se
a= ASP.
“POLITICAL CORRECTNESS”
AND HATE SPEECH
The Word as Sword
MEANING IS COMPLEX
Neutrality is advantageous only if it can be exploited and extended
into an effective means of persuasion. Language both creates a message,
through devices like framing and presupposition, and uses that message
winning the uncommitted over by assuming the “normality” and “neu-
trality” of the speaker's position, as transmitted through arguments that
(because they rely on neutrality) need not even be overtly stated and
therefore need not be exposed to the rigors of examination. This and
the remaining chapters of this book explore several recent cases in which
‘anguage becomes a locus of struggle over self-definition and societal co-
hesion. The battle is joined at all levels of language from word to sentence
tonarrative, This chapter focuses on the use and definitions of the small
and concrete details of the linguistic message, words and phrases: who
setsomake up the words of our contemporary language and invest them
with meaning. Later chapters will explore the creation and function of
the stories we contemporary Americans construct out of these elements
and the question of how our“POLITICAL CORRECTNESS” AND MATE SPEECH / 67
you, as a speaker of English, you will form in your mind an image of a
particular sort of piece of furniture. If say “table,” your mind will pro-
juce another image, with some similarities to and some differences from
desk.” In these cases reference i
ca Il we need to worry about: most of us
t attach positive or negative connotations to these words. But there
_many words that involve much more complex kinds of understand-
g. These are the words that win (or lose) wars, the shooting kind and
more subtle kind we fight with one another in the name of politics,
gion, and relationships. New words are created, old ones given new
ings. Links between form and meaning are forged and strengthened
people use those words‘n specific contexts, with specific nuances
4 connotations. Whoever gets to establish those connections first and
controls the meanings (in the larger sense) of these new words and
pressions. And since words are at the forefront of our persuasive ef-
¢s, controlling meaning brings victory in the continuing war for hearts
minds by defining our cultural “values” and personal “identities” —
elves words currently in the front lines.
Twas about fifteen, I read Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. At the
Twas starting to learn Latin and reading Caesar's Gallic War. 1
him a fascinating figure and set out to read what I could about
Tread the play on my own, with no authority I could turn to for
pretive guidance. Things were pretty clear until I got to the funeral
‘where Brutus offers the citizenry a justification for his assassina-
‘of Caesar. “As Caesar loved me, I weep for him; as he was fortunate,
Goice at it; as he was valiant, I honor him; but, as he was ambitious,
hhim,” he says. That is all the people need to hear: they express
hearty support.
‘confused by the argument. Clearly Brutus meant to contrast
worthy qualities, for which Brutus admired him, with one bad
to justify his murder. But where was that? The last clause, n-
Iyced by “but,” rhetorically and semantically ought 10 be the bearer
‘bad news, but I could find none, As an adolescent in 1950's Amer
1 “ambition” only in a favorable sense: the get~
i ial American virtue. I couldn't imagine
because he was ambitious?
ing apple pie or ice cream!
ved the mystery. Thearcrngss" AND MATE SP"
apouiricat 6O8!