These vacuous words can mean anything a Democrat wants them to mean

OPINION:

Jan. 6 has come and gone, and we need no longer be confused. Our wise and learned betters in the White House and the media have graciously reminded us that they are the final authority. They determine definitions. They decide what the words we use daily to define our laws, culture and freedoms mean. We no longer need to wonder what our overseers intend when they talk about such things.

Here is a glossary of terms for your convenience.

Is: Since the Clinton administration, this word has become an increasingly malleable word that can mean anything when used by anyone on the left to justify their immorality, maleficence or corruption. For example, when asking if former President Bill Clinton “is” a sexual predator or if President Biden “is” colluding with his corrupt son, we are told it all depends on what the “definition of is, is.”

Hope and change: These are vacuous terms that, since the rise of former President Barack Obama, can mean anything a Democratic administration wants them to mean. They are subjective concepts without any immutable definition that can be wielded to the advantage of those in political power. These words have proved very efficient weapons in the hands of demagogues and tyrants, especially when used in cooperation with a complicit media. For historical examples, see Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mussolini, Castro, Chavez, Robespierre and Hitler.

Angry mob: Any group of people that disagrees with the meaningless manipulation of words such as “hope and change” and “is” as described above.

Shrill voice: Any voice of opposition to the progressive establishment. For example, when former competitive swimmer Riley Gaines says that women’s athletics should be reserved for biological females, she is being shrill. But when her “trans women” (i.e., biologically male) detractors respond by calling her a misogynist for defending women’s athletics, their comments are not shrill but, rather, a righteous scolding of Ms. Gaines.

Disinformation: Any blog, news article, op-ed, speech, commercial, sermon or other form of communication that runs contrary to the agenda of the governing class who insist on telling us that men can get pregnant, mass inflation is good for the economy, the planet is dying, and 2 plus 2 equals 5.

Insurrection: Any unarmed protest led by a large number of American citizens who seek to redress suspected breaches in their state and national election laws.

Peaceful protest: Any and all violence that includes rioting, burning, looting, theft, and destruction of private property, as well as shutting down public parks, streets and highways for the political cause of the ruling class.

Security threat: All of those “right-wing extremists” who believe in securing our national borders, fighting for our national sovereignty, defending the lives of the unborn, preserving traditional standards of sexual morality, protecting parental rights, and upholding the rule of law as defined by the Constitution.

Does anyone except me hear the voice of George Orwell echoing through the halls of our culture? Words have consequences, and who gets to define them matters. Doesn’t it concern you that someone who proudly and myopically wears the label of the left is now declaring that those on the right are dangerous and extreme?

And what is a right-wing extremist? Is it that person who argues in the public square for lower taxes? How about the radical, closed-minded soul who dares to call for open debate on energy policy? Or maybe it’s the “deplorable” from flyover country who wants to go to church, raise a family and be left alone?

And by the way, what about those on the left? Is race-baiting and the fomenting of Black Lives Matter riots a security risk? How about nationalizing our economy at the height of the pandemic? Does that enhance or impede the security of our jobs? Does the neo-Marxism of critical theory compromise our freedom? Does sexual nihilism bring greater social, physical or economic security for women and children? How about the religious zeal of the Green New Deal? Does any of this enhance our national security?

A free society that sits on its hands and remains silent while watching “1984” unfold before its very eyes will surely not remain free for long. We have leaders who are hellbent on restructuring the sociopolitical context of our country and culture by lying to us about the basic use of language.

If we don’t reverse course in the coming election, millions will find we’re not nearly as free as we thought we were because we allowed Mr. Biden to tell us that “war is peace and freedom is slavery.”

• Everett Piper (dreverettpiper.com, @dreverettpiper), a columnist for The Washington Times, is a former university president and radio host.