#definition — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #definition, aggregated by home.social.
-
@mlanger @beyondmachines1 @LabSpokane That‘s true, a solution its owners are DESPERATELY looking for problems to capitalize. To be fair, this is only true for generative AI, i.e. large language models (LLMs). That‘s the slop-generators using up all of the computer centre capacity, energy and water and causing the current RAMocalypse. On the other hand, analytic AI is really useful in real-world and scientific applications, as it is a great pattern-recognizer (as are human brains) on very large datasets. Great stuff!
What I‘m trying to say is, „AI“ is a super useless term as it is used to describe completely different things: The current marketing-driven hype of AI is the bad one. When someone talks (correctly) about benefits of AI, it‘s the other meaning of the term.
#AI #definition #term #etymology #confusion bad #marketing -
@mlanger @beyondmachines1 @LabSpokane That‘s true, a solution its owners are DESPERATELY looking for problems to capitalize. To be fair, this is only true for generative AI, i.e. large language models (LLMs). That‘s the slop-generators using up all of the computer centre capacity, energy and water and causing the current RAMocalypse. On the other hand, analytic AI is really useful in real-world and scientific applications, as it is a great pattern-recognizer (as are human brains) on very large datasets. Great stuff!
What I‘m trying to say is, „AI“ is a super useless term as it is used to describe completely different things: The current marketing-driven hype of AI is the bad one. When someone talks (correctly) about benefits of AI, it‘s the other meaning of the term.
#AI #definition #term #etymology #confusion bad #marketing -
#brd #israel #palästina : #staatsräson / #antisemitismus / #definition / #ihra / #stadt / #berlin / #autoritarismus
„Berlin: Das Bezirksamt Neukölln führt die prozionistische #Antisemitismusdefinition der IHRA bei der Mittelvergabe an Projekte ein“
Siehe auch:
„WER DEFINIERT, WAS ANTISEMITISMUS IST?“
https://merkur-zeitschrift.de/artikel/wer-definiert-was-antisemitismus-ist-a-mr-79-2-47/ -
What’s an unconference?
I’m facilitating two unconferences in the next six weeks, one for the Global Entrepreneurship Network NZ, and the other for Re:Shape. They’re going to be epic events. But what is an unconference? An unconference is a dynamic, participant-driven gathering where the traditional event hierarchy is flipped. There are no pre-planned agendas, rigid keynotes, or passive…
https://dave.moskovitz.co.nz/2026/07/31/whats-an-unconference/
#unconference #GENNZ #Reshape #definition -
What’s an unconference?
I’m facilitating two unconferences in the next six weeks, one for the Global Entrepreneurship Network NZ, and the other for Re:Shape. They’re going to be epic events. But what is an unconference? An unconference is a dynamic, participant-driven gathering where the traditional event hierarchy is flipped. There are no pre-planned agendas, rigid keynotes, or passive…
https://dave.moskovitz.co.nz/2026/07/31/whats-an-unconference/
#unconference #GENNZ #Reshape #definition -
"Intentions don't matter" is a pet-peeve of mine.
One understandable reason for saying it is if you mean "intentions" only in a very surface way -- like "the outcome you would prefer" rather than "the outcome you are working diligently to achieve"
To me, though, wanting an outcome without taking care to make it actually likely to happen is not an "intention" but a "wish".
"Intention", in my vocabulary, requires active care. You can't say you "intend" something if you just sit back and hope it happens, and never change your behavior when it doesn't.
It does not, however, require success. You can intend something and still fail at it.
The question of whether you let the failure happen or actively work to succeed next time, therefore, matters.
-
"Intentions don't matter" is a pet-peeve of mine.
One understandable reason for saying it is if you mean "intentions" only in a very surface way -- like "the outcome you would prefer" rather than "the outcome you are working diligently to achieve"
To me, though, wanting an outcome without taking care to make it actually likely to happen is not an "intention" but a "wish".
"Intention", in my vocabulary, requires active care. You can't say you "intend" something if you just sit back and hope it happens, and never change your behavior when it doesn't.
It does not, however, require success. You can intend something and still fail at it.
The question of whether you let the failure happen or actively work to succeed next time, therefore, matters.
-
Dream Warriors - My Definition of a Boombastic Jazz Style
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_410rUN6e2c
#DreamWarriors #MyDefinitionOfABoombasticJazzStyle #Definition #Music
-
Dream Warriors - My Definition of a Boombastic Jazz Style
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_410rUN6e2c
#DreamWarriors #MyDefinitionOfABoombasticJazzStyle #Definition #Music
-
#IA et #vocabulaire : Qu’est qu’un « modèle frontière » ou « frontier model » ?
