'eyup from Stoke

John Carter · 13-03-2005, 09:00 PM

Hmmm...
While this "Europe is still just a continent" terminology is understood by sensible people (i.e. you and I), I don't believe it's quite correct to be using it strictly in that sense when talking to the general public. You're effectively unifying "Europe" in the mind of the general public when what you probably want to be doing is separating the individual countries, disuniting them in the mind of the listener.

We have to remember that we're dealing with a general population who's going to be apathetic enough to vote Blair in for a third term and that they're used to hearing the terms that the three main parties use. You can't change the terminology from the currently accepted standard (i.e. Europe = EU) used by the opposition and expect the voters to "get it".

I mean, just go look at the draft constitution, page one... ..."Provisional consolidated version of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe". They're using the language, they're establishing it in the minds of the electorate. You can't undermine their plans by using a different definition set.

HQ may be technically right on this one, but I believe their linguistic definitions are lacking when it comes down to the psychological effectiveness of campaigning (eek - my first thread and I'm dissing HQ! Don't slap me too hard guys!). It may be honest, but is it effective? Surely it's better to not mention "Europe" at all, referring to the other member countries by their own names (i.e. France, Germany)? This is equally as honest but doesn't give weight to any kind of European unity which allows the opposition to hijack via psycho-linguistic programming.

Just my £0.02

Intbel · 13-03-2005, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Carter

They're using the language, they're establishing it in the minds of the electorate. You can't undermine their plans by using a different definition set.

How I have come to hate that non-word "Can't"

When folks introduce a new language with the intention of manipulating folks the best way to undermine that new language is to refuse to use it and to ensure others become aware of how their language (and thus their thinking) is being manipulated.

We CAN undermine it.

Anthony Butcher · 14-03-2005, 01:06 AM

Stick to your guns, and every time someone calls you anti-European, explain why that simply isn't the case. If it is someone who should know better, then you can accuse them of being deliberately deceitful.

We don't let Labour get away with calling us racist, so we shouldn't let them get away with calling us anti-European either!

Bluemerle · 14-03-2005, 08:56 AM

John is quite right about the Tories. They have been forbidden to discuss the EU in any meaningful way. Michael Howard has taken on the persona of Basil Fawlty DON't MENTION THE EU.

Intbel · 14-03-2005, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluemerle

John is quite right about the Tories. They have been forbidden to discuss the EU in any meaningful way. Michael Howard has taken on the persona of Basil Fawlty DON't MENTION THE EU.

In that case - every time you meet a Tory, discus the EU.

Bluemerle · 14-03-2005, 03:35 PM

I do, I bore them stiff, they agree, but still will not vote UKIP. Still pinning their hopes on Tories renegotiating the treaties. As someone said the other day "We will repeal the 1972 communities act, easy peasy"

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

13-03-2005, 09:00 PM	#21 (permalink)
John Carter Uber Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: On Sabbatical Posts: 5,110	Hmmm... While this "Europe is still just a continent" terminology is understood by sensible people (i.e. you and I), I don't believe it's quite correct to be using it strictly in that sense when talking to the general public. You're effectively unifying "Europe" in the mind of the general public when what you probably want to be doing is separating the individual countries, disuniting them in the mind of the listener. We have to remember that we're dealing with a general population who's going to be apathetic enough to vote Blair in for a third term and that they're used to hearing the terms that the three main parties use. You can't change the terminology from the currently accepted standard (i.e. Europe = EU) used by the opposition and expect the voters to "get it". I mean, just go look at the draft constitution, page one... ..."Provisional consolidated version of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe". They're using the language, they're establishing it in the minds of the electorate. You can't undermine their plans by using a different definition set. HQ may be technically right on this one, but I believe their linguistic definitions are lacking when it comes down to the psychological effectiveness of campaigning (eek - my first thread and I'm dissing HQ! Don't slap me too hard guys!). It may be honest, but is it effective? Surely it's better to not mention "Europe" at all, referring to the other member countries by their own names (i.e. France, Germany)? This is equally as honest but doesn't give weight to any kind of European unity which allows the opposition to hijack via psycho-linguistic programming. Just my £0.02

14-03-2005, 01:06 AM	#23 (permalink)
Anthony Butcher Administrator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Long Ashton, Bristol Posts: 10,192 Party: None	Stick to your guns, and every time someone calls you anti-European, explain why that simply isn't the case. If it is someone who should know better, then you can accuse them of being deliberately deceitful. We don't let Labour get away with calling us racist, so we shouldn't let them get away with calling us anti-European either!

14-03-2005, 08:56 AM	#24 (permalink)
Bluemerle Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Dorset. Posts: 3,252	John is quite right about the Tories. They have been forbidden to discuss the EU in any meaningful way. Michael Howard has taken on the persona of Basil Fawlty DON't MENTION THE EU.

14-03-2005, 03:35 PM	#26 (permalink)
Bluemerle Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Dorset. Posts: 3,252	I do, I bore them stiff, they agree, but still will not vote UKIP. Still pinning their hopes on Tories renegotiating the treaties. As someone said the other day "We will repeal the 1972 communities act, easy peasy"