I’m so tired of bad faith debates. I’m sick of moralizing opinions, as though a view can be only good or bad. When the conversation turns to gender, sexuality, race, or any marginalized identities, I wonder… are we training ourselves not to care?
I care too much, sometimes. Maybe it’s because I fight Anxiety every day, so it angers me when I see media inciting fear. My fists pop up. Venting these thoughts helps me to work up an appetite for truth. And if I’m still feeling sick and tired, well… perhaps I ought to watch my diet.
The media will trick you into believing there are two options: A) Believe in the status quo or B) Believe all existing structures must be torn down and rebuilt.
Gender discourse is a current example of polarizing language. The media reports on a vicious, ongoing battle between tradition and subversion. This false dichotomy frightens away anyone uncomfortable with identity and gender politics.
Language
However, language has always been and will always be nuanced. In the Information Age, internet allows a much more global interchange of ideas. It naturally follows that language is of interest, a crucial tool in politics, to be sure, but also in building community – even online community.
What is to be done when the average person acquires advanced tools to express themselves, to connect to limitless other communities, to learn of foreign concepts?
Those holding power must wield language with superior skill, or risk a restructuring of the status quo. They do this, most often, by wielding fear.
1. Fear of extremes
The tool: False Dichotomy – The assertion that one of two options must be true, while excluding viable alternatives.
2. Fear of malicious intent
The tool: The Straw Man Argument – Changing (often exaggerating) an argument and disproving the result, falsely claiming the original argument has been disproved.
3. Fear for the children
The tool: Censorship – Calling for urgent restrictions to information/communication.
These are only three ways we can identify the use of language to incite fear and hate.
Origin Of Fear
So it is with self-expression in the 21st century. Self-expression threatens conformity. And what does capitalism love? Conformity. Pay the church, pay for weddings, pay the taxes, work at a career that will carry you through the years of child-rearing so your descendants too can pay taxes and tithes.
Back when folks were colonizing North America into new communities, structure meant survival. Survival of collective identity, of religion, of purpose, of civilization.
From what I understand of history, cultural values established by 17th century colonizers of North America tended to moralize behaviors as either Good or Bad. Extremes. False dichotomies.
Newly established communities survived by resisting influence, resisting change. The power-move was to cling to a belief system, weaponizing words. ‘Us‘ meant human and hero and modern and developed. ‘Them‘, by contrast, meant inhuman, antagonist, primitive.
Today, headlines resemble the colonizer attitude, with fear-inciting claims about someone named ‘They‘. They want gender abolished or They want to abolish culture and tradition. One would think destruction was the goal.
Language And Power
But what do change-promoters actually want? To wield language. Language is needed to express individuality and curiosity. To build (and belong to) communities. Extremes will always exist, and weaponized fear ensures that only the extreme ideas hold public attention.
Access to the language toolbox has been restricted because, if we were to figure out how things work, we would eliminate the need for oversight. Who oversees the use of language in media, in politics, even i ternet memes?
While claiming to promote safety, media powers, religious powers, and capitalist powers watch citizens fail to restructure society. The powerful feel secure in their system of things.
Language And Control
We look at a headline and think it must be truth: option A or B. Pick a side. Pre-cooked options ready for consumption. Consume and believe.
Be prepared to perform your identity as a supporter of A who hates supporters of B. The words are written for you. You need not listen to the opposition. Their language is flawed, faulty, destructive. Listen only to those on your side.
Individuality is allowed, only if you choose a political belief system. Whatever your identity, you must pick a side, because, if you were to listen to everyone, you might realize everyone is human – afraid, struggling to survive.
You might realize, then, that language cannot be inherently good or bad.
This is how the status quo thrives. Sitting in simplistic views. Fearing anything other. Moralizing belief systems. Who you are, your identity, can be bought and sold.
Your identity was mass-produced, monetized, and marketed. It belongs to those who control our language.
Q: Is it possible to have discourse in good faith?
A: Yes. By listening to understand, folks of differing opinions can have open discourse without manipulating emotions such as fear.
Q: Is it possible to remain neutral in such a politicized society?
A: In my opinion, doing the work to inform yourself helps you view others as human. That is a good starting point.
Doing the work – Wiki Terms
(I’m not here to educate, I just believe in language!) 💙
Bad faith argument (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_faith)
Straw man argument (https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)
False Dichotomy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma)
Censorship (https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship)
Information Age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Age)
17th Century Colonization of North America (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_history_of_the_United_States)
Capitalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism)
Identity Politics (https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics) Gender and politics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_and_politics)
Voice of Reason 