En gros un modèle à la pointe, dans « l’état de l’art », d’avant-garde « cutting edge » …
Source : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mod%C3%A8le_fronti%C3%A8re_(intelligence_artificielle)
-
The Farmer’s Word: Winona LaDuke, a False Etymology, and the True Root of “Colonization”
A reader sent me a video clip. In it, Winona LaDuke opens a talk on colonization by reaching for the dictionary, and the first thing she says is wrong. LaDuke is Anishinaabe, from White Earth in northern Minnesota. She trained as an economist, ran twice for vice president on the Green Party ticket, wrote All Our Relations, and has spent four decades on wild rice, pipelines, and land recovery. Rooms fill when she speaks. So when she tells an audience that colonization "has the same root as the word colon" and that the root "means to digest," that line travels. It is vivid, it is anatomical, it is easy to repeat, and it is the sentence people carry home. It is also folklore. This is a claim about the history of a word; no lexicon supports it, and it collapses the moment anyone opens a Greek dictionary. The rest of her argument is largely sound and in places understated. That is exactly why the false root matters. An argument this strong should not be walking around with a demolition charge strapped to its opening line. […] -
The Farmer’s Word: Winona LaDuke, a False Etymology, and the True Root of “Colonization”
A reader sent me a video clip. In it, Winona LaDuke opens a talk on colonization by reaching for the dictionary, and the first thing she says is wrong. LaDuke is Anishinaabe, from White Earth in northern Minnesota. She trained as an economist, ran twice for vice president on the Green Party ticket, wrote All Our Relations, and has spent four decades on wild rice, pipelines, and land recovery. Rooms fill when she speaks. So when she tells an audience that colonization "has the same root as the word colon" and that the root "means to digest," that line travels. It is vivid, it is anatomical, it is easy to repeat, and it is the sentence people carry home. It is also folklore. This is a claim about the history of a word; no lexicon supports it, and it collapses the moment anyone opens a Greek dictionary. The rest of her argument is largely sound and in places understated. That is exactly why the false root matters. An argument this strong should not be walking around with a demolition charge strapped to its opening line. […] -
Devil: Derives from the Greek diabolos ("slanderer"). The Greek verb diaballein literally means to "throw across" or "tear apart," making the devil "the one who divides"
-
I am listening to a podcast called Polytechs (politechs.dev) where the hosts interview Dr E. Bender (Computational Linguistics academic, podcaster and author) to talk about Rhetorical technology (all things #AI in this podcast) and besides the reasoned discussion about #GenAISlop and #LLMs in general, which I found most interesting, I was astounded by the amount of research that is available on AI, #GenAI and artificial general intelligence ( #AGI) wondering how is it that none of this material makes the light of day in our public forum discussion or any #NewsOutlets whatsoever. Made me realize how manipulated we all are to think that #GenAI — or as Dr Bender calls Text Extruding machines — is a revolutionary technology that will answer all of our questions.
Dr Bender also talks about the #Racism and #Eugenics that lies behind the historic antecedents of GenAI and the #TechBros push to sell it to us. The discussion also looked at the idea that GenAI #Hallucinates and proposed other words to better reflect what these machines actually produce (Hint: they certainly do not hallucinate).
I was also very receptive to Dr Bender’s #Definition of AI, she says that it is simply a #MarketingTerm and has nothing to do with #Intelligence (artificial or otherwise). I view #ChatGPT and the likes as stochastic word and part-word ordering machines using statistical engines to parsing large uncurated document repositories in a non-deterministic way.
Well worth a listen:
https://politechs.dev/episodes/s02-rhet-tech/#DrEmilyBender #Polytechs #Linguistics #ComputationalLinguistics
-
I am listening to a podcast called Polytechs (politechs.dev) where the hosts interview Dr E. Bender (Computational Linguistics academic, podcaster and author) to talk about Rhetorical technology (all things #AI in this podcast) and besides the reasoned discussion about #GenAISlop and #LLMs in general, which I found most interesting, I was astounded by the amount of research that is available on AI, #GenAI and artificial general intelligence ( #AGI) wondering how is it that none of this material makes the light of day in our public forum discussion or any #NewsOutlets whatsoever. Made me realize how manipulated we all are to think that #GenAI — or as Dr Bender calls Text Extruding machines — is a revolutionary technology that will answer all of our questions.
Dr Bender also talks about the #Racism and #Eugenics that lies behind the historic antecedents of GenAI and the #TechBros push to sell it to us. The discussion also looked at the idea that GenAI #Hallucinates and proposed other words to better reflect what these machines actually produce (Hint: they certainly do not hallucinate).
I was also very receptive to Dr Bender’s #Definition of AI, she says that it is simply a #MarketingTerm and has nothing to do with #Intelligence (artificial or otherwise). I view #ChatGPT and the likes as stochastic word and part-word ordering machines using statistical engines to parsing large uncurated document repositories in a non-deterministic way.
Well worth a listen:
https://politechs.dev/episodes/s02-rhet-tech/#DrEmilyBender #Polytechs #Linguistics #ComputationalLinguistics
-
Guten Morgen - Tässle Kaffee ☕️?
In der neuen Folge 59 von „Blume & Ince“ sprechen der BWL-Prof @Teh_Doc_Inan über ein verstörendes Verschwörungsvideo von „Hoss“ & den Rücktritt von Jens Spahn.
Vor allem aber stelle ich das Buch „Dieser Drang nach Härte“ von @evas_notizen vor, dessen Faschismus - Definition mich auch fachlich überzeugte.
Ich hoffe dazu auf noch viele gute Diskussionen, da ich wirklich meine, dass Eva von Redecker hier eine wegweisende Begriffsbildung gelungen ist. 📚💡🤓
#Hoss #Spahn #vonRedecker #Buch #Rezension #Drang #Härte #Definition #Faschismus #KritischeTheorie
-
Guten Morgen - Tässle Kaffee ☕️?
