New meanings

I’ve a busy day, so posting will be light and laden with persiflage. Here’s some:

I was, as usual, reading “Left wing” websites during lunch, and I realized that one frequently sees the word “haters” used to refer to those who are critical of a person or phenomenon—in other words, “critics.”  Many of these critics don’t have any real hatred for anything, but do have issues (or even dislikes) for ideas or behaviors. The word “hater” is used by the Left simply to dismiss such folks, much as one’s enemies are automatically deemed “Nazis” or “white supremacists” (I’ve been called the latter).

So I thought I’d start a list noting the redefinition of political terms. These are for the Left, the area I know best, but feel free below to add terms from all shades of the political spectrum.

Haters“:   Those people who are critics of your behavior or views, or of behaviors and views that comport with your ideology

Hate speech“:  Speech that you don’t like, often because it doesn’t comport with your ideology

Cultural appropriation“: The new phrase replacing “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.”

Please give others in the comments. I could go on, but I have deadlines. . .


  1. Paul Davies
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

    ideologue: someone with ideas you don’t share
    accommodationist: pragmatic / not extremist

  2. Merilee
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

    Got my thinking cap on…

  3. Randall Schenck
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

    Just off the top of the head I could give some that I have gotten right here on this site in the last 24 hours and it seems easy to achieve. How about Mean-spirited, denigrating or trolling. Well thought out arguments for the left, eh.

  4. Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

    MSM (pejorative): Infinitely more successful, professional and accurate media outlets against whom I rail in my underpants on my intemperate blog for not covering an event 8 hours after all of them have posted it online: elitist loci of anti-real people conspiracy, connected ultimately to the Bilderberg Group, Davos and several honorary Jewish billionaires: the sole reason for Jeremy Corbyn’s upcoming tonking in the election.

    • Gemma Jillian
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

      Hmmm: MSM is not the acronym for methylsulfynylmethane after all ? !

      • jeffery
        Posted May 16, 2017 at 7:37 pm | Permalink

        I heard two women in a drugstore in California discussing MSM (touted for its anti-inflammatory properties): one said, “I had a friend of mine who took that- she said that it made her feel better than she WANTED to feel.”

  5. Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

    Scientific: that which is derived from philosophical arguments without supporting data.

  6. Kevin
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

    Tiger moms: a rare, if not extinct, species evolutionarily crowded out by safe spaces and helicopter moms who think everyone deserves a gold medal.

  7. Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

    “Climate change deniers:” People who are so incurably stupid that they should be lumped in with “round-earth deniers” and “Holocaust deniers” and, by extension from the latter, are probably anti-semitic to boot.

  8. Joseph McClain
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

    Free speech: My speech.

  9. Michael Fisher
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

    “Cuck”, I see it used a lot by alt-right on message boards & comments. Just that four letter word on is own. It saves having to make an argument, just throw out a slur instead. Apparently, it’s a shortening of the neologism “Cuckservative” [cuckold + conservative]

    ** Acc to Wiki is a conservative who sells out, having bought into all of the key premises of the left & sympathizes with liberal values

    ** Also acc to Wiki, Richard B. Spencer says it’s a shorthand used to express “a certain kind of contempt for mainstream conservatives”

    • Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:41 pm | Permalink

      Also it refers to “race traitors,” those that support diversity and work against supremacist ideals.

  10. Harrison
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

    I think a better definition for “cultural appropriation” is “pro-segregation dogwhistle.”

  11. Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:57 pm | Permalink

    Nazi: Evil.

    Conservative: See Nazi.

    Centrist: See Conservative.

    White: See centrist.

    Male: See white

    Cis: See male

    Heterosexual: See Cis

  12. darrelle
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

    Libtard: a human who exhibits at least a hint of human decency in any context related to politics.

    Watermelon: a human who thinks we should not completely fuck up the environment and exhibits a hint of human decency in any context related to politics. Especially if they say something positive about electric cars or solar power.

    • Randy schenck
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

      Wow. So Elon Musk is a watermelon, except when he is shooting those dirty rockets into space.

      • darrelle
        Posted May 15, 2017 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

        Yeah, the people who use those terms are hard to make sense. You’d think that Elon Musk would be a hero to them. A man who starts his own private rocket company from scratch and successfully competes. And starts several other companies as well. And gets filthy rich doing it.

        But, nope. Their ideological commitments cause them instead to condemn him due to three things that simply over-shadow the things about Musk that they would otherwise consider to be most admirably representative of their ideology.

        1)He is pro Solar Power and one of his companies is SolarCity, a solar power systems provider.

        2) He is pro Electric Vehicles and one of his companies is Tesla (no description needed).

