How about the German Democratic Republic?
Ideology twists words. You know the absolute truth and others don't accept it? Convince them--and if that doesn't work, before pummeling their bodies into compliance pummel their thinking into compliance.
Always has, always will. That's how self-righteous power works. It's why in a properly structured democracy, speech and press are free to undermine it and power centers aren't given enough authority to impose the definitional shifts. What screws the system is when different parts of a decentralized system team up to be de-facto centralized. Then it's shifting towards authoritarian in function but democratic in form (and there are countries that are like that, with the de-facto centralization imposed from above, but in a few cases the centralization happened from the side).
Lenin was a master of shifting definitions. So was Stalin. Hitler was a master of the pernicious practice. Mussolini, not bad. Castro had his stellar moments, Chavez was a piker, but then again he was a low-ranking formerly failed coupster so expectations can't be high.
Take "democracy." It reeks of goodness. So it's warped every chance an ideology can get. Or we make sure to "frame" things properly (odd, how "framing" a person is a bad thing ... Then again, Sir Isaac did it late in life).
Who can forget the "German Democratic Republic"? That bastion of RW fascism. Ruled by a Communist Party whose goal was to achieve utopian communism via building socialism. But, again, they went on and on about how they were "deepening democracy" and "perfecting democracy." Such speech sets my teeth on edge.
One doesn't have to learn from history--it's a free country, after all, pass the test and get your piece of paper--but one really shouldn't assume nobody else has.
= new reply since forum marked as read