Words

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Examples:
Obama being branded a socialist, when he is really a capitalist. Garnered socialist votes, despite not being that whatsoever. Today 'socialist' is fully embraced in popular culture as a 'democratic socialist'. Obama just had to be labeled it by the Republicans, and his dismissals were seen as clever mockings of the 'dumb Rightwingers'.

The label "gamer" being attacked or 'killed' in the GamerGate movement because of the promotion of video games in Common Core. The gamer culture interfered with the attempt to legitimize video games as a method for educating children.

The Clinton leaked PowerPoint which talked about their campaign being a "brand" and the voters their "consumers".
-
Every word, idea, concept or 'ism becomes a brand which is marketed either negatively or positively. This is also why they had to label the "Alt-Right" so that the 'shadowy' aspects of Trump support were given a branding which could be attacked. That was also Pepe. They gave a brand to the stupid voter to simplify "/pol/" and generalize it. When 'Alt-Right' didn't work, they blamed Putin or Russia. They cannot label Trump as a "grassroots" movement, which it rightfully is, because of the positive connotation. They say, instead, populist. Populist is labeled as "[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]".

In fact, they saw the word "cuck" as another brand. Every label is a brand. Being branded, like cattle, with a label. Their way of dealing with negative branding is to dismiss it or to convert it into a positive. That's why you saw an attempt by a Super PAC during republican primaries to say "If being a cuck means I'm not hateful, then I'm proud to be a cuck". It is branding management, with no concern for what the branding represents.

Dictionary wrote:

“met·a·phor
ˈmedəˌfôr,ˈmedəˌfər/
noun
a figure of speech in which a word, or phrase is applied to an object, or action to which it is not literally applicable.
‘I had fallen through a trapdoor of depression,’ said Mark, who was fond of theatrical metaphors’
synonyms: figure of speech, image, trope, analogy, comparison, symbol, word painting/picture
‘the profusion of metaphors in her everyday speech has gotten pretty tiresome’
a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, especially something abstract.
‘the amounts of money being lost by the company were enough to make it a metaphor for an industry that was teetering’”

Using a metaphor two, or more, patterns can be included into a unity - a synthesis of meanings: multiple patterns, and congruity of patterns, given a single abstraction, and a single representation - word, symbol, image.
Artistically it facilitates the representation of what cannot be represented by static, abstract, absolute, symbols, such as the artistic representation of movement, of fluidity, - flux.

Using the metaphor one can combine concepts referring to phenomena, with concepts that do not refer to anything but noetic constructs, legitimizing the latter with their association with the former.
I call this the Trojan Horse method.
When the synthesized representation is accepted, as is, by the other, he can no loner differentiate the purely noetic from the noetic that refers to a phenomenon in world. It now becomes, for him/her, self-evident that the synthesized representation is one, and can be used sometimes as metaphor/artistically, evading reasoning skepticism, and at other times as rational representation of an actual phenomenon.
I call this the Seesaw Effect. A concept can be mystical and rational, depending on the context, and what is required of it to promote the same meaning, which has already been established as the given.
The metaphor carries the ideal before itself - placing the noumenon ahead of the phenomenon - Top<>Down Thinking.  

Moderns do this consistently to compartmentalize their definitions of race, sex, and human, according to the desired ideal of unity, uniformity, equality.
Sometimes human is biological, a species identifier, and at other times it is mystical, an idea that cannot be understood, or defined.
Moderns keep one foot in reality, and the other in their preferred ideal world, selectively remaining in the first, to legitimize their participation in the second.
This method can justify any absurdity, lacking an external meaning. It's convictions are founded on adequately dismissing the parts of the real one has to reject so as to validate the ideal, and then when threatened with exposure to use the first to hide the second under a rational covering.
Man is naturally predisposed to such methods, not only because of the way he has evolved to conceptualize the unknown, uncertain, fluctuating real world of (inter)active patterns, but, more so, because of his relationship to the real, as a source of anxiety and conflict.

Humans do not only delude themselves, but they do so with a certain degree of joy - a relief rooted in the degree of anxiety the uncertain, threatening world relates to their ideals, and self-interests.
Joy, pleasure, being the negation of need, and the release of stress.

Metaphor acts like a symbolic, artistic, buffer, converted from connections to reality, into a sheltering wall, within which the mind feels liberated, and courageous, full of careless play, their freedom from necessity produces as liberated energies, now overflowing as excess power.
In severe cases there is no need to preserve the illusion of integrity. The mind freely exposes its hypocrisy and detachments form reality.
In more rare cases, where some integrity has already developed, or evolves as a product of an inherited demeanour, or as a consequence of higher intellectual faculties that have already sen too much to be forgotten, the metaphor acts as an escape back into a child-like, or a pre-awareness state - retardation. It acts as an excuse to fall back behind the cognitive walls, defining the particular organism's tolerance levels - its mental and physical constitution.
A matter of survival.  
 
The brain was automatic defensive processes, preventing pain, trauma, from threatening its organic unity. It pulls back, and closes itself off, when the world exposes it to levels of threats it cannot process, or deal with.
This closing-off is subjectivity, coming out only in relation to other minds, and then only if these other minds do not expose it to a world it cannot handle.
Its intuitive, naive, judgment is rooted in the understanding that no organism can tolerate the real world, entirely. Those that fall beyond this assessment are accused of a purposeful desire to hurt, to hate - a motive, rooted in the intolerable mind's own trauma, expressed as animosity.
This is how the modern explains minds that expose it to a world it has pushed beyond its defensive, cognitive walls, of words and metaphors. The world's threatening, intolerable essence, is now placed upon the one who exposes it - it is given a face and a name, and explained emotionally.

Using the metaphor as a synthesis between the rational and the irrational, or the actual and the hypothetical, or the real and the ideal, also facilitates the construction of the illusion of understanding.
Including the incomprehensible, the counter-intuitive, into a unity that includes the  comprehensible and intuitive, produces an illegitimate cohesion, legitimized in this synthesis.
Instead of simplifying the complexity of (inter)actions participating in congruent patterns, continuously (inter)acting internally and externally, it becomes a method of sneaking in desirable concepts, integrating them into wholes, and/or to deal with an insatiable need - whether this need be one for certainty, for pleasure, for self-preservation, or simply one feeding curiosity demanding certainty, stability, order. The metaphor fills in the gaps in experience, and perception making it all adhere to a desirable whole.

The proper definition of words is not based on social conventions and "I say so" declarations.
A proper definition returns words to their original function of symbols, connecting the noumenon, the abstraction in the mind, with the phenomenon, that which appears, is present, whether the mind wills it, or not.

A definition of words like [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], metaphor, absolute, love, have been offered, by me...if one has a better definition bridging the physical and the metaphysical they can argue on its behalf, and to simply declare it superior.
Dictionary definition offers a preliminary sketch, to facilitate communication, but a more thorough definition would have to connect what is being communicated, between minds, as noumenon, as idea, within the world these minds share and occupy as part of an organic becoming.

Definitions establish a foundation to build upon, otherwise one begins by building on air, from Top<>Down, in the noetic clouds.
The foundation is both a support, and a guide - a limit to how one can proceed upward, always following the rules of symmetry and proportionality, or order.

The application of words in may be a display of creativity but it is not a foundation to build something long-lasting and real.
An improper use, or application, of symbols, implies a motive other than something having to do with a shared reality.
Depending no the words misused and how they are applied one can speculate on the psychological motives, and do so without concerning himself with philosophy, but only with human frailty.

The diagnosis of a mental dis-ease, may put into question the mind of man, and his place in the world, but it directly tells us nothing about the world itself, but only alludes to a reaction we can use to speculate as to what drives a mind to such extremes and how such delusions manage to survive.
If we are honest about out motives and have the courage to follow through with them, then philosophy will strive to be clear and accurate, rather than use word games to complicate and cloud in mystery and mysticism what it lacks the talent and the courage to deal with directly.