In der neuen Folge 59 von „Blume & Ince“ sprechen der BWL-Prof @Teh_Doc_Inan über ein verstörendes Verschwörungsvideo von „Hoss“ & den Rücktritt von Jens Spahn.
Vor allem aber stelle ich das Buch „Dieser Drang nach Härte“ von @evas_notizen vor, dessen Faschismus - Definition mich auch fachlich überzeugte.
Ich hoffe dazu auf noch viele gute Diskussionen, da ich wirklich meine, dass Eva von Redecker hier eine wegweisende Begriffsbildung gelungen ist. 📚💡🤓
#Hoss #Spahn #vonRedecker #Buch #Rezension #Drang #Härte #Definition #Faschismus #KritischeTheorie
-
When democracy started sounding left-wing
Back in January, when I told my electrician that I would soon be working at the Israel Democracy Institute, he immediately said it sounded left-wing.
He did not know anything about the Institute’s research, its staff, its positions, or its history. He was reacting to the name. More specifically, he was reacting to the word democracy.
That moment stayed with me because his assumption did not strike me as unusual. In Israel today, the word democracy often arrives carrying political baggage. It can evoke Israel’s judicial-overhaul protests, the center-left, the courts, elite institutions, or opposition to the current government. A word that ought to describe the shared structure of political life has begun to sound like the vocabulary of one camp.
So the question is not whether democracy is left-wing. It is not. The question is how democracy came to sound left-wing, and what happens when a value that should belong to everyone begins to sound like someone else’s slogan.
A history that does not fit the label
The Israel Democracy Institute’s history does not fit neatly into the political category now attached to its name. Arye Carmon founded the Institute in 1991 with the support of Bernie Marcus, the co-founder of Home Depot and the Institute’s founding benefactor. Marcus was also a major Republican donor who gave substantial support to Donald Trump1.
Nor is the Institute’s connection to the political right only historical. Its honorary chair is Israel’s former president Reuven Rivlin, who spent his political career in Likud and served as a minister and speaker of the Knesset before becoming president2. Rivlin’s support for democratic institutions, civic equality, and dialogue across Israel’s social divisions did not make him a man of the left3. It reflected a political tradition in which a person could hold firmly right-wing views while also treating democratic principles as part of Israel’s national foundation.
Marcus and Rivlin show that the Institute’s democratic mission was neither created by the left nor confined to it. The assumption that an organization devoted to democracy must be left-wing says less about the Institute’s origins than about how dramatically the political meaning of the word has changed.
I know what I mean by my values
I have never believed that political camps should be allowed to define my values for me. I know what I mean when I call myself a Zionist. I know what I mean when I call myself a feminist. And I know what I mean when I say that I support democracy.
Each of those words has been stretched, narrowed, praised, attacked, and turned into a political signal. But a value does not cease to be mine because someone else uses it differently.
To support democracy is not to endorse every institution, ruling, protest movement, or political party that invokes its name. It is to affirm a system in which power is limited, leaders can be replaced, citizens are protected, and no governing coalition is entitled to treat electoral victory as a blank check.
Democracy may now sound left-wing in certain political contexts, but that does not make it an exclusively left-wing value.
Two meanings of democracy
Part of the confusion comes from the fact that democracy is not a single, uncontested idea. For some, it means above all that the majority chooses the government and that elected leaders must be able to carry out their mandate. From this perspective, courts, civil servants, and other unelected bodies can appear to obstruct the will of the people4.
For others, elections are only one part of democracy. Democracy also requires an independent judiciary, the rule of law, minority rights, professional institutions, and limits on the power of the majority. From this perspective, a government can win an election and still act undemocratically if it weakens the safeguards that prevent power from becoming absolute.
These two understandings often speak past one another. One side hears the word democracy and thinks of popular sovereignty. The other hears it and thinks of constitutional restraint.
How political language changes
Words acquire political meaning through repetition. When one camp repeatedly describes itself as defending a principle, while the opposing camp avoids the term or treats it with suspicion, the public gradually begins to associate that principle with the first camp.
Political leaders help drive this process. People tend to trust the language used by figures on their own side and to distrust the same language when it comes from their opponents5. Over time, the word itself becomes a cue. It no longer points only to an idea; it also signals who is speaking, which institutions they trust, and which political coalition they are likely to support.
This is how a value that once functioned as common civic language can become a partisan marker. It happens as repeated patterns of use teach people to hear a political identity inside it.
The American shift
In the United States, democracy was not always a word associated primarily with the Democratic Party. Ronald Reagan spoke comfortably about democracy, and Republican platforms once used the term as part of their own description of the American political system6.
The contrast with 2024 is striking. The Democratic Party platform repeatedly emphasized the defense and strengthening of democracy. The Republican platform did not use the word at all, relying instead on terms such as the Constitution, freedom, election security, and government by the people7.
Public opinion reflected the same divergence. Democratic voters were far more likely than Republican voters to identify the preservation of democracy as a central concern in the presidential election. Yet majorities in both parties still expressed support for democratic government in principle8.
The shift, then, was not simply that one party supported democracy while the other rejected it. It was that the word itself had become much more central to the identity and rhetoric of one side than the other.
