Always Be Closing: a Hash of Orwell, Mamet, Dostoevsky, Mill, etc.

That is a room full of talent. But I have put it here because it illustrates why lefties are so given to Orwellian double speak. The Fairness doctrine is anything but fair. The Employee Free Choice Act is about taking freedom away from employees. The Democrat Party is not democratic: the superdelagates have virtual veto power over any choice arrived at democratically. Obama’s transparency is apparently designed to keep information from the mass of citizens. Racism once meant one race feeling superior or oppressing other races but no longer seems to apply when whites are oppressed. These are just the first examples to come to mind.
Why does the left habitually resort to twisting language beyond recognition? I’m sure there are many reasons. One of the first that comes to mind is their lack of respect for rules and boundaries. I don’t think most of them even care that debasing the language weakens social order. Many might even be glad to participate in the destruction of society since the final conclusion of most every lefty thought process and action is anarchy. (But I’m not going to seriously delve into that here beyond the observation that their misuse of language is a destructive and nihilistic process.)
Alec Baldwin’s (and David Mamet‘s) ‘always be closing’ speech fits in because liberals often twist language for marketing purposes. If they were open and honest about employee free choice, the Fairness Doctrine and the nondemocratic process of the Democrat party they would be about as successful as the Green Party. But to paraphrase Alec B., “They're sitting out there waiting to give you their vote. Are you going to take it? Are you man enough to take it? Because someone else will.”
And some of the marketing involves convincing themselves they are in the right. A perfect example of this is Raskolnikov in Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment. He is a poor student suffering from dire poverty in Czarist Russia. He accepts the basic tenet of utilitarianism that whatever serves the greatest good for the greatest number of people is the highest good. He then takes this and manufactures a rationalization system whereby he feel justified in murdering a rich old woman. He reasons that he will take her wealth, become an engineer and help countless people thus more than wiping out the smaller evil of the one murder. How progressive! He has embraced the evil of murder with a mental trick and strangely enough his little transgression furnishes him with a bunch of money: how convenient. Rather like ACORN’s lax oversight led to forged voter registration forms and finally to many votes for Democrats while they mouth bromides about the democratic process or whatever.
A large web of lies are created to justify perverting the language, thereby speeding the dissolution of society. And the creators of the lies and perversions end up with lots of votes, money, power and a strangely inflated sense of moral superiority.