One of the most critical parts of controlling a populace is controlling their information; ensuring that you control everything they see, hear and read. I’m sure you can think of several countries’ governments doing this, through blocking large portions of the internet or even criminalizing thoughts and writings that go outside of the allowed regime-speak.

If you can’t control what information the people have access to completely or nearly so, the next best thing is to ensure that you control the narrative, while minimizing any other influences as much as possible and still maintain a facade of free speech and liberty. This is done by engaging in massive info/disinfo operations using sock puppets, media, entertainment, education, and even product advertising. Meanwhile, you must also discredit or even simply delete information that threatens the narrative. It’s not criminal to disagree in this scenario–yet–but it’s getting there. One example is the recent brouhaha over Laura Ingalls Wilder’s work. Her Ma and Pa hated Indians, you see, and suddenly regardless of historical context, greater use, or anything else, her work must be demonized. It’s happening with more and more frequency. No matter what you may think about freedom of speech in the United States, book banning is hardly a new idea. It’s been going on for many years. Interestingly enough, books that were once banned for explicit sexual content, such as Moll Flanders or Tropic of Cancer are no longer banned; the Little House on the Prairie series, however, seems well on its way to being removed from libraries and schools.

Ol’ Remus over at The Woodpile Report has an interesting list of words and phrases in his sidebar, titled “Regime-Speak.” If you haven’t made his reports a part of your reading routine, you need to–but when you go over there, take a look at the list. They’re words and phrases that are often used as part of the above mentioned efforts to control narrative and information flow.

As Remus says, if you see these terms, you’re about to be lied to (or steered/manipulated, etc.) — and these are just a few off the list.

a new study shows — How many times have you heard this phrase? It’s often used to introduce the new planned direction for the populace in some area. “A new study shows that _______ can lead to _________.” The media trumpets the ‘new study,’ and while most Americans don’t go read the study–and wouldn’t know how to prove it wrong if they did–they do go out and purchase/do/get rid of whatever they’ve just been told is bad/good. Certain companies benefit, certain industries see a drop, and the puppetmasters continue doing their thing.

are speaking out — The verbiage here by default signifies that the people speaking are somehow being victimized. You will almost never see this phrase used to describe white, Christian, pro-life men, for example. You will see it constantly applied by the media, however, to LGBT groups, progressive causes, and anyone who’s been ‘oppressed’ by the white, Christian, pro-life men.

at-risk communities — At risk for what, exactly? And what constitutes an ‘at-risk’ community? The beauty of the term is that it takes multiple pages to define, and not all agencies, levels of government, or even industries define it the same way. That means it can be defined on the spot to mean whatever they want it to mean. Depending on the context, it could mean the elderly, but it could also mean gang members on the streets. Guess what it doesn’t mean?

best practices — this really means “the way we want you to do it right now.” It uses a superlative for positive spin but in reality it’s just another word for “the only real accepted way to do something.” Ask any member of the corporate jungle how many times they’ve heard the term applied to the new and improved way of doing things.

commonsense solutions –This one is fairly obvious. Used a great deal in discussions (I use the term loosely) on disarming the citizens, the insinuation is simple yet subtle. “If you do not agree with this, you have no common sense…so you are stupid…and should not have a say at all.” See how fast we got there?

denier — The word “denier” literally means “one who denies.” Innocent men are deniers. The connotation this word is always used with means “one who denies but is wrong for doing so, and guilty.”  They reserve that term for people who do not believe the given narrative, and who refuse to parrot what they are told. It’s currently being used to demonize those who aren’t on board with the climate change agenda.

disproportionately — Always used to mean “unfairly.” If something is being characterized as unfair to key demographics, it will be called “disproportionate.” The insinuation, of course, is that it should be proportionate and everyone should have/get/be given the same amount of everything. Most recently, it’s used to justify giving MORE of something to the “at-risk communities” and any demographic that is not white, Christian, pro-life men.

Those are only a few of the terms Remus has listed. When you get a moment, go over there and look at the whole list. Think through what each phrase is, what it says, and what it’s doing when it’s used. Why is it being used? Once you’re familiar with the terms, and understand their purpose, you’ll see them everywhere. The difference is, you’ll also recognize what they’re being used for, and you can start parsing out the truth.

Liked it? Take a second to support us on Patreon!