Israel’s constitutional rupture
In Israel, the partisan coding of democracy accelerated sharply during the judicial-overhaul crisis that began in 2023. Opponents of the government’s proposals filled streets, bridges, and public squares with Israeli flags and signs declaring that they were defending democracy. Week after week, the word became visually and emotionally identified with the protest movement9.
Government supporters answered with a competing claim: the overhaul was itself democratic because it would reduce the power of unelected judges and restore authority to the representatives chosen by the public. In their telling, the protests were not defending democracy but resisting the outcome of an election10.
The conflict therefore attached the word to a specific political and social camp. Even people who had no detailed opinion about judicial appointments or constitutional design could see who was carrying the signs, organizing the demonstrations, and speaking most insistently in democracy’s name.
By the time the struggle became part of Israel’s ordinary political vocabulary, “democracy” no longer sounded merely like a description of the system. To many Israelis, it sounded like a position within the fight over that system.
When democracy becomes a party name
The formation of a new Israeli party called The Democrats made the shift impossible to miss. Created through the merger of Labor and Meretz, the party chose as its name a word that should describe the political system shared by all parties11.
The name was politically effective precisely because the association already existed. It appealed to voters who saw themselves as defending liberal institutions, civil rights, and constitutional limits. But it also reinforced the idea that democracy belonged to one part of the political map.
The party did not cause the word to become left-coded. It revealed how far that process had already gone. Once “democracy” can function naturally as the brand of a center-left party, it no longer sounds only like a common national principle.
What I saw at the Eli Hurvitz Conference
I work at the Israel Democracy Institute, and I attended this year’s Eli Hurvitz Conference on Economy and Society. Coalition politicians were invited, but not a single representative of the current governing coalition participated. I saw the imbalance firsthand.
I cannot know why every invited politician declined. But in an election year, one plausible explanation is that appearing at an Israel Democracy Institute event carried a political cost12. Coalition politicians may have feared that their own voters would interpret participation in a nonpartisan policy forum as a sign of association with the left.
That matters because their absence was not imposed by the Institute. It was the result of a political choice. A conference intended as a national forum appeared more politically one-sided because one side chose not to enter the room.
A cycle that confirms itself
Once an institution acquires a partisan reputation, political behavior can make that reputation appear increasingly accurate. Public figures who fear being associated with the other side stay away. Their absence changes who appears onstage, whose arguments are heard, and how the event is perceived from outside.
The resulting picture then becomes evidence for the original assumption. Observers see an institution populated mainly by figures from one side and conclude that it must belong to that side.
This is how perception hardens into political reality. A label shapes participation; participation shapes appearance; and appearance strengthens the label.
Why this matters
A democratic system depends on more than formal rules. It also depends on citizens recognizing certain principles as binding even when those principles frustrate their own political side.
That becomes harder when democracy is treated as the language of one camp. Courts, elections, civil rights, and limits on power are then judged less by whether they are legitimate than by whether they help or hinder a preferred coalition. Violations become easier to excuse when they are committed by allies and easier to condemn when they are committed by opponents13.
The danger is not only hypocrisy. It is the gradual loss of a shared standard. Once democratic norms are filtered entirely through partisan loyalty, there is no longer a common basis for objecting when power is abused.
Reclaiming the word
The answer is not to abandon the language of democracy, but to use it more precisely. The word should not function as praise for one coalition or condemnation of another. It should describe standards that apply regardless of who is in power.
That means asking the same questions of every government: Does it respect the outcome of elections? Does it preserve meaningful political competition? Does it accept legal limits on its authority? Does it protect the rights of citizens who did not vote for it? Does it permit institutions to perform their roles without being reduced to extensions of the ruling party?
A democratic commitment becomes credible only when it survives political inconvenience. It must restrain allies as well as opponents.
Reclaiming the word therefore requires separating democracy from political allegiance. It should name the rules under which the struggle for power takes place, not one of the teams competing within it.
Someone else’s slogan
The political meaning attached to a word is not the same as the value the word names. Democracy has not become left-wing simply because it is now invoked more often by the left, distrusted more often by the right, or attached to institutions that one side increasingly avoids.
The deeper problem is that polarization has made a shared constitutional value sound like someone else’s slogan. Once that happens, defending democracy can be mistaken for choosing a camp rather than defending the conditions that allow competing camps to exist at all.
I do not accept that surrender. Democracy does not belong to the left, the right, the government, the opposition, the courts, or the protesters. It belongs to the public—and it remains most necessary when those in power would prefer to treat it as optional.
Footnotes
- Home Depot’s co-founder and billionaire philanthropist dies at 95 ↩︎
- Reuven Rivlin ↩︎
- President Reuven Rivlin Joins IDI as Honorary Chair ↩︎
- Populism in Europe: An Illiberal Democratic Response to Undemocratic Liberalism ↩︎
- Elite Cues and Political Decision Making ↩︎
- Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, “Address to Members of the British Parliament”; American Presidency Project, archive of party platforms ↩︎
- American Presidency Project, 2024 Democratic Party Platform; 2024 Republican Party Platform ↩︎
- Gallup, “Economy, Immigration, Abortion, Democracy Driving Voters”; AP-NORC, “Most say democracy is important for the U.S. identity, but few think it is functioning well” ↩︎
- Tens of thousands join protests against Israeli judicial overhaul ↩︎
- ibid. ↩︎
- The Democrats ↩︎
- Israel’s parliament dissolves ahead of Oct. 27 elections ↩︎
- Democracy in America? Partisanship, Polarization, and the Robustness of Support for Democracy in the United States ↩︎
-
When democracy started sounding left-wing
Back in January, when I told my electrician that I would soon be working at the Israel Democracy Institute, he immediately said it sounded left-wing.