        3) His rocket company, SpaceX, gets money from the “Federal Government” (SCARE quotes)(is there an evil font?). The specifics don’t matter. All that matters is SpaceX receives some T-A-X-P-A-Y-E-R money.

        • infiniteimprobabilit
          Posted May 15, 2017 at 7:23 pm | Permalink

          Re (3), it is however perfectly okay for General Dynamics and General Electric and Rockwell and a zillion others to get taxpayer money for the purpose of designing better ways to kill people…

          Now if Spacex just had the wisdom to be developing a ‘payload’ delivery system as an offshoot, all would be forgiven.


          • Michael Fisher
            Posted May 15, 2017 at 7:50 pm | Permalink

            @infinite SpaceX, as of May 2015, have won USAF certification for national security space missions & their last launch was for the NRO with restricted public video [onboard video only of stage 1]

            They are likely to steal the launch biz for military stuff from Boeing/Lockheed Martin Corp [although not manufacture of said stuff] – the militarised space side is worth approx $5,000,000,000/yr for at least 15 years. I’m pretty sure everybody is breaking the militarised space treaties so your ‘payload’ delivery [back to Earth with a bang] systems may be operative or in test phase.

            Donald will never be told this of course – some secrets are too big for Presidents & especially the Toddler President himself

        • Kiwi Dave
          Posted May 15, 2017 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

          According to National Review in January 2015, every $100k Tesla has been subsidised by other car buyers and taxpayers by at least $30k. Not quite private enterprise.

          • darrelle
            Posted May 16, 2017 at 8:15 am | Permalink

            Yeah. I’ll just comment how that article is completely hypocritical and misleading, and is certainly typical of the view point of the kind of people I was criticizing.

            Also, I am not sure what this has to do with my comment? That the people I was talking about dislike Musk because they think he unethically mooches off of the taxpayers and runs an electric car company? That’s what I said already.

    • Kevin
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 3:36 pm | Permalink

      Another version of watermelon: A fruit meant to be violated by young boys from Tennessee, often called ‘moonlight melon mounters’. cf. Suttree (C. McCarthy)

      • darrelle
        Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

        Never heard that one!

        • jeffery
          Posted May 16, 2017 at 7:41 pm | Permalink

          There’s a story about a farmer who got tired of the kids stealing his watermelons, so he put up a sign that said, “One of these watermelons is POISONED!” The next morning he found a sign next to it that said, “Now there’s two!”

  13. Ken Phelps
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

    Cultural appropriation addendum – A strict one-way street. Nothing “western” may be claimed as the exclusive preserve of the culture that created it.

    • Ken Phelps
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

      To paraphrase a favorite Firesign Theater quote: “We don’t want to be equal, we want to take turns. Guess whose turn it is now?”

    • Jan
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 8:07 pm | Permalink

      So if a Muslim decided to BBQ some ribs, that would NOT be cultural appropriation? But if I decide to cook Chicken Briyani that is?

      • Posted May 16, 2017 at 6:10 am | Permalink

        Yes, except I expect Western barbecues are also culturally appropriated. The word originally comes from the Americas via Spanish.

  14. Posted May 15, 2017 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    Biology. The study of living organisms, divided into many specialized fields that cover their morphology, physiology, anatomy, behaviour, origin, and distribution. Excludes people.

    Essentialism. The belief that the biological rules which apply to other living beings can also be applied to human beings.

  15. Posted May 15, 2017 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    Cultural appropriation. The theft of cultural practices be Evil Westerners.

    Cultural Imperialism. When the traffic of cultural practices runs in the other direction.

  16. Carey Haug
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    Referring to the editor who fired Andy Ngo at PSU Vanguard:

    Endangering another student means quoting verbatim what a speaker said in a public panel.

    Taking out of context means quoting a straightforward response to a direct question.

    The statement from the Vanguard regarding Andy Ngo is a masterpiece of this sort of new meaning.

  17. Posted May 15, 2017 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

    Words: Discursive violence.

    Violence: Acceptable discourse.

    • BJ
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 2:58 pm | Permalink

      +1. Perfect post!

    • Craw
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 7:05 pm | Permalink

      Lots of good stuff Speaker, but “discursive violence” is simply brilliant. It even neatly mocks the regressives’ word salad.

  18. Anshul
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

    I don’t see why this is necessary. There are left wing tabloids that employ extreme buzzwords just as there are right wing tabloids that use buzzwords.

    Cut through the bullshit and read better things like NYT, daily beast, or WSJ.

