the power of irrational language

Thinking about Thinking

As 2007 comes to a close, the Senate has been busy passing amendments “to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military activities of the Department of Defense…” The Kyl-Lieberman amendment, expressing the Senates position on Iran, passed on Sept. 26 with a vote of 76-22.

With the appropriate language in place, the Kyl-Lieberman amendment may be the first step toward a dangerous war with Iran. One section of the amendment proposes, “…the United States should designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps” (IRGC) “as a foreign terrorist organization…on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists.”

In the years following 9/11, ‘terrorism’ has become a very powerful word. Singling out terrorists or potential terrorists has allowed The United States to implement otherwise unjustified laws in our country, and fuel an otherwise unjustified war in another.

This is not to argue that these actions were necessarily wrong, though there seems to be a feeling of regret brooding around the ‘war on terror’. This only highlights how, with proper marketing, the American public will allow emotional language to sway their hearts and minds.

I do not want to argue that the IRGC are not terrorists. I do however want to point out that labeling this group ‘terrorists’ restricts choice of action. The American public’s current mentality makes it far too easy to justify the implementation of force in dealings with deemed terrorists.

A single word can be very persuasive. Language carries emotional and psychological powers that have the ability to blind us to reality beyond language and rhetoric. Certain propositions are just not exposed to the same critique we thrust on any other because of the way they are posed. This is why propaganda is so powerful and dangerous.

A person wielding these powerful words also becomes powerful themselves. As a simple example, imagine citing religious beliefs, as reasoning for exemption from a required high school health class. Religion is essentially a set of organized personal beliefs. And one personal belief could be that sitting through another year of required health classes is a waste of time. Not exactly an airtight argument.

Yet, if a person wrote ‘religious beliefs’ on the appropriate paperwork, there would be no questions asked. This is the kind unjustified language that the general public is willing to tolerate. By citing ‘religious beliefs’, no matter how unjustified, the student is not questioned because it is generally accepted that religious beliefs are to be tolerated and respected.

No doubt, tolerance and respect keep our society civil. Yet, when these notions are stretched to their limits, propaganda justifies outrageous actions and the public has the wool pulled over their eyes.

The word ‘terrorism’ has a persuasive emotionally motivated control over the American public. By documenting an agreement stating the IRGC is a terrorist organization, we have, to a great extent also agreed upon how this organization needs to be treated.

We toss around words in the wind, when we should really be treating them as the bombs they may one day justify. The American Public’s tolerance for the marketing of vague unjustified or irrational language is absurd. When sophistry is substituted for logical justification, language becomes emotionally motivated and irrational. If we are not careful, this language can justify drastic actions.

The public will not be told why the IRGC are terrorists; the public will hear that they are terrorists. The label controls the thoughts of the public by playing on their sense of morality and fear. Terrorists are bad people who need to be stopped. If the IRGC are terrorists, then this justifies a reaction appropriate for terrorists. If anything goes wrong, the Kyl-Lieberman amendment can be waved in the air; we all agreed.

Why are there certain instances where irrational emotionally motivated language exempts a person from providing the justification that we expect from everyone else? If this is how the world works, the public needs to recognize this and step carefully. Language is powerful, and irrational language is frighteningly dangerous.

-from Nov. 8 issue of Juniatian 2007