>>756932the left/socialists of which you speak do nothing to actually threaten or capitalism, so your question doesn't follow. if someone says "i don't like capitalism and i think you are an ugly cunt" you are allowed to dislike them when their second statement when their first statement refers only to a feeling and a vibe and not to any practical action whatsoever. (and if they
are engaged in practical action, you can
still dislike them if it's manifestly ineffective…)
>>7571521. not really, it's more like delayed or held back
2. because words exist in a social context which cannot be gamed in this fashion. if people constantly use the word for having your intellectual development delayed or held back as a shorthand for acting foolishly (Which they always do! stupid! idiot! cretin! retard!), it will become offensive to use it to refer to people who're intellectually disabled because they aren't
fools who can do better, they're disabled. Then, in some cases the meaning will fully change (stupid/idiot) and in others, it'll get caught in limbo where it's not really used in a professional context anymore, but that context hasn't gone away and continues to make it more severe than "lower" insults. (e.g. "retard" is clearly worse than "idiot" even though they originated - broadly - the same way.)
the meaning of a word comes from how people use it. that is to say, if, tomorrow, we all decide that the article "the" is offensive,
it is offensive despite the fact it does not really mean anything at all and isn't even a particularly necessary linguistic feature.
that was supposed to be an arbitrary silly example but it actually happened with Ukraine. "the" was felt to imply it was a region rather than a country in its own right, although tbf most people were already dropping it as weirdly antiquated-sounding.