No, you misunderstand me. When we define things purely objectively, especially language, then we are not dealing with reality. The meaning of words is inherently political, it is about power. This is obvious.
10 years ago, “woke” was a strictly leftist term. But the meaning has changed because of politics and power, it at least has a double meaning now. The fact is, reality isn’t purely objective, it is objective and subjective. Being overly objective is just as much an error as being overly subjective.
A relevant example is the history of Italy. Italy was divided until the risorgimento period in the 1800s. Previously it was all cut up into feudal city states that each had separate local dialects. It is a perfect study in how language and meaning spreads via political power. What is considered the Italian language is actually the Florentine dialect, since Florence served as the political capital of Italy after the unification. Political movements throughout this period focused on reactionary education to spread their political agendas. Millions of illiterate Italians were taught to read, write and speak the Florentine dialect.
Why do Americans speak English instead of Cherokee, Sioux, Catawba or Navajo? Domination and perpetuation of class interests embodied by settler colonists.
Its well understood that history is written by the winners, but the same is true for dictionaries.
I actually agree with you a lot more than a lot of the people arguing with and down voting you. If you look further down in the thread, where someone says that political rhetoric is more important than accuracy, I disagree with them. I am very concerned with keeping our analysis as close to real conditions as possible. But confusing reality with pure, static, positivist objectivity is just another form of idealism.
No, you misunderstand me. When we define things purely objectively, especially language, then we are not dealing with reality. The meaning of words is inherently political, it is about power. This is obvious.
10 years ago, “woke” was a strictly leftist term. But the meaning has changed because of politics and power, it at least has a double meaning now. The fact is, reality isn’t purely objective, it is objective and subjective. Being overly objective is just as much an error as being overly subjective.
A relevant example is the history of Italy. Italy was divided until the risorgimento period in the 1800s. Previously it was all cut up into feudal city states that each had separate local dialects. It is a perfect study in how language and meaning spreads via political power. What is considered the Italian language is actually the Florentine dialect, since Florence served as the political capital of Italy after the unification. Political movements throughout this period focused on reactionary education to spread their political agendas. Millions of illiterate Italians were taught to read, write and speak the Florentine dialect.
Why do Americans speak English instead of Cherokee, Sioux, Catawba or Navajo? Domination and perpetuation of class interests embodied by settler colonists.
Its well understood that history is written by the winners, but the same is true for dictionaries.
I actually agree with you a lot more than a lot of the people arguing with and down voting you. If you look further down in the thread, where someone says that political rhetoric is more important than accuracy, I disagree with them. I am very concerned with keeping our analysis as close to real conditions as possible. But confusing reality with pure, static, positivist objectivity is just another form of idealism.