FauxCapitalist
11-26-2009, 10:11 AM
Source: http://fauxcapitalist.com/2009/11/25/the-non-military-bureau-of-labor-statistics-uses-the-military-term-civilians-to-refer-to-americans-who-arent-members-of-the-military-meaning-according-to-one-definition-outsiders/
The non-military Bureau of Labor Statistics uses the military term “civilians” to refer to Americans who aren’t members of the military, meaning, according to one definition, “outsiders.”
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://www.bls.gov/), a non-military department of the federal government, refers to Americans who aren’t members of the military, as “civilians. (http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsatabs.htm)“
The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines a “civilian” as (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civilian):
1: A specialist in Roman or civil law.
2 a: one not on active duty or in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force.
2 b: OUTSIDER
The last definition is particularly revealing. Does the non-military Bureau of Labor Statistics really regard Americans who are not members of the military, or police or firefighting forces, as outsiders? That would include themselves, by definition.
Why the use of the military term “civilian,” to refer to Americans who aren’t members of the military? Why not a non-military classification such as the categories of Americans who aren’t members of the military, police or firefighters, and those who are?
If the majority of Americans are outsiders to their government, according to the terminology implied by definition of the Bureau’s classification system, then what does that say about the form of American government today?
...
More comments at http://fauxcapitalist.com/2009/11/25/the-non-military-bureau-of-labor-statistics-uses-the-military-term-civilians-to-refer-to-americans-who-arent-members-of-the-military-meaning-according-to-one-definition-outsiders/
The non-military Bureau of Labor Statistics uses the military term “civilians” to refer to Americans who aren’t members of the military, meaning, according to one definition, “outsiders.”
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://www.bls.gov/), a non-military department of the federal government, refers to Americans who aren’t members of the military, as “civilians. (http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsatabs.htm)“
The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines a “civilian” as (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civilian):
1: A specialist in Roman or civil law.
2 a: one not on active duty or in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force.
2 b: OUTSIDER
The last definition is particularly revealing. Does the non-military Bureau of Labor Statistics really regard Americans who are not members of the military, or police or firefighting forces, as outsiders? That would include themselves, by definition.
Why the use of the military term “civilian,” to refer to Americans who aren’t members of the military? Why not a non-military classification such as the categories of Americans who aren’t members of the military, police or firefighters, and those who are?
If the majority of Americans are outsiders to their government, according to the terminology implied by definition of the Bureau’s classification system, then what does that say about the form of American government today?
...
More comments at http://fauxcapitalist.com/2009/11/25/the-non-military-bureau-of-labor-statistics-uses-the-military-term-civilians-to-refer-to-americans-who-arent-members-of-the-military-meaning-according-to-one-definition-outsiders/