Only slightly political: War on "war on"

[Liar]

I found this kinda interresting in the context of the power of words and how we define them.

If at least it had been a "war against terrorists". That would be semantically correct.

I think it's time to go to war on "war on [whatevah]". I especially dig the "War on Drugs", which must be just like a regular war, but high as a kite.


Edited to add: At least they could have called it The War Against Terrorism, so it'd have a kickass acronym.

-------------


'War On Terror' Row
Updated: 11:37, Monday April 16, 2007

Britain has decided to ban the term 'War on Terror' - sparking fears of a major row with the US.

The International Development Secretary will say the phrase has strengthened militant groups by giving them a shared identity.

Hilary Benn's speech is expected to anger the White House when he criticises President Bush's phrase.

He will stress the term makes terrorist groups feel that they are part of something "bigger".

Mr Benn will also urge world leaders to open dialogue with potential enemies rather than use military force.

President Bush championed the phrase 'War on Terror' shortly after the al Qaeda attacks on New York on September 11, 2001.

The Foreign Office called for it to be dropped in December last year but Washington stuck to its guns.

Mr Benn will say in his speech: "In the UK, we do not use the phrase 'War on Terror' because we can't win by military means alone, and because this isn't us against one organised enemy with a clear identity and a coherent set of objectives.

"It is the vast majority of the people in the world - of all nationalities and faiths - against a small number of loose, shifting and disparate groups.

"What these groups want is to force their individual and narrow values on others without dialogue, without debate, through violence. And by letting them feel part of something bigger, we give them strength."

It is thought his comments could help Mr Benn's standing among Labour backbenchers at a crucial time.

They are due to vote shortly on who should be the party's next deputy leader and President Bush has become a hate figure for many on the left

 

[Pure]

yep, most "wars on" are shams, that on drugs being the most notable example.

it a favorite Republican/rightwing/"family-values"-people thing. probably has its origins in Xtian militarist metaphors, like putting on the 'breastplate of righteousness' and singing 'onward Xtian soldiers.'

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

yep, most "wars on" are shams, that on drugs being the most notable example.

it a favorite Republican/rightwing/"family-values"-people thing. probably has its origins in Xtian militarist metaphors, like putting on the 'breastplate of righteousness' and singing 'onward Xtian soldiers.'

The Crusader mentality....even Ike fell prey to it....just read his 1952 acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention. I like Ike, too...but I think that the Crusader mentality is one of the luxuries for this country has proven more trouble than it's worth.

 

[TxRad]

Dating myself..... War on war is kind of like fucking for virginity......

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Good idea - I hereby enlist.

"it a favorite Republican/rightwing/"family-values"-people thing . . ."

Yeah, makes me think of the infamous right wing extremist LBJ, and his "war on poverty."

 

[Pure]

the phrase is not unknown to liberals (who like Xtian metapors, esp. in the present days of evangelical activism), nor was that said. i thought of your [rox's] example [war on poverty], but another reason for not mentioning it in a general statement is that it was real and may have accomplished something, at least short term.

it certainly beats anything coming from your [Rox's] side of the aisle in that period ('give them shovels and tell them to get off their butts.'

 

[rgraham666]

Giving shovels to people who have reason to hate you is not a good idea. You can do a lot of damage with a shovel.

I suppose you could post armed guards to keep the people with their new shovels in line. That's the usual adjunct to the 'give 'em shovels' policy.

 

[Pure]

yep.

 

[Sherry Hawk]

it certainly beats anything coming from your [Rox's] side of the aisle in that period ('give them shovels and tell them to get off their butts.'

you just made me waste a perfectly good mouthful of coffee.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

My personal favorite is the "War on Poverty" started some years ago. Interesting how the population below the poverty line increased faster after the war began than before there was a war.

Count me in.

 

[Pure]

Well, Jenny,
I'll take Krueger's assessment over your sources:

http://www.krueger.princeton.edu/01_08_2004.htm


//The trend is not the same for all groups. For the aged, the poverty rate fell from close to 30 percent in 1963 to 16.3 percent in 1973, then to 10.4 percent in 2002. The share of children in poverty fell from 23.1 to 14.4 percent in the first decade of the war on poverty, but increased to 16.7 percent over the next three decades. For blacks, the rate fell from more than 40 percent before the war on poverty to 31 percent in 1973, and was 24 percent in 2002, still disturbingly high but much lower than it had been.

