USA - США - SAD

bela maca wrote:trol, hranjenje
upravo sam završila 1984, našla sam verziju gde je stiven fraj narator. cela knjiga je naravno jeziva, ali ono što mi je najužasnije bilo je stvaranje novogovora, ukidanje duplih značenja, ukidanja sinonima, antonima.
paće, kad vidim tvoju volju i uživanje u maltretiranju ljudi sa kojima sam biraš da deliš prostor i vreme tačno mogu da te zamislim kako približavaš kavez sa pacovima licu nekog nesrećnika koji je rekao pomešao kad si ti smatrao da treba pobrkao

Evo npr. šta je u svom "Rečniku savremenog srpskohrvatskog književnog jezika s jezičkim savetnikom" 1966. poznati srpski lingvista Miloš Moskovljević označio kao pogrešno ili nepoželjno:

asortiman - bolje je izbor
vežbati nešto - ne, nego vežbati se u nečemu
dati ispit - ne, nego položiti ispit
dobiti na težini - bolje je dobiti u težini
dodatni - ne, nego dopunski, naknadni
dozvola - bolje je dopuštenje
zadnji - samo u prostornom, ne u vremenskom značenju (iako je još 1951. istaknuti srpski lingvista Mihailo Stevanović vrlo detaljnom analizom pokazao da je ta zabrana besmislena i da su najbolji srpski pisci i prevodioci, poput Vuka Stefanovića, Isidore Sekulić i mnogih drugih, odvajkada koristili zadnji u vremenskom značenju: npr. zadnje vreme, zadnje reči i zadnji čas)
zakonitost - samo u značenju "postupanje po zakonu", ne i u značenju "zakon"
zaostavština - ne, nego ostavština
puška je zatajila - ne, puška je slagala ili puška nije opalila
zatezna kamata - ne, nego kamata na kamatu neplaćenu na vreme
zahvaliti za - ne, nego zahvaliti na
dati na znanje - ne, nego obavestiti
primiti na znanje - ne, nego uzeti na um
znaju da traju - ne, nego mogu da traju, dešava se da traju
navodno - ne, nego božem, tobož ili kažu
ogavan - bolje je gadan, mrzak
osvojiti nagradu - ne, nego zadobiti ili zaslužiti nagradu
razumeti se u muziku - ne, nego razumeti se u muzici (sic!)
redosled - ne, nego red ili niz
smer - ne, nego pravac
glumac snima film - ne, nego igra u filmu, jer snimati može samo filmski operator i režiser
spremati ispit - ne, nego spremati se za ispit
sprovesti - samo u značenju otpratiti (zatvorenika, mrtvaca), ne i u značenju izvršiti ili ostvariti
tu i tamo - ne, nego ovde-onde
usmeriti - ne, nego upraviti ili uputiti

Good job from @AOC making clear that the people who confronted her were far from leftists. pic.twitter.com/jLZ7PYHgMm

— Bhaskar Sunkara (@sunraysunray) October 18, 2022

zvezda je zivot wrote:

Good job from @AOC making clear that the people who confronted her were far from leftists. pic.twitter.com/jLZ7PYHgMm

— Bhaskar Sunkara (@sunraysunray) October 18, 2022

In a recent essay for Compact, Jon Askonas argues convincingly that the conservative project failed because “it didn’t take into account the revolutionary principle of technology, and its intrinsic connection to the telos of sheer profit.” Conservatives, he says, were too obsessed with “left-wing revolutionary politics” and missed the real threat, which was technological change so swift and powerful it fundamentally reordered society, swept tradition aside, and unleashed a moral relativism that rendered the conservative project obsolete.

So what kind of politics should conservatives today, as inheritors of a failed movement, adopt? For starters, they should stop thinking of themselves as conservatives (much less as Republicans) and start thinking of themselves as radicals, restorationists, and counterrevolutionaries. Indeed, that is what they are, whether they embrace those labels or not.

, there has been plenty of talk on the right lately about what should be done differently now. Some, such as Sohrab Ahmari, Gladden Pappin, and Adrian Vermeule (along with a larger cohort of conservative Catholic thinkers), advocate a conservatism that is comfortable with big government and in fact sees it as necessary not only for the common good but to tame what Ahmari recently called the “private tyranny” of woke corporations empowered by unrestrained market forces. 

Indeed, a willingness to embrace government power has been a topic of fruitful debate on the “New Right” in recent years, as it should be. However uncomfortable traditional “small-government” conservatives might be with Ahmari’s argument, it is more or less true.
Put bluntly, if conservatives want to save the country they are going to have to rebuild and in a sense re-found it, and that means getting used to the idea of wielding power, not despising it. Why? Because accommodation or compromise with the left is impossible.

The left will only stop when conservatives stop them, which means conservatives will have to discard outdated and irrelevant notions about “small government.” The government will have to become, in the hands of conservatives, an instrument of renewal in American life — and in some cases, a blunt instrument indeed.

To those who worry that power corrupts, and that once the right seizes power it too will be corrupted, they certainly have a point. If conservatives manage to save the country and rebuild our institutions, will they ever relinquish power and go the way of Cincinnatus? It is a fair question, and we should attend to it with care after we have won the war. 

For now, there are only two paths open to conservatives. Either they awake from decades of slumber to reclaim and re-found what has been lost, or they will watch our civilization die. There is no third road. 

Cousin Billy wrote:Možda bi neko rekao i da je posredi predlog da se ne-fašizam zameni fašizmom.