An old post from Tea Party News
Say any word a thousand times and it loses its meaning. Yet, how could any act punishable by death lose its meaning? I don't care how many times I hear the word murder, it always pretty much holds the same weight as the first time I heard it. The same goes for rape. I heard the word many times and have seen it used superfluously as in: "They are raping the land!" Regardless, when I hear that word, it sparks an internal revulsion.
Treason seems to no longer hold that same revulsion. It is a co-opted word by those guilty of it. It is a word reserved for those who have gone against the government. But, when the government goes against the people in clear violation of the Constitution, the word never appears, or when it does it carries no weight whatsoever. So, one must ask oneself: "Why not?"
Why not, indeed.
A word like treason only holds meaning if it is enforced, if it represents a true and rational threat. Where there is no one to enforce the death penalty aspect to it, there is no meaning. Traditionally, we think of the consequences of treason more than the mere act of it. We might imagine the sneaky, late-night passing of communication between the treasonous agent and the beneficiary, but it is the stark sight of the firing squad that brings home the import of the act.
Another aspect to the act of treason that lends more weight to the word at one time rather than another is the immediacy of threat. When a nation is at war, treason is dealt with differently than when it serves to aid some distant military threat. I'm not sure that it should, but it is a fact. Part of that obviously comes from the lives put in danger dimension to a nation at war and the possibility of war.
In America today, we are at war. Treason is being committed. Lives are being put in danger as a result. This treason is open and clear, almost insultingly obvious, to anyone who cares to look. So, it must be the word that means nothing. I guess we need a new word for it.