The Left – the bananarama sort anyway – are nominalists. Things are according to what they are named. A rose to them, by any other name, might be a sign of moral turpitude. Or it might be the new name we call those things formerly known as roses, but which are now called “pink exfoliated flower ovaries” on pain of apology and social exclusion.
I shall never forget a Canadian woman of this sort who corrected an American for calling them “Eskimos”. She said, with great kindness: “the preferred name we use in Canada is Inuit”. A smile of gladness spread across the face of the American leftie as she received the communion wafer of political correctness: she had a new stick with which to beat the politically incorrect back home.
So it is with the transition from “global warming” into “climate change”. Say “global warming” and you are actually referring to a real thing (or not); say “climate change” and , as well as showing yourself to be one of the enlightened, you have also escaped any pretence of holding a disprovable proposition. Heating up – climate change; cooling off- climate change.
The difference between weather and climate is whatever the Left says it is.
Thus this weekend’s comic pages had this gem from the usually astute Wiley:
“First of all,” says dad from the armchair, “the correct term is climate change, and the increasing severity of storms is all indicative of….”
“No preachy science junk on a Saturday, okay?”
Dad asks the well-behaved daughter: :How long is his anti-knowledge trend going to last?”
-“As long as there’s an Internet”.
The obvious implication, for the politically minded, is to regulate the Internet so that no facts contradictory to the dominant man-made global warming narrative are allowed.
Just you wait my friends, this is coming to us, and its backers will not be confined to the political Left, or the Muslims, though they will lead the way in being offended.
It will not be justified on the basis of science, or knowledge, because the proponents of this sort of repression are ignorant of science and lacking in knowledge. It will be justified on the basis that some narratives are just too insensitive to be tolerated.
Remember, the correct term is climate change. Correct as in 2+2-4? Ah no! Correct as in “in conformity with the latest emanation of the anti-church of political correctness”.
The one thing I will say in favour of Islam is that, in Islam, what is correct and incorrect does not shift weekly. It is ordained by God from the time of Mohammed’s revelations for evermore. That is why the cultural Left and Islam are on the same course, and will eventually converge. People of that sort, having developed no internal morality, and believing no internal morality is legitimate or possible, will seek certainty and permanence in Islam’s arbitrary rules about what is correct – or incorrect (haram).
In Islam they are neither Eskimos nor Inuit; they are only kuffar, and may be treated accordingly. Islam claims to be a simple and practical guide to all of life’s problems, and its unflinching, unyielding rules are intended to avoid precisely the moral confusion which freedom allows.
With Islam, the labels are attached by the culture/religion/society rather than by personal inclination, and they never change.
So when Islamic Dad says “the correct term” for this is that, he is backed up by an entire culture, society and legal system, by force of death, if necessary, administered by one’s male relatives to general applause.
It is a Leftist’s dream come true. Stay tuned folks, this is where we are heading.