He did not know anything about the Institute’s research, its staff, its positions, or its history. He was reacting to the name. More specifically, he was reacting to the word democracy.
That moment stayed with me because his assumption did not strike me as unusual. In Israel today, the word democracy often arrives carrying political baggage. It can evoke Israel’s judicial-overhaul protests, the center-left, the courts, elite institutions, or opposition to the current government. A word that ought to describe the shared structure of political life has begun to sound like the vocabulary of one camp.
So the question is not whether democracy is left-wing. It is not. The question is how democracy came to sound left-wing, and what happens when a value that should belong to everyone begins to sound like someone else’s slogan.
A history that does not fit the label
The Israel Democracy Institute’s history does not fit neatly into the political category now attached to its name. Arye Carmon founded the Institute in 1991 with the support of Bernie Marcus, the co-founder of Home Depot and the Institute’s founding benefactor. Marcus was also a major Republican donor who gave substantial support to Donald Trump1.
Nor is the Institute’s connection to the political right only historical. Its honorary chair is Israel’s former president Reuven Rivlin, who spent his political career in Likud and served as a minister and speaker of the Knesset before becoming president2. Rivlin’s support for democratic institutions, civic equality, and dialogue across Israel’s social divisions did not make him a man of the left3. It reflected a political tradition in which a person could hold firmly right-wing views while also treating democratic principles as part of Israel’s national foundation.
Marcus and Rivlin show that the Institute’s democratic mission was neither created by the left nor confined to it. The assumption that an organization devoted to democracy must be left-wing says less about the Institute’s origins than about how dramatically the political meaning of the word has changed.
I know what I mean by my values
I have never believed that political camps should be allowed to define my values for me. I know what I mean when I call myself a Zionist. I know what I mean when I call myself a feminist. And I know what I mean when I say that I support democracy.
Each of those words has been stretched, narrowed, praised, attacked, and turned into a political signal. But a value does not cease to be mine because someone else uses it differently.
To support democracy is not to endorse every institution, ruling, protest movement, or political party that invokes its name. It is to affirm a system in which power is limited, leaders can be replaced, citizens are protected, and no governing coalition is entitled to treat electoral victory as a blank check.
Democracy may now sound left-wing in certain political contexts, but that does not make it an exclusively left-wing value.
Two meanings of democracy
Part of the confusion comes from the fact that democracy is not a single, uncontested idea. For some, it means above all that the majority chooses the government and that elected leaders must be able to carry out their mandate. From this perspective, courts, civil servants, and other unelected bodies can appear to obstruct the will of the people4.
For others, elections are only one part of democracy. Democracy also requires an independent judiciary, the rule of law, minority rights, professional institutions, and limits on the power of the majority. From this perspective, a government can win an election and still act undemocratically if it weakens the safeguards that prevent power from becoming absolute.
These two understandings often speak past one another. One side hears the word democracy and thinks of popular sovereignty. The other hears it and thinks of constitutional restraint.
How political language changes
Words acquire political meaning through repetition. When one camp repeatedly describes itself as defending a principle, while the opposing camp avoids the term or treats it with suspicion, the public gradually begins to associate that principle with the first camp.
Political leaders help drive this process. People tend to trust the language used by figures on their own side and to distrust the same language when it comes from their opponents5. Over time, the word itself becomes a cue. It no longer points only to an idea; it also signals who is speaking, which institutions they trust, and which political coalition they are likely to support.
This is how a value that once functioned as common civic language can become a partisan marker. It happens as repeated patterns of use teach people to hear a political identity inside it.
The American shift
In the United States, democracy was not always a word associated primarily with the Democratic Party. Ronald Reagan spoke comfortably about democracy, and Republican platforms once used the term as part of their own description of the American political system6.
The contrast with 2024 is striking. The Democratic Party platform repeatedly emphasized the defense and strengthening of democracy. The Republican platform did not use the word at all, relying instead on terms such as the Constitution, freedom, election security, and government by the people7.
Public opinion reflected the same divergence. Democratic voters were far more likely than Republican voters to identify the preservation of democracy as a central concern in the presidential election. Yet majorities in both parties still expressed support for democratic government in principle8.
The shift, then, was not simply that one party supported democracy while the other rejected it. It was that the word itself had become much more central to the identity and rhetoric of one side than the other.
Israel’s constitutional rupture
In Israel, the partisan coding of democracy accelerated sharply during the judicial-overhaul crisis that began in 2023. Opponents of the government’s proposals filled streets, bridges, and public squares with Israeli flags and signs declaring that they were defending democracy. Week after week, the word became visually and emotionally identified with the protest movement9.