    • Michael Fisher
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 3:05 pm | Permalink

      @Anshul – Very little in life is “necessary”, but this exercise is fun

      Also educational for people like me who haven’t the patience to read the shit sites & who thus have trouble knowing if they’re reading a ‘selective’ [lying] partisan [i.e. bullshit] opinion or something worth chewing over. I’m also not so sure that your list of three umbrella mainstream news/info providers is sufficient nor reliable. I have found it best to consume the blogs, like this one [yeah I know!], of people whom I trust – they are usually far more accurate & are careful to say when working with partial info. Also the comments usually serve to expose imbalance or error [I’m leaving out PZ Myers-type partisan loony blogs! 🙂 ]

    • Posted May 16, 2017 at 4:58 am | Permalink

      Anshul, chill out. We’re having a bit of fun.

  19. Posted May 15, 2017 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

    New Atheist – An atheist who is not an accommodationist.

    Neocon – An actual neoconservative OR anyone who criticizes any tenet of Islam in any way.

    Rothschild – (pejorative) Jew. (See also, Zionist)

  20. BJ
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

    Racism — something every single white person is guilty of, and something no other group but white people can be guilty of. If you hate another race but you’re not white, you’re not guilty of racism because “marginalized” or “oppressed” people can’t be guilty of it.

    Sexism — same as above, only with men instead of white people. All other stipulations apply (as in women can’t be guilty of it, only men).

    Fascist — someone who disagrees with any regressive about anything

    Nazi — Same as above

    Oppression — any time someone who isn’t a white male has their feelings hurt in any way, or is even emotionally uncomfortable in the slightest

    Marginalization — People aren’t taking your BS points seriously enough

    Harassment — disagreement with a regressive

    Mansplaining — any time a man explains something to a woman, regardless of whether or not he is right and she is wrong

    • netizen_james
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:27 pm | Permalink

      Maybe you should actually study things like racism before you make a fool of yourself elsewhere as well. Look carefully into the distinction between racial bigotry and racism.

      The Brooklyn black man who hates all white people is a bigot. But he’s a bigot living in a racist society – with cops that are mostly white, and DAs that are mostly white, and lawyers and judges that are mostly white.

      That you could trivialize words like ‘oppression’ is really damning. Do you want to go back to being forced to live in Company Housing, and being paid in ‘scrip’ that is only valid in the Company Store? Or do you see that as an acceptable ‘free market’? So being forced into segregated and unequal schools doesn’t qualify as being ‘oppressed’? Really?

      • BJ
        Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

        Boy, you sure do make a lot of assumptions.

        We’re talking about how words have been redefined by the regressive left here, and you just showed that my description of how racism has been redefined is absolutely correct. Racism is hating people because of their race. Full stop. It does not depend on the skin color of the person doing the hating.

      • BJ
        Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:50 pm | Permalink

        By the way, I’m not the one trivializing words like oppression; it’s the people who keep using it for anything ranging from being disagreed with to having too many white men in their Western Literature class as “oppression” who are doing that. I’m just observing how they’ve trivialized these words. Don’t shoot the messenger.

      • harrync
        Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:54 pm | Permalink

        james – I don’t see what DJ said that was that different from most other posts on this thread. And while your points are good in the abstract, I’m not seeing how they relate to DJ’s post.

        • harrync
          Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:58 pm | Permalink

          I’m still trying to find the edit button: “BJ” not “DJ”.

          • BJ
            Posted May 15, 2017 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

            Haha thanks, it’s ok. There’s no edit button, which I think is a good thing for a site that hosts rigorous debate of ideas.

      • Posted May 16, 2017 at 4:59 am | Permalink

        Apologize: you’ve violated the Roolz with name-calling and if you don’t apologize you’re gone,

        • BJ
          Posted May 16, 2017 at 8:08 am | Permalink

          That was by far the nastiest comment I’ve had directed at me here. But at least it made my point for me.

      • John Frum
        Posted May 16, 2017 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

        Looks like you need to study racism.
        A black man that hates all white people is a racist, by definition.
        The irony is strong with you.

  21. Curt Nelson
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

    We’re sliding down the slippery slope — haters say hateful things = hate speech = illegal.

  22. Posted May 15, 2017 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

    It’s true that the CTRL “Left” (so-called) has been crying wolf for years. Calling people wolves is now frowned upon. The problem is, there are now really wolves. And like before (with seeing “social justice warriors”) it takes forever for many reasonable people to see it.

    • infiniteimprobabilit
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

      Are you maligning wolves? There is (so I believe) considerable doubt as to whether wolves’ bad reputation is deserved (even if they are, unfortunately, related to d*gs).

      We shouldn’t be perpetuating such stereotypes on this site.

      (Also Huns, Vandals, wild beasts, heathens, Philistines, and any other entities maligned by popular stereotypes).

      Umm, obligatory 😉


  23. Posted May 15, 2017 at 3:06 pm | Permalink

    Unsafe precious

  24. Alan Reader
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

    Stewie: They’re just being haters.
    Chris: What’s a “hater”?
    Stewie: Oh, it’s just something people say instead of working to change their own flaws.

