Assassination or "work-place violence?"

[LincolnMan]

I have noticed there is discussion in certain media outlets of a reconsideration of what to call Lincoln's assassination. The suggestion is being put out there to rewrite the history and label it "work-place violence." This development, in my opinion, follows the political correctness path that our country has been taking for years now. Frankly, It is alarming to me but nothing surprises anymore. We are headling into Orwell's landscape and many can't see the forest from the trees.

[BettyO]

Pretty scary indeed.....are we to assume that because Booth shot Lincoln in Ford's Theatre (Booth's "sometime" workplace - although Booth claimed to have "given up" acting) that the deed is designated "workplace violence"? How about Powell's attempt? Certainly Seward's house wasn't Powell's "place of employment/working environment" - however, if Seward had visited Parr's China Shop and Powell jumped him there - then maybe we'd have something?

Utterly crazy -

[LincolnMan]

I think so Betty. The whole premise is absurd- but that is true of a lot that is occurring nowadays.

[Susan Higginbotham]

Is this the piece in question? If so, I think it's meant as satire.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/12/1...lence.html

[LincolnMan]

Yes I think so. I hadn't remembered where I had read that. Now I've re-read it several times- maybe it's me but I'm not seeing it as satire. I hope it is!

[Susan Higginbotham]

(04-13-2016 03:10 PM)LincolnMan Wrote:  Yes I think so. I hadn't remembered where I had read that. Now I've re-read it several times- maybe it's me but I'm not seeing it as satire. I hope it is!

I think these lines are written firmly with tongue in cheek:

"But people at the time probably just weren’t sophisticated enough to understand the nature of the workplace relationship between actors and regular members of the audience.

Americans leaped to the conclusion that Booth killed Lincoln over lingering resentment related the Civil War.

This ‘rush to judgement’ prompted a predictable jingoistic response from a blood thirsty American public who were left with the impression that Booth and many of his fellow confederates weren’t peaceful lovers of the union."

[Eva Elisabeth]

Reminds me of "collateral damage" which was "Un-word of the Year" 1999, referring to the civilian casualties in the Kosovo war.

If serious, "work-place violence" would be a prosperous candidate for the 2016 "Un-word of the Year"! Is there a similar annual "award" in the US?

The title "Un-word of the Year" is awarded each year by the German Language Association to the year's most offensive new or recently popularized (seriously meant) term.

The year before it was "sozialverträgliches Frühableben", lit. "socially acceptable early passing", implying that people who die early into their retirement were considered advantageous for the welfare system.

For more examples go here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Un-word_of_the_year

[Susan Higginbotham]

Now that I look at the date of the article I linked to above (December 2015), I believe that it was a response to the San Bernardino mass shooting earlier that month. At the time, there was some question at first as to whether the male shooter had ties to terrorist groups or was simply a disgruntled employee out for revenge. That confirms my feeling that the article is satire targeting those who thought initially that the shooter was a disgruntled employee.

[LincolnMan]

Susan: looking at it yet again I think you are right!
Sadly, the determination nowadays to label an act of terrorism (in my opinion) workplace violence- has occurred multiple times- and is disturbing. That's why the article was written following San Bernardino.