undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmjevans10y ago0 comments

No, it's a great idea. It denies them recognition and legitimacy.

If we described domestic terrorists (bomb makers, mass shooters, killers, etc) as 'that waste that killed a bunch of people in X during Y' and never /ever/ published their names (in the news anyway, court transcripts would need to show them) then it would make those actions a lot less sexy.

In that same way, we should also call the extremists in the middle east that; possibly picking an arbitrary flavor word that is of no relation to them just so we can make a distinction. There are /quite/ a few extremist groups in that area of the world.

0 comments

7 comments · 4 top-level

yongjik10y ago· 3 in thread

"Call him Voldemort, Harry. Always use the proper name for things. Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself."

- Albus Dumbledore

serf10y ago

“A nickname is the hardest stone that the devil can throw at a man.”

― William Hazlitt

dragonwriter10y ago

ISIS, ISIL, and Daesh are all transformations of the same name (the first two are initialisms for different translations of the name into English, Daesh is a transliteration of an untranslated acronym.)

AYBABTME10y ago

Using Daesh instead of ISIS is more like, stating a lack of fear for the thing itself.

pessimizer10y ago

> It denies them recognition and legitimacy.

This doesn't mean anything. We recognize them as a legitimate threat because of the land they've taken and the people they've murdered. This reeks of the "homicide bombers" campaign, or the people complaining that "Xmas" takes the Christ out of Christmas. If anything, it's even sexier that the greatest powers in the world are so terrified that they refuse to even say their name - is it for fear that they might appear?

It was disappointing to me that the SNP chose to make forcing the BBC to use "Daesh" their first issue after the elections.

Karunamon10y ago

I'm not sure that follows, or for that matter that there's any evidence to support your position.

These attacks are not the terrorist group form of advertising, getting the name out in the MSM? No, they are to drive home some kind of ideological point - that's going to happen whether you call them "ISIS" or "fuzzy pickles".

gdwatson10y ago

Your position is that propaganda is useful and we should structure our speech for maximum utility?

That way lies Newspeak.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse