Find Insurance Online

Baudrillard (1974) writes of "hyper-reality," which arises when productions, perhaps created by publicists and other spin doctors, become the reality that is taken seriously--at the expense of the originals.  Consider, for example, the modern art of Andy Warhal. His portrats are not exactly pure "copies" of the originals.  It can be problematic when the new way of depicting reality becomes identified as the definitive truth.  I have in mind the modern redefinitions of socialism taking place both in the EU and US.  Socialism, which is an economic system wherein the state owns the means of production--an alternative to private property--has morphed into greater government control of the economy.  This is essentially government regulation of private commercial property, not government ownership. Moreover, the government regulation "definition" effectively shifts socialism from being an economic system to a political system. That is to say, an economic terms has come to be redefined into primarily political terms. There are doubtless various factors that have gone into this morphing phenomenon; I wish to call attention to its ethical dimension. It strikes me that ignoring a term's definition and declaring one of one's own to be "what the term means" is a rather presumptuous enterprise. Even if all that people notice is the output--suddenly the term is used in a way at odds with its definition--the slight of hand ought to be called and made transparent. Simply having a public platform is not a sufficient justification for deciding that a term's definition can be ignored and replaced with one that is more expedient for one's political purposes. Sadly, such well-publicized misconceptions can gain traction and a certain currency of their own, and may even replace the real definition in the lexicon of modern English. In such a case, it is as though the original definition simply never existed. The partial-perspective is itself, it seems to be, problematic ethically. That the "redefiners" may get away with their expedient spin raises the troubling ethical question of desert and justice. In other words, what comes around does not always come around, at least in this life, and there might not be another. We are left with the possibility that politicos may be able to get away with having instituted their misconceptions as definitive. Yet this presumes a decadence in the people, rather than the Founding Father's ideal wherein the electorate of a republic are virtuous and educated. The success of those who have sought to redefine socialism may be a reflection of how far we have fallen from our Founder's ideal. 

Reference:
Baudrillard, J. "Mass Media Culture," in Revenge of the Crystal, J. Baudrillard, ed. (London: Pluto Press, 1974), pp. 63-97.