Difference between revisions of "Liberal wordiness"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(template and link to mother article) |
(our approach) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
See, for example, the work of liberal academics, especially literary theorists, who use confusing language to make themselves look smart. Contrast this with [[conservative]] statesmen, who do their utmost to make their ideas understood by any and all. | See, for example, the work of liberal academics, especially literary theorists, who use confusing language to make themselves look smart. Contrast this with [[conservative]] statesmen, who do their utmost to make their ideas understood by any and all. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Conservapedia == | ||
| + | Due to the prevalence of endless liberal disputation, Conservapedia has adopted the [[90/10 rule]] which undermines pointless wordiness by demanding content. | ||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
Revision as of 16:57, November 17, 2009
Liberal wordiness is part of liberal deceit and is a pattern of using overly pompous and drawn out language to express simple points. The goal is to confound the reader in the hopes they will give benefit of doubt to the writer.
See, for example, the work of liberal academics, especially literary theorists, who use confusing language to make themselves look smart. Contrast this with conservative statesmen, who do their utmost to make their ideas understood by any and all.
Conservapedia
Due to the prevalence of endless liberal disputation, Conservapedia has adopted the 90/10 rule which undermines pointless wordiness by demanding content.