Applying words/symbols correctly, by no means prevents them form being incorporated it more complex metaphors, or from being used as artistic methods of overcoming the mind's limitations and addiction to order, and patterns.
What it does is to create a framework within which man can attempt to describe a liquid, fluctuating reality, preventing himself from going astray, guided by emotion and desire.

Defining 'love' as a mechanism that overcomes the fight/flight mechanism enabling bonding to take place, and then for heterosexual reproduction and social organizations to evolve, does not reduce its power, and visceral, cellular, effects, that can raise a man to heights, or bury him in the depths of despair, nor does it stop the automatic emotion from breaking down ego and self, to create the sense of unified becoming.
What it does is stop cowards and imbeciles from using the term to construct metaphorical, metaphysical, delusions, that have nothing to do with experienced existence, or to apply the word/symbol in fanciful ways to pretend something new and profound is being spoken of.

Metaphor = The transportation/transference of a complexity of concepts into a singular concept.
The metaphor implodes the various ideas, feelings, emotions, images, into a singular abstraction, and then gives it a name, or a story, a simile, to express this integration, encompassing all the relationships this produces.

The ancients used gods, to symbolized, using a metaphor, the complexity of nature, and to reduce it to a form even a simpleton could learn and understand on a very simplistic level.
The masses were taught, in metaphorical form, ideas, they would not be able to understand in any other forms.
They understood the metaphors literally, absorbing the lesson, the innuendos on a visceral level.
For them the metaphorical way nature was describes as deities, was understood literally.

To this day the mediocre and the base understand language literally, and those who wish to manipulate and exploit this weakness deliver messages in the form of allegory, and metaphor.

(n.) mid-13c., "sacrifice by fire, burnt offering," from Old French holocauste (12c.), or directly from Late Latin holocaustum, from Greek holokauston "a thing wholly burnt," neuter of holokaustos "burned whole," from holos "whole" (see holo-) + kaustos, verbal adjective of kaiein "to burn" (see caustic).

Chabad.org, on Jewish "Hell" wrote:

We do believe in a type of Hell, but not the one found in cartoons and joke books. Hell is not a punishment in the conventional sense; it is, in fact, the expression of a great kindness.

The Jewish mystics described a spiritual place called “Gehinnom.” This is usually translated as “Hell,” but a better translation would be “the Supernal Washing Machine.” Because that’s exactly how it works. The way our soul is cleansed in Gehinnom is similar to the way our clothes are cleansed in a washing machine.

Put yourself in your socks’ shoes, so to speak. If you were to be thrown into boiling hot water and flung around for half an hour, you might start to feel that someone doesn’t like you. However, the fact is that it is only after going through a wash cycle that the socks can be worn again.

We don’t put our socks in the washing machine to punish them. We put them through what seems like a rough and painful procedure only to make them clean and wearable again. The intense heat of the water loosens the dirt, and the force of being swirled around shakes it off completely. Far from hurting your socks, you are doing them a favor by putting them through this process.

So too with the soul. Every act we do in our lifetime leaves an imprint on our soul. The good we do brightens and elevates our soul, and every wrongdoing leaves a stain that needs to be cleansed. If, at the end of our life, we leave this world without fixing the wrongs we have done, our soul is unable to reach its place of rest on high. We must go through a cycle of deep cleansing. Our soul is flung around at an intense spiritual heat to rid it of any residue it may have gathered, and to prepare it for entry into Heaven.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (n.)
"hell," 1620s (earlier "a place of torture," 1590s), from Church Latin gehenna (Tertullian), from Greek geenna, from post-biblical Hebrew gehinnom "Hell, place of fiery torment for the dead," figurative use of the place name Ge Hinnom "the Valley of Hinnom," southwest of Jerusalem, where, according to Jeremiah xix.5, children were sacrificed to Moloch. Middle English had gehenne (late 15c.) from Middle French gehenne.

In politics, Moloch:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
"Pizza Gate" scandal, the word "chicken" in pedophilia code word means little boy.
---
If I were to deny the Holocaust, I would argue that their religion is a fiction, like they affirm of Christ - and there was no genocide because there is no such thing as the Jewish or Semitic "race", since races do not exist.

