Fields are where some slaves worked in the early nineteenth century. Consequently, the word “field” has been struck from the Newspeak Dictionary by the University of Southern California:

USC’s Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work said the change was critical to support anti-racist social work and inclusivity.

If you want to see how moonbatty moonbattery can get, a school of social work in California would be good place to start.

The department specifically decided to remove the word “field” from its curriculum and replace it with “practicum,” according to the letter, which was dated Jan. 9 and shared to Twitter.

Before long, moonbats will speak a separate dialect, consisting entirely of stilted terms like “practicum.” As it becomes increasingly incomprehensible to normal Americans, it will qualify as a foreign language.

The letter continued: “Language can be powerful, and phrases such as ‘going into the field’ or ‘field work’ maybe have connotations for descendants of slavery and immigrant workers that are not benign.”

Belief in the power of language is at the core of the moonbat religion. It is grounded in postmodernism, which explicitly deprecates reality in favor of a contrived pseudo-reality created by language in order to achieve power. This is the reason the Newspeak Dictionary gets shorter each day.

USC says they are joining other universities across the nation in making changes to their institution to “honor and acknowledge inclusion and reject white supremacy, anti-immigrant and anti-blackness ideologies.”

Social work isn’t about social work any more than universities are about learning. Everything controlled by leftists is about ideology.

Eric Utter wonders how far the thought police will take the new ban on the word “field”:

If “field” is verboten, we will have to rename baseball positions and parks. No more “center field” or “Wrigley Field,” etc. Football’s “field goal” will have to give way to a different term. Entire cities must be renamed. So much for “Bakersfield” and “Springfield,” for example. And, sorry Mrs. Fields, but your cookie outlets will have to be rebranded. Hope the cost of doing so isn’t prohibitive, but, racism, you know. The Beatle’s iconic “Strawberry Fields Forever?” Ash heap of history. Maybe “Strawberry Practicum Forever.”

Maybe old uses of the word “field” will be grandfathered in, like the forbidden word in United Negro College Fund.

On tips from Ed McAninch, Mr. Freemarket, Jack D, and Wiggins.

“Pro-choice” is a hell of a euphemism to describe being in favor of people choosing to kill their own offspring. But another term is considered more effective at promoting the media’s agenda. Consquently,

The Associated Press issued new guidelines for the topic of abortion Monday. The writing stylebook says to now “use the modifiers anti-abortion or abortion-rights; don’t use pro-life, pro-choice or pro-abortion unless they are in quotes or proper names. Avoid abortionist, which connotes a person who performs clandestine abortions.”

News outlets across the spectrum use the AP stylebook. But the Daily Signal will ignore this Newspeak Dictionary update. Here’s why:

Replacing the term “pro-choice” and “pro-abortion” with “abortion-rights” inaccurately implies that women have a right to end the life of the child growing in their womb. The Declaration of Independence speaks of a right to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” but neither the Declaration nor the Constitution provides a right to end a pregnancy through elective abortion.

This was confirmed by the Dobbs decision, infuriating pro-abortion progressives, who assert that the Constitution says whatever they want it to say.

The purpose of the liberal media establishment is to fabricate and reinforce a narrative that empowers the Democratic Party. Conditioning people to see abortion as a right rather than a crime supports this narrative. It does not reflect reality.

On a tip from Lyle.

According to postmodern philosophy, objective reality is either nonexistent or irrelevant; all that matters is the artificial world we create with words. Consequently, leftists believe that ultimate power can be achieved through control of language. This is why updates to the Newspeak Dictionary come fast and furious. It is why you can tell that you have found a soft spot in leftist defenses when they react to certain words as if you had poked a raw nerve. Use the word “depravity” in a discussion with liberals about the LGBT agenda and you may see fireworks. The word “globalist” so betrays their agenda that they have resorted to playing the anti-Semitism card:

Following what many, such as Brexit leader Nigel [Farage], have described as a “globalist coup” to install former Goldman Sachs banker and World Economic Forum (WEF) acolyte Rishi Sunak as prime minister, left-wing figures have attempted to make the very term “globalist” an off-limits slur, claiming that it is antisemitic.

I didn’t realize Sunak is Jewish. He threw me off by taking his parliamentary oath of office on the Bhagavad Gita.

Acknowledgment that power-hungry supranational cabals like the World Economic Forum are globalist is allegedly “a common antisemitic trope based on conspiracy theories about international Jewish power,” according to professional offended Jewish person Marie van der Zyl.

The linguistic dispute came to a head on Sunday, when a caller to the LBC radio station echoed Mr Farage’s sentiments in describing Sunak as a “globalist” who “doesn’t seem to love England”.

Delete the word “globalist” from your copy of the Newspeak Dictionary at once, and remember that if you utter it, you are literally a Nazi.

On a tip from StephaneDumas.