Day 25 - Political Language: Sorry, I Don't Speak "Politician"

"Political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." - George Orwell

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Day 25 - Political Language: Sorry, I Don't Speak "Politician"

In the current system, we see many politicians using the same sweeping remarks and professing to have the same values and principles, and yet when you place those same politicians in a room together and have them clearly define and explain what they mean when they say they value "freedom" and "democracy" and "equality" - they will not have the same answer, if they are even able to answer at all - which should reveal to us that any prescribed "solution" or "plan" to achieve/implement/or enforce concepts such as "freedom" and "democracy" and "equality" is not based on an equally agreed upon definition or principle, but instead is based on inconsistent political language that is accepted as fact - upon which policy is written and in turn "sold" to the public.

Politics has become a profession that employs specific political languages. One language is the technical language used by the professional career politicians amongst each other. The other language is used for the public with the intent and purpose of influencing and convincing the public in order to support a particular politician or policy, or to serve as "damage control" when unpopular decisions are made or when the government has made mistakes or betrayed public trust. 

A politician who delivers a speech to the public must employ this kind of specialized language for many reasons due to the nature of what the politician must face if he/she wishes to remain in office - a career politician in the current system CANNOT speak the actual truth or actually allow themselves to be vulnerable and accountable and intimate with the public - because such actions would be taken apart and used maliciously by the politician's political opponents, who will ensure that whatever can be exploited or "spun" in such a way that damages or discredits a politician who employs the "wrong" language will not go to waste.

Another reason for this kind of specialized language is due to the fact that the majority of the public are NOT politically inclined - and have NOT been given an equal education so that they can be spoken to as political equals. A politician who clearly states exactly where they stand on an issue and why will more likely LOSE support because they will in effect be alienating potential voters who would have continued to keep voting and supporting this politician because they assumed that their political goals were the same - and people have an interest in voting for politicians who they can relate to - politicians who they feel best represents them - because people have not realized the responsibility of representing themselves and becoming equal and active participants in the political dialogue of their country, and in general have NO access to having political conversations with policy makers (unless they come with substantial campaign funding) 

All of this lends to the problem of there being a WHOLE OTHER LANGUAGE developed by politicians to speak amongst each other as well as speak TO the public, instead of speak WITH the public, which is made even worse when the public - unfamiliar with political structures and technical language - resort to trusting their "feelings" and "impressions" when deciding on whether they accept or support a particular politician or political decision and WANTING to trust political leaders to make decisions FOR the public while the public is busy working and surviving in a system that is starved of actual REAL political leadership that would see a politically and socially inactive and inarticulate public as a major cause for concern - because when a deciding majority loses touch with their own decision making and does not understand the nature and function of emotions and feelings - those who DO understand such concepts wield a disproportionate and dangerous amount of influence and power. (Suggested reading - "Coercion and it's Fallout" at Psychologist's Journey to Life Blog)

When a politician speaks to a crowd and uses sweeping statements about "Democracy" and "freedom" and "justice" - they must be able to clearly and consistently share what the actual definition of those terms are and how they will practically approach whether to implement and/or enforce those concepts - and they must be able to do so without fear of political repercussion from other "politicians" who intend to misconstrue and deliberately take out of context this kind of clear and specific speech.

Here, the public must be equal in knowing exactly what the politician actually means when using political terminology, and must be able to respond with clarity and political awareness so that they are not simply "spoken to" and "assured" through vague or overly technical language and showmanship to continue supporting politicians and policies that are not publicly accountable.

To this end, the next several blogs will be dedicated to having a look at "political philosophy" and the use of political language. 

In the series to follow we will begin with defining and expanding on the concept of "justice" and the role of the government and politicians in relation to these concepts, as well as the responsibility of the public to be EQUAL, Real Politicians that can not only understand the importance of clear political language, but can SPEAK for themselves in an equal conversation instead of being "spoken to" by their representatives.