Erroneous Epithets

blog

Posted by Connor on February 2nd, 2007

As humans we like to apply epithets to ourselves, allowing for categorization based on our affiliations, be they social, political, religious, or otherwise. For example, I can quickly classify myself in the following ways:

I’m a Mormon.
I’m a Conservative Constitutionalist.
I’m a bachelor.
I’m an RM.
I’m an extroverted introvert (try making sense of that one).

Uniting ourselves with like-minded persons (sharing a similar epithet) allows for the exchange of ideas and services with those whom you trust because of a shared belief or ideal. We do it at church, at work, at home, and in countless other situations. The problem arises when the label which you’ve applied to your granfalloon is actually a misnomer, be it through naivetÃ© or intentional deceit.

Take, for example, politics.

Simply by reading its name, one would assume that the Republican Party would be a group of people who seek to defend, uphold, and promote the Republic. Instead, the leadership of this group has brought us rapidly into a socialist dictatorship. The party who claims to represent our Republic is sweeping it under the rug with the chunk of the Constitution that stands in their way.

The Democratic Party has started out on the wrong foot since we don’t have a democracy, contrary to popular belief. But as our nation’s leaders have steered us away from the Constitutional Republic to a tyrannical democracy where the majority rules regardless of divine law, this party has done its fair share of work in destroying democracy. Part of democracy is allowing your constituents the free speech they so divinely inherited, not creating for your first piece of legislation in a new session of Congress a bill that would destroy free speech and supplant basic democratic principles.

As a third and final example, look at the “Federal” Reserve. The name might suggest to the ignorant American an association with and oversight by the federal government. However, this unconstitutional organization is a private bank owned largely by foreign interests. Our nation is heavily in debt to international bankers that are anything but federal. This entity’s name, probably unlike the previous two mentioned, was a creation of intentional duplicity. As Michael Ruppert says in Freedom to Fascism, “The Federal Reserve is no more federal than Federal Express”.

Since there are and will be sheep in wolves clothing (taking upon themselves a name so as to infiltrate and destroy from within), we are to judge a person or organization by its fruits.

The fruit of the Republic Party shows that they do not support the Republic.
The fruit of the Democratic Party shows that they do not support democracy.
The fruit of the Federal Reserve shows *oh so clearly* that it is not a federal institute in the slightest, and is destroying our economy and nation.

Epithets are very destructive when used for deceit and illusion. They lead the unsuspecting ignoramus down a path of misinformation and chicanery which are difficult to combat. As Charles Caleb Colton once said,

Malinformation is more hopeless than noninformation; for error is always more busy than ignorance. Ignorance is a blank sheet, on which we may write; but error is a scribbled one, from which we must first erase. (Source: unknown)

Read quotes about “politics” on

Did you enjoy this article? Read Latter-day Liberty!

***************

4 comments so far. Care to chime in?

Here’s a few more:

government assistance
government initiative
federal budget
congressional action
congressional oversight
department of the interior
military intelligence
political science
politically correct
public education (that’s for you, Connor)
representative democracy
united nations

:)

#1 John David Anderson | February 2nd, 2007 10:46 AM

I like that last quote! It’s so true! :)

#2 -Nash | February 2nd, 2007 7:25 PM

Or are you an introverted extrovert? Maybe you’re an introvert who can do extrovert.

I hate that ‘we don’t live in a democracy’ meme, btw. I read your link — so what if the word ‘democracy’ was never used in the Constitution or the Dec of Ind? You can describe something without using the word. Haven’t you ever played ‘Taboo’?

While I’m having a grizzle: You might want to provide more justification that Democrats do not support democracy. Right now, your evidence is that they pass legislation that pays for things the John Birch Society doesn’t like.

One day we have to sit down and discuss evidence and finding good sources. They covered it in general ed, but you may have forgotten.

Did you see that? I just referenced three other threads in this comment. Go for four! Um…

Look out, everyone! Communists!

#3 fontor | February 5th, 2007 2:37 AM

…so what if the word ‘democracy’ was never used in the Constitution or the Dec of Ind? You can describe something without using the word.

The founding documents doesn’t reference describe a dictatorship, socialist welfare state, communist regime, or papal theocracy, either. They describe a Republic, exactly as they specify. The Founding Fathers were explicit in describing what type of government they were establishing. Should they have wanted a democracy, they would have said so. They didn’t. They knew full well from their extensive study of other governments and the annals of history that governments can be overrun by the tyranny of the majority.

Shocking that that’s exactly what is going on today…

You might want to provide more justification that Democrats do not support democracy.

Does one example not suffice? Perhaps another?

The Democratic Party core of support comes from just a few groups, such as union workers, especially government union workers, trial lawyers, and those who receive government assistance. These groups have something in common – they all rely on the threat of government violence for their sustenance. In other words, the Democratic Party is the party of the thieves and parasites.

Socialist robber is hardly the hallmark of a strong democracy.

One day we have to sit down and discuss evidence and finding good sources.

Good sources and ones you don’t disagree with are two separate things. :)