Introduction:
This is the first of a series of posts in which I will examine pairs of words with markedly different meanings, but which many Americans use as if they were synonyms. Without a doubt, this conflation is due in part to intellectual laziness on the part of those who confuse the pair. However, having paid attention to American political discourse for many years, I have come to the conclusion that this erosion of concrete meaning in language is not accidental. It is the result of a calculation made by folks who use conflation to distort facts. They do this to promote their ideological agendas and line their pockets at the expense of those they are able to dupe into voting against their own best interests.
con•flate transitive verb \kən-ˈflāt\
Definition of CONFLATE
1 a : to bring together : fuse
b : confuse
2 : to combine (as two readings of a text) into a composite whole
Examples of CONFLATE
- be careful not to conflate gossip with real news
- the movie conflates documentary footage and dramatized reenactments so seamlessly and ingeniously that viewers may not know what is real and what is not
Origin of CONFLATE
Latin conflatus, past participle of conflare to blow together, fuse, from com- + flare to blow
Synonyms
confuse, confound, mistake, mix (up)
The conflation of these two words has long bothered me, especially as I've observed self-serving, self-righteous, self-declared "patriots" use it time and again to promote regressive tax policy, deny equality to minorities, and bamboozle Americans into voting against their own interests.
I didn't even have to write a new post to explore the subject. I went to my archives and found the framework for everything I wanted to say in a letter I had submitted to the editor of The Columbus Dispatch over twenty years ago.
I have made a few additions and modifications to the original, changing names and inserting phrases intended to clarify a point. These changes are in italics.
– September 18, 1993
I would point out that justice, not fairness, is at issue here. Although most people use these words interchangeably, they are not equivalent. King Solomon's renowned wisdom came from his knowing the difference between these ideas. He offered fairness when he said he would cut a baby in half to settle a dispute between two women, each claiming to be the baby's mother. He dispensed justice when he gave the whole baby to the real mother who - also knowing the difference between fairness and justice - had placed the welfare of her child above her right to a fair judgment.
Mr. Dough's desire for everyone to pay an equal tax percentage and his claim that "the Clinton administration and its Democratic colleagues utilized class envy to support their plan" demonstrates a basic lack of understanding of the reality of life in a society where "tax fairness" is confused with social justice.
If class envy exists in America, it is only because real children are allowed to lead fragmented lives so that wealth, the metaphorical child of economic success, may grow and prosper in the bank accounts of the rich at the expense of the less fortunate – all in the name of fairness.
There is one further difference often overlooked by those who confuse fairness with justice. Supporting a progressive income tax is not the same as agreeing with the priorities or the process used to distribute the collected funds - but that's another letter.
* * *
Fairness Isn’t JusticeThe conflation of these two words has long bothered me, especially as I've observed self-serving, self-righteous, self-declared "patriots" use it time and again to promote regressive tax policy, deny equality to minorities, and bamboozle Americans into voting against their own interests.
I didn't even have to write a new post to explore the subject. I went to my archives and found the framework for everything I wanted to say in a letter I had submitted to the editor of The Columbus Dispatch over twenty years ago.
I have made a few additions and modifications to the original, changing names and inserting phrases intended to clarify a point. These changes are in italics.
* * *
– September 18, 1993
Mr. John Dough (recent letter to the editor) cries foul over what an earlier letter writer called "tax fairness" in the recently passed federal budget. Dough then complains about a "class-envy campaign" to pass this budget and asks the question: "How is it fair that a 'rich person' pays 36 percent of his income to the government, while someone who earns less income pays a significantly lower percentage? To truly be fair, shouldn't everyone pay an equal percentage?"
I would point out that justice, not fairness, is at issue here. Although most people use these words interchangeably, they are not equivalent. King Solomon's renowned wisdom came from his knowing the difference between these ideas. He offered fairness when he said he would cut a baby in half to settle a dispute between two women, each claiming to be the baby's mother. He dispensed justice when he gave the whole baby to the real mother who - also knowing the difference between fairness and justice - had placed the welfare of her child above her right to a fair judgment.
Mr. Dough's desire for everyone to pay an equal tax percentage and his claim that "the Clinton administration and its Democratic colleagues utilized class envy to support their plan" demonstrates a basic lack of understanding of the reality of life in a society where "tax fairness" is confused with social justice.
If class envy exists in America, it is only because real children are allowed to lead fragmented lives so that wealth, the metaphorical child of economic success, may grow and prosper in the bank accounts of the rich at the expense of the less fortunate – all in the name of fairness.
There is one further difference often overlooked by those who confuse fairness with justice. Supporting a progressive income tax is not the same as agreeing with the priorities or the process used to distribute the collected funds - but that's another letter.
George A. Denino
Westerville
No comments:
Post a Comment