uh, sure. I believe you. Posted by: Dave on July 2, 2002 06:44 PMIs it possible to love the Bible and the Love of Whom it speaks, but not pack a gun, wave a flag, support war, or vote for America's Favorite Nazis™? While such people certainly exist (I live in the corn belt, baby!), these kinds of stereotypes are tired, boring and offensive. Was that your point? Oh, and you forgot to mention Little Green Footballs...:) Posted by: michael on July 4, 2002 06:11 PMPost a comment
|