Government supporters answered with a competing claim: the overhaul was itself democratic because it would reduce the power of unelected judges and restore authority to the representatives chosen by the public. In their telling, the protests were not defending democracy but resisting the outcome of an election10.
The conflict therefore attached the word to a specific political and social camp. Even people who had no detailed opinion about judicial appointments or constitutional design could see who was carrying the signs, organizing the demonstrations, and speaking most insistently in democracy’s name.
By the time the struggle became part of Israel’s ordinary political vocabulary, “democracy” no longer sounded merely like a description of the system. To many Israelis, it sounded like a position within the fight over that system.
When democracy becomes a party name
The formation of a new Israeli party called The Democrats made the shift impossible to miss. Created through the merger of Labor and Meretz, the party chose as its name a word that should describe the political system shared by all parties11.
The name was politically effective precisely because the association already existed. It appealed to voters who saw themselves as defending liberal institutions, civil rights, and constitutional limits. But it also reinforced the idea that democracy belonged to one part of the political map.
The party did not cause the word to become left-coded. It revealed how far that process had already gone. Once “democracy” can function naturally as the brand of a center-left party, it no longer sounds only like a common national principle.
What I saw at the Eli Hurvitz Conference
I work at the Israel Democracy Institute, and I attended this year’s Eli Hurvitz Conference on Economy and Society. Coalition politicians were invited, but not a single representative of the current governing coalition participated. I saw the imbalance firsthand.
I cannot know why every invited politician declined. But in an election year, one plausible explanation is that appearing at an Israel Democracy Institute event carried a political cost12. Coalition politicians may have feared that their own voters would interpret participation in a nonpartisan policy forum as a sign of association with the left.
That matters because their absence was not imposed by the Institute. It was the result of a political choice. A conference intended as a national forum appeared more politically one-sided because one side chose not to enter the room.
A cycle that confirms itself
Once an institution acquires a partisan reputation, political behavior can make that reputation appear increasingly accurate. Public figures who fear being associated with the other side stay away. Their absence changes who appears onstage, whose arguments are heard, and how the event is perceived from outside.
The resulting picture then becomes evidence for the original assumption. Observers see an institution populated mainly by figures from one side and conclude that it must belong to that side.
This is how perception hardens into political reality. A label shapes participation; participation shapes appearance; and appearance strengthens the label.
Why this matters
A democratic system depends on more than formal rules. It also depends on citizens recognizing certain principles as binding even when those principles frustrate their own political side.
That becomes harder when democracy is treated as the language of one camp. Courts, elections, civil rights, and limits on power are then judged less by whether they are legitimate than by whether they help or hinder a preferred coalition. Violations become easier to excuse when they are committed by allies and easier to condemn when they are committed by opponents13.
The danger is not only hypocrisy. It is the gradual loss of a shared standard. Once democratic norms are filtered entirely through partisan loyalty, there is no longer a common basis for objecting when power is abused.
Reclaiming the word
The answer is not to abandon the language of democracy, but to use it more precisely. The word should not function as praise for one coalition or condemnation of another. It should describe standards that apply regardless of who is in power.
That means asking the same questions of every government: Does it respect the outcome of elections? Does it preserve meaningful political competition? Does it accept legal limits on its authority? Does it protect the rights of citizens who did not vote for it? Does it permit institutions to perform their roles without being reduced to extensions of the ruling party?
A democratic commitment becomes credible only when it survives political inconvenience. It must restrain allies as well as opponents.
Reclaiming the word therefore requires separating democracy from political allegiance. It should name the rules under which the struggle for power takes place, not one of the teams competing within it.
Someone else’s slogan
The political meaning attached to a word is not the same as the value the word names. Democracy has not become left-wing simply because it is now invoked more often by the left, distrusted more often by the right, or attached to institutions that one side increasingly avoids.
The deeper problem is that polarization has made a shared constitutional value sound like someone else’s slogan. Once that happens, defending democracy can be mistaken for choosing a camp rather than defending the conditions that allow competing camps to exist at all.
I do not accept that surrender. Democracy does not belong to the left, the right, the government, the opposition, the courts, or the protesters. It belongs to the public—and it remains most necessary when those in power would prefer to treat it as optional.
Footnotes
- Home Depot’s co-founder and billionaire philanthropist dies at 95 ↩︎
- Reuven Rivlin ↩︎
- President Reuven Rivlin Joins IDI as Honorary Chair ↩︎
- Populism in Europe: An Illiberal Democratic Response to Undemocratic Liberalism ↩︎
- Elite Cues and Political Decision Making ↩︎
- Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, “Address to Members of the British Parliament”; American Presidency Project, archive of party platforms ↩︎
- American Presidency Project, 2024 Democratic Party Platform; 2024 Republican Party Platform ↩︎
- Gallup, “Economy, Immigration, Abortion, Democracy Driving Voters”; AP-NORC, “Most say democracy is important for the U.S. identity, but few think it is functioning well” ↩︎
- Tens of thousands join protests against Israeli judicial overhaul ↩︎
- ibid. ↩︎
- The Democrats ↩︎
- Israel’s parliament dissolves ahead of Oct. 27 elections ↩︎
- Democracy in America? Partisanship, Polarization, and the Robustness of Support for Democracy in the United States ↩︎
-
... que celui qui est discuté.
