Do you believe that the word war was so overused...?

Question

Do you believe that the word war was so overused that people became somewhat immune to its meaning?

War on Poverty,War on Drugs, War on the Environment, War on the Poor, War on Crime, etc., etc., etc.

I have no alternative. Just thinking that maybe if the war wasn't so used so much in recent history, the idea of war would be more fearful and one that would have been measured more carefully in 2002-2003.

Answer 1

The concept of using the word "war" to describe the 'War on Poverty', the 'War on Drug', the 'War on Illiteracy', etc. rises from the midst of the Cold War.

Johnson used it to decribe his "Great Society" initiatives of the 1960's where he declared a war on poverty.

Its all part of a mentality. However I think the word is improperly used but fits the mindset.

Bureaucracy is organized, in a way, like the Army. Hence, when Johnson started this snowball rolling with his war on poverty, he wanted to organize the Department of Health and Human Services and Housing and Urban Development in ways that resembled a military chain of command, with intelligence gathering type systems, and policy formation groups and committees (like joint staffs).

The whole point was that these great thinking bulbs had no idea that bureaucracy is the least efficient model to accomplish a goal. That is too much input, too many regulations being created, submitted for comment, published in the federal register and then republished for final action.

All of that costs money, employs armies of accountants, lawyers, and other operatives, and then seeks out GAO and Budget Office analysis.

The point I'm making is that the word "war" should have never been used.

Instead, we have a paper monster and an overused word.

So the answer to your question is that the use of the word "war" is misplaced and then overused.

We should consider some other description for these programs. Don't you think?

Answer 2

That's really an excellent point. Words can be powerful weapons - or they can be de-sensitized with over use and become just second nature.
It must still retain some of its meaning because Korea and Viet Nam were "conflicts" - not "wars."
Sounds like an argument of semantics to me - if someone is shooting at me and I'm shooting back - that sounds like "war" to me.

Answer 3

So what is your alternative? The examples you quote are listed in the dictionary

Answer 4

That's key to perpetuity of it. Desensitize. Far more impacting when you are in combat.

Answer 5

Good point... never thought about that before, I think you might be on to something...

Answer 6

No.