Skip to content
TERMS THAT WOULD MAKE KINK LOOK INNOCENT
by Kakajan Haytlyyev
Sometimes you cannot help it but wonder how all these funny terms find their way to our day-to-day language? I am very curious to know who is that person who came up with some of those terms, which we use in our conversations on daily basis.
What if it was not just one person but two or three friends, who probably have had a small talk and accidentally discovered this magical combination of very few words that would symbolise either someone or something that we all know. Or it would describe the entire group of people or events that would cause a political, economic, or social shift of colossal scale.
The combination of two or more words that would immediately provide all of us with absolute clarity on the subject matter, irrespective of our citizenship
What if none of those world-famous terms has anything to do with ordinary people who were lucky enough to have a eureka moment and made our language a bit richer? What if it is an outcome of a team (or teams) of highly trained experts who are paid to ensure that new terminology is constantly injected into our language. Most probably we would never know whether it is a creation of experts or not, even if it is true.
It is safe to use the word “never”, despite the visionary lyrics of the song by Justin Bibber, who is obviously will never be exhausted under the heavy weight of intellect. We may never know the truth because our societies do have several secrets, which are more difficult to unlock than to finally find the answer to the ultimate question – why we are here?
It is what it is. And even if there is not answer, it kind of adds some mystical charm to so elegantly camouflaged pathetic crimes. It also does not stop us to wonder and continue our endless and, often fruitless search for answers. In addition, it helps us to maintain a conversation with someone we would wish to avoid. In extreme case, it even helps to run the entire business.
For instance, some smart people organise conferences on forever critical issues related to UFO or, perhaps, “Who killed Kennedy”. Not so smart people attend those conferences and, by doing so, perform a good deed, and help the smart people to generate good money as well as make their personal contribution to assist the government in its tireless efforts to reduce unemployment.
In short, it keeps all or most of us busy, so be it.
However, unlike some historic events which remain unsolved, the terms politicians use might not be harmless. My suspicion derives from the fact that the new terms are being introduced to us with increasing frequency. Some of them suggest that they do carry a specific and almost invisible connotation that somewhat impacts our way of thinking and interpreting past or current events without us even realising it.
Here are few examples.
What does this mean, “Refugees Crises”? First, these two words are mutually exclusive. There is no such thing like “Refugees Crises”, simply because refugees are because of the crises.
This category of people is a direct product of some events which caused a devastating chain reaction and endangered lives of these people. In an instance, lives of millions of people changed dramatically. I would imagine, they have been thrown into a state of shock as their eyes vividly observed streams of live images which would be very appropriate to describe Hell or endless episodes of a Hollywood horror movie, which is so scary that it would guarantee an Oscar.
Unfortunately for them, it was not a live broadcast of military conflict by CNN or BBC, and it also had nothing to do with Hollywood. These life-threatening circumstances forced people to grab their children and run for their lives leaving behind everything they earned.
Every time I watch reports from Syria or Iraq, or Afghanistan, I still have difficulty in appreciating the scale and depth of the horror these people must face every day. I am still unable to comprehend the level of disparity and sense of total lack of justice and humanity that now are new norms for them.
In addition, these people are no longer called people by international media, because now they must carry the assigned label that says “refugees”. It was done because highly civilised international society had to separate them from the rest of “people” due to a very inconvenient number of arriving “refugees”.
For legal and humanitarian purposes this term is necessary because it helps “to speak the same language” or “be on the same page” for government and non-government organisations that deal with these issues. Having said that, I noticed that the term somehow is overused, or should I say abused, because when you repeat “refugees” many times somehow it transforms in your head as “not us”, “not one of us” or “someone we don’t want to see”. Isn’t this ironic, that once the word “people” replaced with so neutral and abstract word “refugees” it took away the sense of urgency to help these people.
Since it is not that urgent, EU closed its borders and no one said that it is a material breach of the international law. Why do I think so? Because EU members as many other countries are a signatory to many conventions and other important documents that constitute international law.
