Discussion Forum

Please consider registering

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —

— Match —

— Forum Options —

Minimum search word length is 4 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Another established word that never stops sounding silly.
Topic Rating: 0 (0 votes) 
Forum Posts: 476
Member Since:
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

This word has long been in the dictionary for how things that used to belong to the elitist few now become accessible to the masses :  high technologies, medicines, weapons.  I seem to have heard said that the Greek Deities were  democratized by Christianity’s the Apostle Paul.  Still I can never bring myself to using this word like that.  You?

Forum Posts: 538
Member Since:
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I don’t use that word because I’ve never seen it used to mean “to change the power structure to majority rule.”   There needs to be a word that means “as accessible to the economic have-nots and the socially unpopular as to those who are rich, beautiful, famous and powerful”, but as we have all observed, “equal protection of the laws” doesn’t even allow a homeless gent to lounge in a warm public library, reading, in mid-winter.

New Member
Forum Posts: 2
Member Since:
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

If we consider that power structures are partially (if not substantially) dependent upon who has access to resources, ideas, and so on, this might help recover the apparent ‘improper’ use.  When I read RobertB writing “the Apostle Paul democratized the Greek Deities” I read it to mean that because of the Apostle Paul, ‘the majority’ gained greater or more effective access to the Greek Deities such that their power and influence in society increased.  I will admit, this particular usage still feels a little tortured if not awkward.  But I think DeaconB’s concern is usually not an issue in my mind when the idea of democratizing some thing implies a shift in power, tending towards majority rule, as a result of greater accessibility to the economic have-nots and the socially unpopular.

Forum Posts: 10
Member Since:
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Perhaps part of the confusion I see here is “democratize” as an action versus “democratization” the results of taking the action (or an embodiment of the view that democracy is a long-term process)?

“They chose to democratize the process of selecting representatives by undertaking a series of votes.”

“The democratization of the voting process has taken years of effort, and the loss of untold thousands of lives.”

Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles

Most Users Ever Online: 1147

Currently Online: EmmettRedd
2 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

Heimhenge: 915

Bob Bridges: 680

Ron Draney: 670

deaconB: 538

RobertB: 476

Robert: 475

tromboniator: 437

Dick: 423

samaphore: 312

dilettante: 287

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 611

Members: 3057

Moderators: 1

Admins: 5

Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 1

Topics: 3354

Posts: 17761

Newest Members: Archena, cwcollins06, lizaellis, homerfarmsby, sglickman, bry-bry, wyobrewer, Carol K, gryphonous, GeezMcDutz

Administrators: Martha Barnette: 820, Grant Barrett: 1444, EmmettRedd: 744, Glenn: 1713, timfelten: 0