How have degenerates understood the pursuit of wisdom, symbolized by the 'exotic', to them, word 'philosophy'?

Like a child cries, expecting a parent to come to its aid, the degenerate modern asks questions, of the void.
Like toddler asking repeated questions of its father, the degenerate modern asks question after question from others.
This takes the Socratic method down to its cynical end.
Socrates wanted to expose his fellow Athenian's inability to define the words they parroted, or defend the concepts they adopted and held unto dearly.

Degenerate Moderns attempt to uncover the emptiness in all human answers in a cowardly attempt to justify their own self-serving obtuseness.
Degenerate Moderns demand absolute answers, from some parent deity, shouting endless questions into the void, listening to the echo of their own voices.
Nothing but the absolute will fulfill their infantile hunger, because to accept superior/inferior, or more or less probability as a measurement of degree, retains uncertainty, as a source of their anxiety.
Like feminine minds they want the biggest and the baddest to appear for them to justify their surrender.
The idea of creating answers and then facing the consequences, as a masculine attitude, has been cultivated out of their feeble inheritance.
They do not want to compete, they want to be given completeness, and to the giver give themselves completely.
They do not want answers, they only pretend to be seeking the 'real'.
They want to reduce all to their level by dismissing all answers created by men, because they cannot create answers on their own, and then apply them, reaping the rewards and paying the costs.

What is philosophy to such pathetic creatures but an endless questioning, with no acceptable answer?
This they consider intellectual openness.

Words are, for the Nihilist mind, the edges of his world-creating will.
He means 'world' when he speaks of human, and the only relevant occupants of his world, the only ones that can share in it, help create it and maintain it, or threaten to destroy it, are those organisms that have the ability to use words.

The boundaries of a shared world are words - shared symbols, representing shared concepts, feelings, ideals that need not be true, or real, but only believed in.
There are no lies, in a shared reality. there are only words that aid in its construction and maintenance, and words that do not - words are expressions of belief, of moral intent.
Words are magic.
Words are projections of organic power.

But words have no ability to affect world directly, especially the ones used by Nihilists of all variations.
No, these words require proxies to be controlled, using words, to become actors, driven by the power of words.

The schooling and herding survival method is brought to mind.
The ambition of every Nihilist is to be part of a large group, swirling, bobbing and waving, to confuse, not to clarify, but to escape, predators....the wold, in other words, full of threats.
Ideally, the center to this fluctuating swirl of organic bodies, is where one would want to be - the furthest point away from the edge, from the point where they are open and distinct for all eyes to see, all snouts to smell, all teeth to tear at.
Species with no ability to affect their kindred, only jostle for the center...but man has the symbol to affect, at a distance. Only man can manipulate the swarm of bodies to spin around one individual, creating a wall of flesh and blood, protecting it from predation.
For the Nihilist the word, the symbol, is the bonding mechanism that creates a super-organism - a memetic glue, bonding different genes.
Using symbols the SuperOranism can fabricate an alternate reality, keeping the world outside its confusing mass of continuously working, acting, bodies - from gene to meme.

To the participants words are powerful magical forces, because within the swarm they can affect, at a distance, even if they are impotent outside the flesh & blood perimeter.
All words are no longer used to connect to reality....reality is where threats come from, and where words are useless. No, words are magical and powerful, only inside the swarm, and only among those that share a language, and a cultural reference - a semiotic tradition point.
These are the agency that create an alternate reality, within an undesired one.

Nihilists need masses of converts, of fellow believers, of shared semiotics....because their ideals are swept away like dead fish in the tides.
words re to be used only to manipulate, and exploit, to seed beliefs, and to convert...to include, more and more into a shared swirl of confusion.

If words are made clear, or are connected to the real, as they once were, then the entire swarm dissolves into individuals, easy prey for what leis out there, in the unknown depths.
No, words have to remain vague and confusing - useful to each individual psychology, fodder for each subjective mind to release its own private anxieties and desires.
Only then can they unify, and not divide.