I do not think that all international conventions on human rights and refugees, including, but not limited to, other related documents and international treaties as well as provisions of the national legislation do indicate that any country that signed those documents is at liberty to decide, at its sole discretion, to be in breach of its obligation with respect to all of the above as long as the crowd of desperately needed help people exceeds a certain number, which shall be either agreed by all parties involved, or be decided by any country individually by simply looking at the window to evaluate the number of strange-looking “refugees” in order to assess whether it is still ok or damaging.
Instead of closing borders, they had to open a discussion which would address one very important issue: what is the extent of EU’s liability for starting the illegal war which triggered a domino effect and led to the destabilisation of the entire region. Instead of making the irrational and unjust decision to lock their borders, why they have never thought about locking up Tony Blair for his crimes against humanity?
Why these people who still do not have any answers to what happened that left them with no choice but to run? How come these people shall suffer twice with no good reason? Why those who forced these huge number of civilians out of their houses and now denied them from having basic human rights are doing just fine?
I cannot even begin to think how unbelievably painful it must have been for them to know that although they are still capable of having physiological capacities – senses of sight, hearing, taste, and touch – emotionally, however, death with hideous delight has almost finished eating away their souls and future, as they helplessly watched.
How to measure the enormous depth of sorrow which constantly continues to grow with every bit of clarity that their lives – the priceless gift – were used as a feedstock to produce the required outcome for those who somehow feel that they don’t have enough of things.
So, whoever it was, a person, group of friends or a team of highly experienced specialists, I wonder what was the reason that caused terminal sickness of their mind and lead to the creation of such senseless term as “Refugees Crises”. What is the core reason which is so important that it cannot be completely explained and, therefore, is presented to the public under tells-nothing-templates – “National Security” or “Spread of Democracy”.
In my opinion, the scale of the hypocrisy of this often-used phrase about “democracy” beyond believes. To me, it sounds scarier than spreading STD. After watching so many reports on Syria or any other country that share the same fate, I think that given a choice, I would honestly opt for STD and maybe I would even request a double dose of it, just to ensure that I am safe. I would imagine that Kiss of Death would seem like a pleasure as compared to the “democracy”, so aggressively promoted by those shameless liars.
that scares lots of things out of everybody
I do not know for sure, but it seems like the western governments have realised that they completely devalued the very meaning of the word “democracy”, and, therefore, they decided to replace it with another term. I can only assume that “leaders of free world” had many sleepless nights, whereby many brainstorm sessions were conducted to create a new cover for their next game of greed.
I guess, they were a bit worried that the replacement might not be found. They know that without the replacement it might not be possible to satisfy their addiction to go around the world and cause destruction? And, without destruction, it may not be possible for them to maintain self-assigned and fake titles of “Great Nation”, “First World”, “Free World”, etc.
Eventually, they found the solution and decided to use the name of the best season of the year. This choice for the replacement has sealed the faith of several Arab countries. They have made an exceptionally cruel choice because Spring is such a wonderful time of the year.
Spring is my favourite season. After long and not so friendly winter with its low hanging, depressingly grey and heavy clouds, nature wakes up and fills people’s soul with something magical. Irritating clouds disappear, making the sky taller and brighter, days become warmer and longer, trees transform from the lifeless wood into something beautiful, and the entire world seems about to announce that many warm and happy days are ahead.
Somehow winter clouds always reminded me of uninvited guests who have announced themselves in a very bossy fashion by insistently knocking your door, although it would be easier just to ring the bell. They just decided to show up at your door and you know that they are unlikely to go away soon. Therefore, for me, spring is always a good reminder that even the most hopeless days would come to the end.
If it could only be the same when we talk about political seasons. Unfortunately, the recent events have demonstrated that unlike in nature, political seasons are not well organised and somehow deliver quite opposite result. For example, natural spring is considered as a new beginning that brings new life and triggers some feelings which are completely irrational. These feelings make a person to want to lose his or her freedom and would genuinely consider themselves as truly happy ones (many will regret it later, but usually we don’t talk about it)
On the other hand, political spring has nothing to do with any of the above. It kills, destructs and instead of giving hope for better future and a chance to experience the magic of love, it takes away the future, together with love and magic, and replaces it with hate, hopelessness, and endless chaos.
