“When words lose their meaning, people lose their liberty” – Confucius
The political left wing have always been masters of language abuse.
They take a word with an emotional response like “poverty” which conjures up mental images of starving children in Africa and re-define it into things like fuel poverty and child poverty which have nothing to do with what the rest of us think of as poverty, but are in fact labels given to promote their egalitarian agenda. (Follow the links above for a detailed destruction of their two types of “poverty”).
Everyone wants to avoid real poverty so people get sucked into supporting legislation that is aimed at egalitarianism and not poverty alleviation in any sense that they understand it
The health Nazis have adopted this tactic with the term “Binge Drinking”.
When the average person thinks of binge drinking, they conjure up mental images of drunken teenagers, falling over in the street, vomiting on the pavement, shouting, swearing, fighting and causing a general nuisance to people living near by.
Nobody wants to suffer, or see their neighbours suffer, with this kind of public nuisance, so everyone is against this sort of “binge drinking”.
This where the health Nazis jump in. Since nobody has formally defined “binge drinking” they announce that binge drinking is to be defined as drinking double the recommended daily alcohol unit intake. Since most people don’t have a clue what alcohol units are, or what the daily recommended amounts are they just assume that this definition simply quantifies what they think of as binge drinking.
With this clever slight of hand they have converted everyone who is against drunken noisy teenagers, fighting and vomiting in the street into being against drinking more than twice the recommended daily alcohol unit intake.
The health nazis then proclaim that legislation must be passed to stamp out the “widespread problem” of binge drinking, such as setting minimum alcohol pricing levels. The unthinking sheeple are tricked into using their desire to stamp out anti-social drunken loutishness, into supporting this.
If they took the time to stop to think they would realise that someone who simply drinks twice the daily recommended alcohol units is not what they mean when they use the term binge drinker. By the crazy health nazi definition:
- The Queen is a binge drinker.
- A couple who share a bottle of wine over a meal are binge drinkers (Well, the woman certainly is, the man might need to have a brandy with his coffee to qualify)
How many people would support legislation designed to solve the “widespread problem” of couples sharing a bottle of wine over dinner or to stem the binge drinking of people like the queen?
Those with a more libertarian view might even go so far as to suggest that adults have the right to choose for themselves whether they think the health risks in sharing a bottle of wine are outweighed by the pleasure they get from drinking it.