#histoire : les prisonniers en fuite du sud USA en laissaient derrière eux pour distraire les chiens et détourner de leur piste.
-> les enfants sont champions de ce stratagème.
"- Ne joue pas avec ce bâton pointu, tu pourrais te blesser.
- Ce n'est pas un bâton, c'est un laser bionique."-> de même que les #lobby
ex sur le #rechauffementclimatique :
#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
Même si l'observation de tous les cas est impossible/impraticable, l'antidote à la généralisation trop rapide est l'utilisation de l’échantillonnage + inférence statistique -> la statistique est une branche des #mathématiques
= se demander si l'échantillon invoqué est suffisant et représentatif avant de l'accepter.
¤ stratégie rhétorique du #hareng fumé : vous amener à traiter d'un autre sujet ...
#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
¤ stratégie rhétorique de la généralisation hâtive : tirer rapidement des conclusions au sujet d'un ensemble donné en se basant sur un trop petit nombre de cas -> argument anecdotique.
"le #sexisme comme le #racisme commence par la généralisation : c'est-à-dire la bêtise."
- #ChristianeCollange #citation#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
Kahane https://archive.org/details/logiccontemporar0000kaha_b2b5 -> faux dilemme combiné au paralogisme de l'homme de paille = manipulation la plus utilisée par les politiques -> adversaire caricaturé/rendu grotesque.
==> Si on nous présente un dilemme, s'assurer que c'est un vrai avant de sauter à une conclusion/de conclure qu'il est impossible de choisir.
à relier à l'abstention.
Enjeux : imagination/créativité #culture #art #education
#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
ex 2 : si on ne diminue pas les dépenses publiques, notre économie va s'écrouler.
ex 3 : America, love it or leave it
cf : transport en char à voile + on est pas chez les Amish
=> l'humain préfère des analyses/descriptions simples à des analyses/descriptions complexes et nuancées = succès des faux dilemmes.
-> enjeux des fonctions mathématiques et de la grammaire/orthographe = gymnastique cérébrale.
#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
cf clause de l'orteil en #politique -> choisir supprimer 2 jours fériés ou ...
-> un vrai dilemme nous place devant une alternative. Faire remarquer qu'entre le choix A et Z, il existe une grande variété d'autres options.
ex 1 : la médecine explique les guérisons. Mme X a été guérie mais la médecine ne peut pas l'expliquer, donc c'est un miracle.
#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
#Paralogismes informels :
¤ stratégie rhétorique du faux dilemme = forcer un choix alors que vous n'avez pas organisé les conditions de ce choix (cf #commerce #consommation) -> nous convaincre qu'il n'y a que ces choix possibles, mutuellement exclusifs.
Souvent, l'un des choix est tellement rebutant/inacceptable, que vous optez pour l'autre, celle que le manipulateur voulait que vous choisissiez.
#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
Si A alors B
Non A
donc Non BSi je suis à Paris, je suis en France
Je ne suis pas à Paris
donc je ne suis pas en France-> souvent confondu avec :
Si A alors B
Non B
Donc non ASi je suis à Paris, je suis en France
Je ne suis pas en France
donc je ne suis pas à Paris.#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
... soit explicitement visible.
Si A alors B
Or B
Donc AS'il pleut, le trottoir est mouillé
le trottoir est mouillé
Donc il pleut.-> souvent confondu avec :
Si A alors B
Or A
Donc BS'il pleut, le trottoir est mouillé
Il pleut
Donc le trottoir est mouillé.¤ Négation de l'antécédent : la condition nécessaire est faussement admise -> difficile à détecter car ressemble à la négation de la conséquence.
#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
#Paralogisme formel -> 3 causes rendent son raisonnement invalide.
¤ Inconsistance = l'argumentation est contradictoire;
A est à 60km de C
B est à 120km de C
donc C est plus près de B que de A.¤ Affirmation du conséquent : si les 2 prémisses sont vraies, la conclusion ne l'est pas nécessairement -> particulièrement pernicieux, difficile à détecter car rarement présenté de telle manière que sa forme ...
#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
#Paralogisme formel : la conclusion ne découle pas des prémisses.
Paralogismes informels -> les plus courants : reposent sur des propriétés du #langage + sur la manière dont on fait appel aux faits + sur certaines caractéristiques des prémisses.
Développement de cette logique par Frege et Russell https://shs.cairn.info/philosophie-et-langage--9791037038555-page-127?lang=fr avec la logique mathématique.
-> https://shs.cairn.info/magazine-les-grands-dossiers-des-sciences-humaines-2017-3?lang=fr
#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
sophisme : raisonnement invalide avec l'intention de tromper #politique #lobby
paralogisme : raisonnement invalide commis de bonne foi -> formel/informel.
"- Pourquoi t'as pas fait la vaisselle ?
- dès que j'ai fini mon cours de sophisme, non seulement tu seras convaincue que je l'ai faites, mais en plus, tu seras persuadée que c'était ton tour de la faire."
#charb#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
... ce qui garantie que si les prémisses sont vraies, alors la conclusion le sera aussi.
-> #Aristote a décrit 14 formes de #syllogisme valides.
Complexité : validité est-elle vérité ?
