Any political analyst will tell you that the use of language in politics is just as, if not more important than, the actual viewpoints that make up a candidate. Orwellian language, which is generally defined as political rhetoric or oxymoronic language created to deceive, runs rampant in Washington. We have career politicians who will say anything to get elected. The use of false language and strategically framed statements is what gets people elected.
Examples of the importance of language use in politics can be found everywhere. Democrats railed President Bush for having implemented “Tax cuts for the rich,” when in reality his cuts benefited the lowest tax bracket as well as the highest. The former received a 33 percent cut – down from 15 to 10 percent of taxable income. Those who support amnesty do not even acknowledge the term ‘illegal immigrant.’ Instead they prefer to use ‘undocumented,’ or even simply ‘migrant’ and ‘immigrant.’ This kind of language makes those who hear it think that undermining our nation’s sovereignty is not illegal.
Republicans are guilty of the same measure. Terms such as ‘fiscal conservative’ are used to imply fiscal responsibility. Senator John McCain co-sponsored a bill titled “Campaign Finance Reform” that in fact did little to reform campaigns other than to add more protections for incumbent candidates. How many times have we heard about “No Child Left Behind?” It sounds good, but what does it mean? It means another bureaucracy with unlimited funds, which is supposed to increase test scores and graduation rates.
Even the most important words can become unrecognizable in their meanings; all that is needed is time and repetitiveness. Think about the word ‘liberal.’ What does this word mean to you? To be called a liberal today, one must support taxpayer-funded abortion, government controlled medical care, oppose full private property rights, and advocate ‘equal result’ over ‘equal opportunity.’ In summation, contemporary liberals support greater government control in all aspects of our lives, in effect taking freedoms and choice away from the individual.
If any of our first 32 presidents saw what a liberal was like today, their understanding of the word would not even be comparable with ours. This is because the term ‘liberal’ has done a complete 180 on the political spectrum. While today it lies on the Democratic side, just seven decades ago it was associated with Republicans. The historical definition of liberal relates to an emphasis on individual freedom. A liberal in the 19th century would have called for small, local government; inalienable private property rights; low-to-no taxes, and a large emphasis on God. This is a far cry from what I am told a liberal is today. I feel the need to take back this word and restore its true meaning. From now on all Republicans are liberals. We want to liberally apply freedoms to the individual!
Both parties are good at language use. Everyone hires experts to determine which words and statements hit a nerve on the American spinal cord. But I think that Democrats have an edge on the use of language – specifically euphemisms. Take for instance the word ‘progressive.’ This is a word that many Democrats use in place of ‘liberal,’ as the term liberal has come to mean that you are not moderate but left-wing. The use of this word is ingenious for a couple of reasons: First, it adds a negative connotation to the Republican Party. If a Democrat is progressive, then I as a Republican can only be regressive. To make the word ‘progressive’ synonymous with the Democratic Party allows politicians to associate it with all of their policies. Take, for instance, progressive tax brackets, progressive education reform, and progressive foreign policies. Who doesn’t want to be progressive? It all sounds so good. And so while the voter is thinking about how progressive he or she is, they fail to dig through the misinformation that is political rhetoric and find that progressive tax brackets consider earning 80,000 dollars a year to be too much. Progressive education reform calls for a greater bureaucracy, and progressive foreign policy says the United States should disarm its nuclear weapons first.
With the presidential election just 392 days away, it is important to really listen to what candidates are saying. The use of Orwellian language is deadly. After hearing imprecise, euphemistic and vaguely framed language, we will eventually begin to accept what we are told. When Democrats tell us they are not for socialized medicine, but all of the top tier presidential candidates propose socialized medicine reform, you should probably question that. When Republicans say that they are for small government, but then outspend Democrats, you should probably question that. And when a politician tells you they can fix a problem, you should just turn and run because they can only make it worse.
As Americans, we have a civic duty to understand the true effects of government policy – not just what the policymaker tells us. This is why language use has become a science: Politicians know that a positive title on a proposed bill can get them the votes they need. It is na’ve and insulting in my view, but apparently it works. Don’t let our government play you for a fool. Understand that cutting through the lies and misdirection is just a part of politics.
[email protected]