Unlike in the case of natural spring, the good times of summer do not follow political spring. Instead, after few horrifying days or weeks of political spring comes political winter. If we compare negative air temperature which people mostly experience during the natural winter season, it would never match the level of cold that political winter would bring. It is so unforgiving because it feeds from the destruction which political spring has delivered. No warm clothes would help. The cold temperature of this type of winter would freeze not water, but people’s soul and believe in justice.
I must say that political seasons do have one similarity with nature. Just like global warming, political seasons are also man-made. Ironically, the same and only similarity contains one controversial aspect. Global warming is a result of burning fossil fuel which was necessary for humans to evolve. Technology that helped to refine crude oil lead to a dramatic improvement in the standards of living.
Political seasons, on the other hand, are the result of greed, which is one of the most primitive human instincts and has nothing to do with evolution.
Cynical Nature of Terms
Somehow, politicians choose very positive words to ensure that the public is solidly confused and ability to think totally disabled. That is why they must choose something very inspiring and stimulating to formally name their despicable crimes against humanity. Since I know that they will not stop and shock us with other conflicts soon, I would like to propose to them to start thinking outside of the box and choose a term “Viagra with 20% added Digestive Marijuana” – there is no such thing, but it sounds like inspiring and stimulating. Besides, it sounds appropriate if we consider Yellow Nightmare who is now the President of the United States.
I am not sure whether it will be the name for the next crime, most likely not. What I know there will be a war that would be named as something which brings peace and stability. For instance, the atomic bomb that was dropped by the United States on Japanese City of Hiroshima in October 1945, they named “Little Boy”. That “Little Boy” killed more than one hundred and forty thousand people, mostly civilians. Much more had to die by slow and very painful death due to radiation.
I wonder, what would be the reaction of people if we could have a lengthy documentary with the same number of episodes equal to that of the average reality show, broadcasted by all mainstream media channels during the prime time to show in graphic details people’s suffering because of that “Little Boy”. I would think that shortly after the premiere, many would never want to have children and those who already have them most probably would opt to send them for adoption as they would hate children.
Another example is the name that was selected for 2003 invasion of Iraq. It was called “Operation Iraqi Liberation” (talking about uninvited guests). First, at the time of the invasion, Iraq was sovereign, independent country and equal member of the United Nations. It did not need liberation. Second, since when the occupation is considered as liberation? I guess politicians really believe that we all are simply stupid.
Why it is acceptable and considered as reasonable measures when the western governments as and when they like, twist the truth, openly commit a crime by invading a sovereign state, breach international law in many ways, including use of torture and killing prisoners of war, in addition to the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent people and yet, manage to get away with it. Besides, while they are getting away with it, they loudly, shamelessly, and so cynically call themselves as “Leaders of the Free World”?
In my opinion, the decision to select such name for the illegal war is a single, compact, and yet so powerful and clear term that illustrates in X-ray vision the actual, unmasked face of that criminally free world. I also suspect that the original idea to give a good name to the evil belongs to Dick Chaney. My theory does make sense as only a person who believes that waterboarding and other tortures are effective, could come up with it.
I also think that it is possible that parents of Dick Cheney were visionary people because when he was born, they looked at him and realised that they have just given birth to a monster. That is why they named him “Dick” (he really is, and the shape of his head vividly confirms it). It would be funny as a joke if only we could ignore the reality which continuously produces the range of solid and shocking evidence on the daily basis that proofs the true nature of such “liberation”.
I guess one way to make sure that people like DICK are treated appropriately with well-deserved entitlement to enjoy the spotlight, is this. Those of us who are still able to think shall pay attention to these terms that pop-up time to time the moment a new crime is committed. We must be able to understand the difference between the innocence of the original meaning of the words used and actions of those in power that demonstrate something completely opposite. We need to learn how to correlate and establish the link between these two.
I can only hope that these measures in combination with the knowledge of the law, may help to jail people like DICK. Otherwise, what kind of world are we going to let our children inherit if such dangerous creatures like DICK are not isolated?