B. U. G. S.

When people asked me about why I would say “everybody” in the past decades, they were

1) usually falling into a trap I set, or

2) could not understand my explanation.

So I found an answer that could get into their tiny skulls.

But the blog is different.

This is a genuine seminar. I have to explain myself.

Here is a group of people who have sat still and listened to EXACTLY what my whole approach is. I cannot sneak away from you the way I could everybody else.

More important, there is a POINT to me explaining things to you I would go around with those who, if I really tried to explain, wouldn’t get it anyway.

Believe me, I spent many useless hours trying to explain my approach to people outside Bob’s Blog, and the expression on the listener’s face only needed the word “Moo!” to make it complete.

So Joe’s asking me about why I use “everybody” so much has forced my mind out of the bushes. I sat and tried to think of some easy way to deal with Joe’s valid objections in my writings.

I either had to do that or actually think out WHY I use “everybody” so much.

So I considered using the accepted phrase, “the general concensus is…” But somehow that seemed to say exactly what I didn’t want to say.

Joe’s latest comment caused a breakthrough in my thinking:

Joe said,

“No, not everybody wonders what’s wrong. Somebody knows what’s wrong. Maybe (probably) several somebodies know what’s wrong. Surely, you know what’s wrong. Specifically, I mean. But not EVERYBODY is wondering what’s wrong. The people who know what’s wrong just won’t talk about it.”

Shari had a similar remark.

My response to Joe and Shari was, “If they don’t talk about it, why should I consider them SOMEBODY?

Which finally got me directly onto what I mean by “everybody.”

Fifty something years, and finally I got it in this seminar.

Why can’t I use the normal phrase, “The concensus is…?”

When you say “the concensus is…” you are describing a point of view which is a CONCENSUS on a matter. That is to say, everybody has had their say and there is a generally and voluntarily held position against which one is free to argue, and against which somebody DOES argue.

That is precisely wrong in the case of what I refer to as “everybody knows.”

For example I could say that “the concensus within Hitler’s National Socialist Party was that Jews were not nice.”

Well, that’s certainly ACCURATE. But you must admit that it really doesn’t express the spirit of the thing.

When you point out, as Joe and Shari did, that many people see what is wrong but you don’t dare say it, that is not a concensus.

In fact if you say it is a concensus you are WRONG.

Libanon, I need you in here. Does the word consensus have a common root with “consent?”

When I say “everybody knows” what is I mean is that there is no questioning of what I am saying.

It may be that nobody is ALLOWED to question it or that no one THINKS to question it. But in the real world, it can only be described as something “everybody knows.”

It just occurred to me that what I should say is, “Everybody CLAIMS to know that…”

But that’s not accurate either. If you never question it you don’t CLAIM it. In fact, when I say “everybody knows” I am usually trying to squeeze something which is not debated into public awareness.

In fact, concensus is the kind of word respectable conservatives use. It gives respectability to tyranny.

In USAGE, “everybody knows” is exactly what the average person who uses statements like “experts have proven that races don’t exist” are saying. He is saying that everybody knows that, and if you don’t you are just ignorant.

Everybody doesn’t know anything. Ask several thousand comatose patients at hospitals and you will find they do not know whatever it is. But if you could only discuss what comatose patients are aware of, you would not use up much space.

I pointed out that the most obvious kind of accepted truth, “The sky is blue on a cloudless sunny day” is not at all true. My father was among millions of people who never saw a blue sky in his life.

But going this way, you cannot have any discussion at all. A brick is a Stein to a German, but he would say that a Stein is a brick.

Be careful what you ask for, you may just get it.

You have to keep your language within usage but, as Joe points out, you cannot make a fool of yourself doing it.

I argued with him, but I also listened.

I asked you to watch me and correct me, and Joe gave me the whole load. I asked you think with me, and you are making me hop.

It takes me a LONG time to come up with something like this. I now think “Everybody CLAIMS to know,” though it is inaccurate, may do a lot for my credibility.

What do you think, Joe?