The Language of Politics

Can’t see the words for the forest.

Last night I was listening for comments about what was happening in the language of the selections, but everything said seemed to be focusing on the specifics of the names and the issues involved. What proceeded from that was a discussion and judgment of the rightness or wrongness of the issues or the trashing of the people involved based on what was brought to class already in our minds. I wanted to pop up and suggest that we change the names of the principals in the selections so that we could see more clearly what was happening with the language, but it wasn’t my role. So, I changed the names involved and wrote a little blurb in the spirit of the two platforms:

Noam Chomsky=George Bush II

Academics=Republicans

Students=Americans

Philosophical Anarchists=Terrorists

‘Noam Chomsky is a brilliant commander and leader who sees the future and who grasps the moment and who works with Academics in Congress to build a more perfect society through the wise constructing and implementation of laws, and with Students who use their inherent moral and patriotic judgments to counter the activities of Philosophical Anarchists who would corrupt youth and who would mock and degrade every slogan that we hold sacred.’