That was the title of a recent article in the Financial Times that caught my eye. We see this word a lot these days, but there are also many words similar to what I would call political “slang” that are launched, and I often wonder what exactly they mean.
I had assumed it, for example “he woke up” it actually referred to people who used to be called each other “liberals” or “reformers”. These people typically looked to the government for various kinds of social change. However, this article defines “he woke up” how “The number one nonsense word used to mean ‘any acknowledgment of racism or sexism,’ ‘expressing an opinion while black or female,’ or simply ‘something new I don’t like.'” However you define it, it seems “he woke up” it’s a word meant to be a negative description, by those who use the term, of someone who takes a position somewhere on the political spectrum other than where they are.
Another such political term, according to the article, is the word “Witch Hunt.” It no longer refers to the actual witch hunt, as in the old Salem witch trials. Instead, it is a word that “has become the first refuge of any political scoundrel in legal trouble.”
Or, what about this word: the “media”, or sometimes expressed “The mainstream media?” I had always thought that word applied to major newspapers, radio and television stations, and organizations like the Associated Press. However, it is now primarily used as a term to describe a concerted, organized, alleged effort of disinformation. The article says that so used “It’s a meaningless word because there are countless very different means, which do not act in concert.”
One more example: words “fake news”. I used to mean that what we thought was real news, was being made up, sometimes created “Trolls producing fake content masquerading as news on Facebook.” But today, says the article, these words have been “reused” by some politicians “to signify any news inconvenient to the speaker.”
What this article pointed out to me, in my mind, is the fact that labeling people or issues with simple words or slogans is, in fact, a means of avoiding real communication. What we need is real dialogue and discussion in our body politic…not slogans.
For example, instead of indicating one’s position as being “he woke up” or “anti-wake”, why not actually discuss an issue at stake? A good starting point might be to talk about something controversial, like illegal immigration. Why is it happening? What about those who are waiting for a decision on the legality of their entry, that is, if not legally a “refugee”, are they still entitled to asylum? How do we protect the border? Do we need new legislation to deal with the problem? Should Texas send busloads of border crossers elsewhere? What if they come here? Etc.
Handling controversy in this way, through serious discussion and dialogue, is the American way of doing things. We may never agree but at least we can come to understand our disagreement; and, perhaps, you can find some common ground in the process.
Regarding politics of one or two words “slogan”-I’ve had enough. It is not good for the country.
Rolland Kidder is a resident of Stow.
Today’s news and more delivered to your inbox