-> détecter la fourberie mentale = savoir repérer les argumentations illogiques/fausses, et qui incitent à tirer les mauvaises conclusions = #sophisme ou paralogisme.
#NormandBaillargeon #cerveau #definition #vocabulaire #science #mot #philosophie #maths
-
Guten Morgen - Tässle Kaffee ☕️?
Ich pflege bewusst nicht nur den Dialog, sondern auch das Lesen über meine eigene Blase hinaus. So sprach ich ja auch zuletzt in Tübingen über die Mimesis - Antisemitismus- Theorie nach Adorno & Horkheimer.
In der nächsten Folge von „Blume & Ince“ mit @Teh_Doc_Inan möchte ich das Buch „Dieser Drang nach Härte“ von @evas_notizen sowie ihre Definition von Faschismus vorstellen.
Interesse? Meinungen? Vermutungen, wie ich es einschätze? 🤓📚💡
#EvavonRedecker #Buch #DieserDrangnachHärte #Faschismus #Definition #Dialog
https://www.fischerverlage.de/buch/eva-von-redecker-dieser-drang-nach-haerte-9783103977240
-
noun lookup nerd
- Nerd noun
nerd a person seen as over-intellectual, obsessive, introverted, and lacking in social skills and socio-cultural intuition.
I'm extravert, have fabulous and amazing social skills.
Such a person may spend inordinate amounts of time on unpopular, little-known, or non-mainstream activities, which are generally either highly technical, abstract, or relating to niche topics such as science fiction or fantasy, to the exclusion of more mainstream activities.
Since I'm a hyper intelligent Force with auto didactical skills and love to work on the bleeding edge of micro and nano technology, I burn my time on subjects most mortals have never seen or heard of.
Additionally, many so-called nerds are described as being shy, quirky, pedantic, and unattractive.[4]
I'm shameless never shy, have coördinatie on the level of a
- musician
- Composer
- Arranger
- Jazz ballet dancer
- Electrical Engineer
- Cyclist
- Sound engineer and am quite attractive to a super hunk according to the females I have interaction with
Yet subjects of my interest are often so complex, that out of 100 people only two may actually understand everything that I speak about, without giving them extra explanations
Conclusion
The definition of nerd is one that belongs in the cinema 🎥 📽️ a caricature of highly intelligent people
Sources
man nerdhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerd
#Nerd #noun #definition #cinema #caricature #no #TV #social #media #socialmedia
-
📖 farrago /fəˈrɑː.ɡəʊ/ noun. a confused mixture
"he told us a farrago of lies"
-
Just one more example of someone who doesn’t know what “Begs the question” means.
#language #definition #logic
https://www.greaterfool.ca/2026/07/10/the-obsession/ -
In Sachen "Dummheit" teile ich ausdrücklich die Definition des NS-Gegners Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906 - 1945):
#Dummheit #Definition #DietrichBonhoeffer #Bonhoeffer #Psychologie #Macht #Externalisierung
-
Music is what? Lot's of answers made in history. And my position is one variation. But I wrote that in my blog. I ask my self why I liked music. My blog read only a few people. But talk to myself is variable time to me.
-
Honest Opacity
Honesty is a rule about what you say. Transparency is a rule about what you hide. They are different instruments, and the confusion between them is how power keeps its secrets in the open. Two words get treated as synonyms by people who ought to know the difference, and the people who exploit the confusion understand it best of all. A company under investigation announces that it has been fully transparent and expects the phrase to function as an alibi. A politician says he has nothing to hide and trusts you to hear it as proof of innocence. Each one is trading on a slippage between two ideas that are not the same and do not even point the same way. […] -
🤗🚨⚠️🚨⚠️🌐🌏💚🤗*Warning Against Idolatry!*& FOR YOURS!*& MINE EXTRA knowledge!*& CLARITY I SHARE THE FOLLOWING Definition of the Word ‘Idolatry” THAT is the worship of an idol!*or physical object as if it were a deity!*Figuratively!*it refers to an excessive attachment!*blind devotion!*or reverence toward any person!*concept!*or material pursuit (like wealth!*or fame)!🤗🚨⚠️🚨⚠️🌐🌏💗🤗👉
1 Corinthians 10:13
#Warning #Against #Idolatry
#Definition #of #Word #Idolatry #GOD #Love #Christ #Jesus #Holy #Spirit -
☁️🌈☁️🛐🙌🤲🙏🧘🏿🧘🧘🏼♀️🧘🏻♂️🧘🏽♂️🏩💒💜💛🩵🩷✝️👑🕊️💦🫂💚💗💌💙🪽😇🪽💌❤️🔥🌏🌐❤️💁♀️*[“APOSTLE PAUL”TEACHES US ALL ABOUT GOD’S]*Warning Against Idolatry!*& FOR YOURS!*& MINE EXTRA knowledge!*& CLARITY I SHARE THE FOLLOWING👉
(1 Corinthians 10:13)
#Warning #Against #Idolatry
#Definition #of #the #Word #Idolatry #GOD #LIFE #TESTING #Love #Christ #Jesus #Holy #Spirit #Savior #Light #World #People #Pray #Believe #Christian #Heaven #Hope #Peace #Faith #Truth #Goodness #Kindness #Caring #Hospitality #Helping #Others #Gentleness #Understanding
