When Lenin died in 1924, his obiturary in the London Times (at that time the most respected newspaper in the world) was headed 'Gospel of Hate'. Indeed, that is exactly what the doctrine of Socialism has always been - a gospel of hate. In those days that fact was perfectly clear to everyone. Seventy years later, however, people's perceptions and beliefs have been considerably altered, and most people no longer consider the doctrine of socialism evil - indeed they regard those who oppose socialism too strongly as in some ways suspect. Brian Crozier, the writer and journalist, tells the story of his first job interview in the early 1960s, when he was young man. It was her job on a magazine, and at a certain point, the editor said to him, "I must make it quite clear that we are centrist magazine" - to which Crozier replied, "And I must make it quite clear that I am strongly anti-Communist." Neither of them saw the slightest contradiction in those two statements!

How has this radical change in people's view of socialism being effected? Obviously in many ways. Some of the best-known have been: the very active propaganda machines of the Socialist/Communist countries, the continuous infiltration of the Hard Left into our educational systems, the growth of sympathy for Socialist views in the media, and the continual manipulations by the Hard Left of well-intentioned, but misguided people through their guilt feelings.

One of the most effective methods, however, has been one of the least noticed, namely the manipulation of words as a way of altering people's perception of reality. By persuading people to use words in ways that are opposite to their real meaning, the Hard Left has succeeded in making people say things that are quite different to what those people actually meant to say. From then it is only a short step to persuading people to then change their thoughts to conform to their words. To demonstrate the importance of words in our life, imagine that over the past 30 years homosexuals had been universally referred to as 'sodomites' rather than as 'gays'. Would their position and political influence in society be the same as it is today? Yet 'sodomite' is accurate, while 'gay' is an outrageous euphemism.

A good example of an influential word whose meaning has been stealthly altered is the word 'tolerant'. The dictionary definition of 'tolerant' is: "one who tolerates opinions or practices different from his own." The crucial phrase in the definition is "different from his own" because it makes clear that in order to be tolerant, one must first have opinions of one's own. There is a famous occasion in history which graphically illustrates this point. When Constantinople fell in 1453, the Ottoman Turks overran Greece and the Balkans. Most people would agree that the Moslem religion is very fervent, indeed almost a fanatical one. Yet during the almost 400 years that the Turks occupied the Balkans, they did not interfere with the practice of the orthodox religion in any of the Balkan countries. By contrast the Christian religion is a much more gentle religion, which preaches tolerance. Yet when the Christian Knights arrived in the Middle East with the Crusades, although many of them were very lax Christians themselves, they still chopped off the head of any infidel who refused to embrace Christianity. It was the fanatical Moslems, who were very tolerant - it was the lax Christian Knights who were not.

The crucial point is that being tolerant does not mean accepting other people's views - it only means allowing others to hold views that are very different from one's own. Indeed, once the views of others have been accepted, there is no longer any need for tolerance. Yet, today, the word "tolerant" is used in exactly the opposite way. In order to be considered "tolerant" today, you are expected to accept the views of others, and anyone who does not do so is immediately labelled "intolerant".

By definition, therefore, anyone who has strong views or standards of any sort, is now automatically considered "intolerant". Now as traditional ideas invariably have standards imbedded in them, this results in all traditional views immediately being labelled "intolerant". In short, the truth has been turned inside out. It is not difficult to confuse people's minds if one goes about it systematically, and most people today - even intelligent people - are not even aware that the word "tolerant" has been turned inside out. The truth, of course, is that it is the people who consider themselves "politically correct", and who do not allow anyone to have views different from themselves, who are the intolerant ones.

George Orwell pointed out almost 50 years ago, in his famous essay "Politics and the English Language", that there is a strong connection between politics and the debasement of language, and that slovenliness of language makes it easier to have foolish thoughts. By confusing the meaning of words, and encouraging people to use ready made cliches, which will think their thoughts for them, political views can be transmitted into the minds of others with little difficulty. As Orwell puts it, "ready made cliches perform the important service of concealing your true meaning, even from yourself."