The official definition of poverty is inadequate. It omits taxes and in-kind transfers; it pretends that the cost of living is the same in every state. Two of the most costly tools the government uses to fight poverty -- the earned-income tax credit and Medicaid -- are not even counted in the official statistics. Including these transfers would lower the proportion of people below the poverty threshold and hasten the decline in measured poverty in the 1990's. But the poverty line of $14,348 for a family of three is below what most Americans consider the minimum income required for a family to survive. Nonetheless, statistical adjustments are unlikely to change the perception that poverty fell rapidly in the 1960's, grew from 1973 to the early 1990's, and fell again in the 1990's. //



there is a neutral history at:

http://www.answers.com/topic/war-on-poverty

---
i'm aware that some conservative analysts claim the poor became worse off, but i suspect that's just a recycling of the basic axioms: "nothing done by governement can be beneficial to anyone," and "they [poor] can't be helped."

two points re krueger: i will agree that defining poverty, and hence its 'reduction' in rate is very murky territory. i also agree that the alleged 'drop' he mentions cannot be *proven* to be linked to any particular government measures.

---

IN ANY CASE: comparing ill effects of the 'war on drugs' with alleged ill or absent effects of the 'war on poverty' is like comparing apples and oranges; i find it totally unconvincing. Even assuming the war on poverty was just 'hot air,' your comparison ignores the massive social evils, and government corruptions attendant on the 'drug war.'

===
Jenny said,
My personal favorite is the "War on Poverty" started some years ago. Interesting how the population below the poverty line increased faster after the war began than before there was a war.

Count me in.

 

[Kev H]

I'm all for abolishing the word "war" altogether. Surely, that will make us better human beings, right?

 

[Pure]

more broadly, maybe we should just avoid talking about 'evil.'

 

[cloudy]

more broadly, maybe we should just avoid talking about 'evil.'

Some of us would have nothing to talk about if we did that.

 

[Guest]

Using "War on" allows the government to take steps they wouldn't dare take if they were just trying to curtail some undesirable act. The problem escalates when the government invoking "War on" fails to define what realistic conditions must be met for that war to end. The war then, by definition, never ends. That is too often, by design of the government.

People will always use illegal drugs. Even elephants learn what berries ferment in the sun and will give them a high when consumed. The War on Drugs will forever be funded and fought.

Terrorists will always exist. To some, George Washihgton was a terrorist.

What is the definition of terror anyway? If I creep up behind my wife in a dark room and yell boo, am I terrorizing her? She feels terrified for a moment. Then should incarcerating without habeas corpus continue as long as my wife is jumpy in a dark room?

 

[gauchecritic]

Some of us would have nothing to talk about if we did that.

He said 'evil, cloudy not ebil.

 

[N0madS0uL]

My personal favorite is the "War on Poverty" started some years ago.

Are you sure it isn't "Fight against poverty"?

 

[Liar]

Are you sure it isn't "Fight against poverty"?

Either way. Even "fight" suggest that the action taken must be destructive.

The new government here in Sweden is vowing to "fight unemplyment". They do it by attacking the unemployed w decreased social security and disability pensions. As iof unemployment was a disease that needs to be bled out. As if that will get the "lazy couch potatoes" to "grab a shovel and get to work".

The former goverment used the words "raising employment levels", and their policies reflected that. Support for unemployed so they could get education and a fair break while searching for a job. Now, this didn't succeed, because they were incompetent about it and the efforts got lost in regional politics squabble, but I do believe they had the heart in the right place.

If you use a destructive rhethoric, you can match it with destructive and confrontational leadership. If you use constructive rhethorics, the policies that follows will match that. There is more power in a methaphor than people think sometimes.

 

[rgraham666]

As iof unemployment was a disease that needs to be bled out. As if that will get the "lazy couch potatoes" to "grab a shovel and get to work".

My favourite author often remarks on the similarity between modern economics and medieval medicine. Especially the 'bleeding' part.

Much of our economic policy consist of opening veins and applying leeches. It works about as well as it did in medicine.

 

[Huckleman2000]

I think they should change 'war' to 'wild'. Then it could be a late-night TV show.

Wild On Terror
Wild On Drugs
Wild On Poverty
Wild On Rio

 

[Guest]

I think they should change 'war' to 'wild'. Then it could be a late-night TV show.

Wild On Terror
Wild On Drugs
Wild On Poverty
Wild On Rio

Only if there were topless babes.