Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gun Control & RKBA

In reply to the discussion: HR 127 - DOA [View all]
 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
19. You offer little more than glittering generalities and superlatives in defense of HR 127
Wed Feb 3, 2021, 07:39 PM
Feb 2021

Generalities such as:

It has to do with responsible gun ownership and the application of an independent standard to ensure the 2nd Amendment far into the future. That bill is an excellent start to this process...


https://propagandacritic.com/index.php/how-to-decode-propaganda/glittering-generalities/

These are all glittering generalities. These words sound great, but they mean different things to different people...

...Alert readers will recognize that glittering generalities are the mirror image of name-calling words. One technique encourages us to reject ideas or people without considering the evidence; the other hopes we will approve of ideas or people without considering the evidence...

...Propagandists don’t want us focusing on specific details. They hope to see us bathing in these words’ positive emotional glow.

It is also important to consider a close cousin of the glittering generality: the superlative. Superlatives are adjectives used to describe something of the very highest quality. Words like amazing, beautiful, best, fabulous, phenomenal, strong, and tremendous are all such words. But what do these words really mean in the context of the speaker’s claims? What, specifically, makes the speaker’s idea so tremendous?...


Then there's the following passage from Orwell's ""Politics and the English Language" :


"The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotic, realistic, justice have each of them several different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using that word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different. Statements like "Marshal Pétain was a true patriot," "The Soviet press is the freest in the world," "The Catholic Church is opposed to persecution," are almost always made with intent to deceive. Other words used in variable meanings, in most cases more or less dishonestly, are: class, totalitarian, liberal, reactionary, equality..."

HR 127 - DOA [View all] melm00se Jan 2021 OP
Hmm discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2021 #1
I have no problem with the bill for the same reason I don't have a problem with registering or... PirateRo Jan 2021 #2
I am going to guess you didn't read the propose bill. melm00se Jan 2021 #3
Oh, i read it PirateRo Jan 2021 #5
"(A)ny reasonable person" in this case means "agrees with me" friendly_iconoclast Feb 2021 #8
Hardly. I couldn't care less on agreement on this topic. PirateRo Feb 2021 #9
Again, you're using *your* standards as synonymous with 'reasonable'. Your schtick is not new, btw: friendly_iconoclast Feb 2021 #11
Yeah, no. PirateRo Feb 2021 #14
It's not new just because you personally haven't used it before friendly_iconoclast Feb 2021 #16
Oh, this has nothing to do with me PirateRo Feb 2021 #18
You offer little more than glittering generalities and superlatives in defense of HR 127 friendly_iconoclast Feb 2021 #19
In general, I support a vigorous debate of proposed restrictionist laws. discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2021 #20
I didn't read anything about... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2021 #12
The antigun want to treat gun ownership the way the GOP treats voting friendly_iconoclast Feb 2021 #10
I've been toying with ideas for... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2021 #4
Well, there goes 2022 krispos42 Jan 2021 #6
BTW, H.R. 125 was introduced on 4 January... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2021 #7
What is the intended point of this insurance? ManiacJoe Feb 2021 #13
Registration discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2021 #15
Effectively an $800 poll tax on what *all* the Supremes have held to be an individual right friendly_iconoclast Feb 2021 #17
The bill, or subsequent law, is irrelevant. Rick Rolle Feb 2021 #21
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»HR 127 - DOA»Reply #19