  25. grasshopper
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    Journalist – A person who aggressively listens to an interviewee and fearlessly writes down what they heard.

  26. Rita
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:06 pm | Permalink

    I’m waiting for someone to define “intersectionality”.

    • grasshopper
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:19 pm | Permalink

      Intersectionality is a new word for the old definition of a Chronosynclastic Infundibulum, as mentioned by Kurt Vonnegut Jr in his great novel The Sirens Of Titan.

      Definition: n. A place, or a moment, where all the different kinds of truths fit together, and where there are many different ways to be absolutely right about everything. n. To be absolutely right about everything.

    • Craw
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 6:59 pm | Permalink

      Intersectionality, n. one-upmanship.

      • Phil Giordana FCD
        Posted May 16, 2017 at 3:25 am | Permalink

        Intersectionality = crossroads = Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed initial fraudulent name.


    • infiniteimprobabilit
      Posted May 16, 2017 at 3:33 am | Permalink

      ‘intersectionality’ is meaningless, as far as I can tell. It has just been assigned one specific arbitrary meaning by its proponents.

      (Intersection of what? Could be anything.)


  27. Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

    Dicussing certain statistical facts about groups -> “stigmatizing”
    Giving possible causal links to explain these facts -> “framing”
    Raising any genuine concern at all about these things -> “problematizing”

  28. JonLynnHarvey
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:19 pm | Permalink

    OK, pun of the week.

    “Scientific imperialism”- often confused with scientific empiricism by the Regressive Left.

  29. Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

    “Snowflake” has been used all around the political map and the last two hundred years with different meanings.

    • Michael Fisher
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 5:13 pm | Permalink


      I thought I knew that the first non-snow meaning of “snowflake” came from the film Fight Club, but I was intrigued by your comment & I’ve learned today [thank you] that…

      In Missouri in the early 1860s, a “snowflake” was a person who was opposed to the abolition of slavery

      Are there other political meanings in other eras as your comment suggests?

  30. Jenny Haniver
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

    Being exposed to ideas from “people who are critics of your behavior or views, or of behaviors and views that comport with your ideology”; i.e., “haters” =

    1) brain rape or 2) Forcible cognitive penetration.

    • kesheck
      Posted May 15, 2017 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

      There’s so much great stuff here, but “forcible cognitive penetration” made me LOL for real.

  31. Posted May 15, 2017 at 4:45 pm | Permalink

    Scientism: the work that is carried out by a practicing scientist.

  32. Posted May 15, 2017 at 5:08 pm | Permalink

    Darwin Award Winners = All life on the planet when global warming effects at last kills it off.

  33. Craw
    Posted May 15, 2017 at 6:57 pm | Permalink

    Heresy, n. dissent.

  34. Richard
    Posted May 16, 2017 at 5:00 am | Permalink

    Ideological: when someone on the Right does something according to their beliefs.


    Principled: when someone on the Left does something according to their beliefs.

  35. Jeff Morgan
    Posted May 16, 2017 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    Here goes:

    Taxation: Something that happens to poor people.

    Foreign Policy: Either (a) Selling guns to countries awash with them or (b) buying food at inflated prices from countries that don’t have enough to start with.

    BREXIT: Form of national Seppuku.

    The little people: Either (a) Working class people in western countries who can be relied upon to spite their own noses or (b) leprechauns.

  36. Posted May 16, 2017 at 9:52 am | Permalink

    “activism” a social media role playing game, wherein the character plays a hero role to better humankind. Be like Rosa Parks, or MLK, and fight trolls! And look good in the grand timeline of history. Dice not included.

    “cis-het” – a devilish condition, something that makes a person less human, and coruppted, and no longer worth listening to; a risk to everyone.

    “consequences” — character assassination, distortions, because somebodies opinions must be stopped at all costs.

    “fighting the good fight” wearing BLM merchandise and safety pins, and tweeting #Resist at likeminded followers. Black Lives Matter shirts now 50% off!

    “Freethought” — thinking freely about something, then expressing opinions that remain after consideration of “consequences”, compare democracy with “Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea”.

    “marginalization” – the act of sending rich kids to elite university, and which forces them to campaingn on campus in sheer desperation.

    “mild criticism” — see consequences.

    “Safe Space” – a community where everyone has to watch their every word; a safety environment comparable to handling toxic and radioactive substances, in full protective gear and where an ear-shattering alarm indicates any leak or error in routine.

    “silencing” — casting doubt on someone’s assertions, thereby ever so slighlty weaken their (preachy) message to a large audience.

    “violence” — disapproval on social media.

%d bloggers like this: