Search Box

Tuesday, June 6, 2017


There are lots of translations from foreign languages available on the internet, but what's missing are translations from various fields. The fact is, what people in certain occupations say does not necessarily mean what it sounds like, once translated into honest English.

For instance, you'll occasionally hear the following in actor-speak: "To prepare for this role, I went on a really strict training regimen. I worked out four hours a day -- lifting, running, boxing, and calisthenics. I cut down on my carbs, eliminated sugar, and ate lots of protein. That's what allowed me to put on 40 pounds of lean muscle in three months." That translates, of course, as "I took steroids."

Likewise, when you hear, in Wall Street-speak that a certain trader is "a financial wizard with an uncanny ability to sense when companies are about to be taken over," that usually means, "He's an insider trader."

A few examples of liberalese:

"Junk science," "Discredited theories," "hate speech."
Translation: "Facts that don't fit with our narrative."

Translation: "One who acknowledges those facts."

"A hater."
Translation: "Anyone who's honest."

"A settled science."
Translation: "I don't like hearing contradictory statistics."

"We really have to cut down on carbon emissions, which means shared sacrifice."
Translation: "The common people have to cut back on their lifestyles while I fly around on a private jets and hobnob on yachts."

"Climate change-denier."
Translation: "The moral equivalent of a Holocaust denier!"

"We are a nation of immigrants."
Translation: "Immigrants are far more likely to vote Democratic, and we want those votes. Anyway, my top donors want the cheap labor."

"Equal pay for equal work."
Translation: "Equal pay for unequal work."

"They're waging a war on women."
Translation: "We're waging a war on them."

"The fringe right."
Translation: "The half of the country that elected Trump."

"We need more bipartisanship."
Translation: "The other side needs to see things our way."

"Anonymous source."
Translation: "My imagination."

Translation: "Whenever the other side criticizes."

"Our diversity is our strength."
Translation: "Just go back to sleep."

"The right side of history."
Translation: "The Left side of history."

"That's not who we are."
Translation: "You really should try to be more like me, because I'm perfect."

"The long sweep of America has been defined by forward motion, a constant widening of our founding creed to embrace all and not just some."
"We should ignore the Constitution whenever doing so leads to equality of results rather than equality of opportunity."


Anonymous said...

Political correctness, I googled that word to see what it originally meant.
It was used in the 40s to refer to obedience to a particular party's manifesto or creed. Such as Stalinism.

It gained a new meaning in the 70s among the New Left.

The big difference is these were leftists but not "leftists". They were modernists or pre-modernists. Marxism is a rationally laid out manifesto, a belief in communism through revolution and other steps. The leftists at the time were wrong. "Leftists" nowadays are not even wrong.

About pre-, regular, and post-modernism:

Looking at three, I have a cafeteria attitude towards them:

I believe some laws or rules governing man have already existed and should be treated as natural and don't have to be rebranded like the pre-modernists do, but I am not religious and there is such a thing as new ideas being superior to old. I believe humans naturally have some shitty nature in us when we are born, but I don't believe it is a thing like original sin. We are born with shitty instincts and habits that cause us to do crappy things but without some hereditary supernatural sin gene, the Jews, Muslims, and Eastern orthodox Church believe this unlike most Christian denominations.

I believe in individualism, trying to further advance and evolve our society to something more perfect like modernists, but I don't think there will be an end of history or we will reach a singularity soon. Stuff will always happen, progress can't be forced into being linear, the world is chaotic and unpredictable, we can only guide society. Attempts to control it directly lead to dictatorship. Being too rational can make a person boring and not everything can be figured out with pure logic or needs to be if they are self evidently true. And not everything is deterministic: time, chance, exceptions, and blunders happens.

I believe in questioning how much is manmade and believe not everything is genetic nor is everything deterministic like the post-modernists, and I do believe moral relativism in the descriptive sense, it simply is, but that doesn't mean it should be that way like the prescriptive sense, and we shouldn't do nothing about backward cultural ideas, nor throw out nature,disregard genetics, or predicable patterns in society just because nurture also exists.

The problem with post modernism is that it has been embraced with a fervor we have never seen before. If it were modernism right now with the same fervor, we would be complaining of something besides SJWs. Some post-modern work like Game of Thrones is good, but then we have the SJW pandering shows or works that always include a dozen LGBT characters, includes someone with autism, I played a sci fi, game, there was an autistic character, I thought "Really? Its the year 2200, there is no cancer, heart disease, alzheimers, down syndrome, other mental illnesses, humans live to 150 but there is an autistic character?" That game has a character who smoked constantly, like 100 cigarettes a day but was perfectly healthy because of futuristic medicine, but they can't even do something about autism? Not even treat it with medicine to make it more manageable?

I like the area of Epigenetics, its not understood so well, but can explain the workings of nature and nurture. Adopted black children may have lower IQs than white children, but they have higher ones than non-adopted. Genes are the bullets, the gun sometimes misfires accidentally since the bullet is really crappy, but environmental effects on a person, their parents, or even grandparents influence how many times the trigger is pulled, i.e the severity or risk.

A person could have the genes for a super genius IQ , but lets say he is abandoned and raised by wolves, he becomes feral and retarded. Bullets are there but the trigger is never pulled.

But back to the point, where do you find yourself with the pre, regular, and post-modern framework?


John Craig said...

Ga --
Judging from that chart you linked, I'm definitely a modernist. Pre- is all about religious dogma, and post- is all about silly political correctness.

Anonymous said...

"Conventionally attractive"
Translation: attractive, as opposed to those who want to pretend they are attractive (outside of 'oppressive Western media beauty standards')

John Craig said...

Anon --

Anonymous said...

"Everyone is beautiful in their own way"

Translation : we can no longer make fun of your appearance so we will lie and tell you it is lovely

John Craig said...

Anon --
That one I have a little more sympathy for. There's no harm in telling an unattractive girl she's attractive.

I wouldn't put little white lies in the same category as the other, Big Lies that the Left promotes.

Anonymous said...

I do have mostly modernist leanings too but pick and choose things from the others like a cafeteria. The chart was mostly for ideology, what about non-political matters?:

Premodernism: Michaelangelo, Renaissance paintings, Realistic portraits, Shakespeare,
Classic western films, old stuff, Lord of the Rings movies and books, Gk Chesterton, CS Lewis. Frankenstein novels. Thomas Hobbes also comes to mind (atheist dogma). People who talk about democracy or republics being flawed and we should have a philosopher king or benevolent monarch. Confucianism and old Chinese classics like Dreams of the Red Chamber.

Modernism: Van Gogh, James Joyce, Ernest Hemingway, Salvador Dali, classic cyberpunk like Blade Runner leans more here, All quiet on the western front, Django Reinhardt, Heart of Darkness (the original novel), The Great Gatsby, early Jazz music, Franz Kaftka, Fritz lang or any bizarre surreal movie made by a guy who smokes way too many cigarettes with a weird mustache. The Roaring Twenties was defined by modernism, modernism slowly died out after WW2.

Good and bad (Right after WW2 mainly and some modern works): Game of thrones by George RR Martin, Books by Murakami, Andy Warhol (at least he bothered painting stuff even if absurd), Metal Gear series, Hunger Games series. Post cyberpunk like Japanese Scifi anime Ghost in the Shell. David Bowie, Talking Heads, Michael Jackson, Meatloaf, the Rolling Stones, Beatles in later career. The Forgotten Soldier by Guy Sajer (ww2 eastern front). After world war two to the late 1960s was when this kind of post modernism dominated.

Not even bad or wrong, it's not anything! (Postmodernism closer to the present):
Literal buckets of maggots, feces, urine, and rotting flesh passed off as art. Everything Alex Jones says that has been going on that turns out to be true. Twilight. Anything on deviantart, wattpad, and 90% of everything on Adult Miley Cyrus, Lady Gaga (shame since she actually is a good singer I heard a video of her sing when was still Stefani Germanotta). Almost anything made by a movie director who is a drug addict, money fetishist, jerkass, and/or obese, without being that way before his career started. The turn of the 21st century was when the ball really got rolling.

Postmodernism, the shitty kind, is mostly favored by the left, but I can see some members of the right, the ultra-anarcho-capitalist/super libertarian/neoliberals are an equivalent. Everything is subjective, money is what matters, any progress will be decided by money not law, science, or reason.

Neoconservatives believe bringing democracy would fix the middle east or solve dictatorships. But the neoliberals believe flooding the world with business and money would solve terrorism, war, and tyranny because they would change their attention from terrorism or sharia to their own self interests outside the collective group. They would overthrow their dictators not for democracy only but to destroy his monopoly so they can reap their own bucks.

They want to get them hooked on a different less violent inducing drug. Maybe that isn't such a bad idea if done in a controlled way? But thinking it's super easy without any need for diplomacy is just naive, and sometimes people stupidly do care more about fame than comfort, power over other people even at the cost of self determination or private wealth, and culturally honorable but self defeating activities over self-interest. If you offered me 500 million dollars and the chance to a celebrity or famous person, and/or king of a country. I'd just take the half billion, I fear displays of power or fame, I want to die forgotten. If I was smart enough I may become a king, a benevolent one in my fantasy, but I have no political experience, and it may be too much a hassle: