American propaganda, especially during the build up to a military conflict, is always laughably simplistic. Today I would like to discuss the trope that American officials have of using the word regime to refer to any government with which it disagrees and has decided to target for war. No doubt you have noticed that the Obama administration now refers to the government of Syrian Pres. Bashar al-Assad as the “Assad regime.”
George W. Bush (who was not even legitimately elected, thus would properly be referred to as the head of “the Bush regime”) used the same linguistic construction when he wanted to attack Iraq after the September 11 terrorist attacks.
When a government is the enemy or foe or adversary of the United States, it becomes a regime. Which is also interesting because this used to be a left-wing construction. When it is an allied government, no matter how monstrous, it is a government.
So it is not the regime of Uzbekistani Pres. Islam Karimov, but rather the government of Islam Karimov. Silly but well worth noting. America relies on these Orwellian linguistic constructions almost as much as it relies on brute force to exercise its bullying ways throughout the world.
7 Comments.
I’ve noticed a similar trend among writer types. They tend toward prolixity when they want to “win” the argument rather than “discuss” the issue. A good example of this can be found (in fiction) in the character of Nero Wolfe. He uses very precise words, for a very precise reason: it is very difficult to debate someone (and win) when that person uses words so arcane no one can follow the discussion.
“Regime” carries with it the flavor of vagueness. Go on, define the following: monarchy, democracy, regime. Two are easy. Regime? It’s like the length of a piece of string. It’s what the journalist teachers of yore used to call soft, bland, nothing words. So of course the administration uses it. You can’t be caught being wrong on it. It’s like trying to stab someone with a balloon.
As for the lefties. The original phrase was “card-carrying communist.” This was appropriated and converted to “card-carrying liberal.” And … (and this is the important bit) … the Liberals let the conservatives do that do them. They let the conservatives turn them into un-Americans. And it worked so well that Godless Communists became Godless Atheists and Godless Homosexuals and Godless biology teachers and so on. Every time, the conservatives are the ones who take control of the terms of the debate and the spineless “progressives” stand there and let it happen.
Or, even worse, they demonstrate zero capacity to engage in street-level political action. Occupy Wall Street is apparently going to have a “ballet at the bull” event. It goes back to that “iconic” (iconic is what people call something idiotic when they don’t want to admit that it’s idiotic) image of the ballerina holding a position on top of the Wall Street bull.
If you were a progressive, would you bother trying to organize these people? It’s like trying to start an orgy with some eunuchs and a 95-year-old spinster who’s read a lot of biology textbooks.
I think you’ve only taken the essay partway, Ted. The U.S. relies on the Orwellian linguistics because the brute force couldn’t be used without the language paving (or blocking) the way. Remember the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis: if you control the language, you can, to a great extent, control how people think about an issue. The journalists can’t write, the editors are too busy being “fair,” the newsreaders’ lips are too tired from sounding out all those words and such.
Thoughtful notes on Roland Barthes come to mind, while listening to Sabbath Bloody Sabbath, in relation to “ownership” of the word “regime” by the left.
The rhetorical empire, greater and more tenacious than any political empire in its dimensions and its duration, flouts the very concept of science and historical reflection … calling into question history itself, at least as we are accustomed to imagine and employ history…
For two and a half millennia [rhetoric], watches—immutable, impassive, and virtually immortal— while political empires come and go under its watch.
Rhetoric is that privileged technique which permits the ruling classes to gain ownership of speech; selective rules of access to this power have been decreed…
You guys know more about this stuff than I do.
My blue-collar reaction is that everybody does it. Guys and gals (or whatever) use language to seduce each other. Parents use language to teach their kids. Business uses language to sell us stuff. Professors, preachers, and cartoonists, use language in an attempt to educate us.
Given that, sure, it’s something that we all need to be aware of. We have to take care not to be too easily swayed. After all, we don’t necessarily want to be seduced by every suitor that comes along. We don’t need to buy every product offered. Not every idea communicated to us is of equal value.
When all you have is a bash-the-US-government-hammer. I guess everything the US government says, looks like a nail.
Frankly, I can’t believe anything this government says. They lie more often than they tell the truth.
“When all you have is a bash-the-US-government-hammer. I guess everything the US government says, looks like a nail.”
At last aaronwilliams135 finds a comfortable refuge from his cynicism in his exception for the holy empire, the apotheosis of the state.
Ted, you’re right, the government lies a lot. But to not believe anything they say? I think, you go too far.
I don’t think Ted goes too far. The government has only told the truth when it has served the government’s interests for several decades. Yes – they tell the truth sometimes, but they tell half the truth and add spin and bullshit most of the time. When is the last time that “Our Government” has ever thrown billions of dollars into helping regular middle-class americans, than throwing billions of dollars into crazy-ass wars overseas and bribing everyone they can to maintain power and influence. When was the last time “Our Government” got upset about US Corporations poisoning the seas or damaging the environment? When was the last time “Our Government” ever pursued or prosecuted the banks and investment firms that caused the last depression that affected the entire world? When was the last time that “Our Government” acted like it cared about the American people first, before anything else that it could spin and turn to instead of doing the job it was elected to do?