Progressive Politics

That's just associations' war.

Complex words have more specific associations. Except specific associations are easier to change via propaganda than generic associations. And people love to pretend to be smart like I do, so use complex words when they can.

This rule shouldn't be limited to outsiders. It should be used when talking to your own as well. Using compound concepts of simpler ones in discussion helps preserve understanding (and filter the kind of people not better than tankies).

Reagan's smear campaign on welfare is still paying dividends

Reminds me of how many people were really against Obamacare, but loved the Affordable Care Act.

Anyone can be poor, but only they are on welfare.

Publishers note: They usually refers to African Americans, but can be used for any suspicious minorities.

Don't use the buzzwords Republicans have spent decades poisoning.

Psychological damage is present.

As someone that works with the general public.

People are fucking dumb. Like not I'm not even kidding, there's a skill gap to even get to a site like this...and not everyone has the ability to do it...I'm not even kidding. People are just stupid.

Yep. Never use a ten dollar word when a 50 cent one does the job better. The left wing needs to dump it's highbrow (and cringe celebrity endorsements) and use the language of the common people in simple terms that cannot be demonised (or would sound insane to try).

Also, this is a prime example of how demonising words, especially buzzwords, is the strategy they use to make it lose all rationality with the public... the notion of being "woke" originally a good thing, welfare a good thing, etc...

Just want to point out that this negative association is based on racist dog whistles like the, "welfare queen," which were propagated by right-wingers to convince low-income whites to hate the programs designed to help them.

I get the critical comments here, but I think there's a basic association of the word "welfare" with the CURRENT system of assistance which leaves too many people out. Democrats have made the current apparati too hard to qualify for with their means-testing. If they were sincere in working for the masses, they would push more universal programs, but at least on the national level, they are bought out by the same corporations as the Republicans.

The issue is entirely a media problem. Can you tell yet?

Did the study define the kinds of assistance at all or was it simply the choice of terms?

“Welfare” is defined and had a lot of baggage with it. Opinion about welfare can be wildly different individually and demographically.

“Assistance” isn’t defined, people can place their own restrictions on what that hypothetical assistance is, who gets it based on their own prejudices, needs, and ideology.

FREEDOM DIVIDEND 🦅🇺🇸

Assistance implies that it is temporary, that it is help to help themselves.

Welfare implies that it is continuous.

If you have to continually support a part of the population then you have a systemic problem. The correct solution would be to change the system. People who support the continuation of the current system either profit from it or don't see an advantage in a change.