Sunday, September 18, 2016

The Transformaion of the Political Landscape


                Tuesday, November 8th, 2016 will be the 58th United States Presidential election and will arguably be another milestone in US history as candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump break the norm of ‘standard’ candidates – Clinton being the first female and Trump having little political experience.  The heated banter between both candidates enforces Orwell’s analysis that political language is a powerful tool that can be used to deceive and manipulate.

                Trump has made headlines for his outlandish statements pertaining to immigration and women and consistently uses crude statements surrounding his opponent Hillary Clinton.  In his acceptance speech at the RNC, he mentions Clinton roughly 12 times and calls upon what he believes are her ‘wrongdoings’ as a candidate.

“America is far less safe – and the world is far less stable than when Obama made the decision to put Hillary Clinton in charge of America’s foreign policy”
“This is the legacy of Hillary Clinton: death, destruction, terrorism and weakness.”
“While Hillary Clinton plans a massive, and I mean massive, tax increase, I have proposed the largest tax reduction of any candidate who has run for president this year – Democrat or Republican.”

                Clinton has made headlines for her email scandal and jeopardizing the security of confidential information. In her acceptance speech at the DNC, she makes negative comments against Trump roughly 25 times.

“And most of all, don’t believe anyone who says: “I alone can fix it. Those were actually Donald Trump’s words in Cleveland.”
“It’s just not right that Donald Trump can ignore his debts, but students and families can’t refinance theirs.”
“Donald Trump can’t even handle the rough-and-tumble of a presidential campaign.”

                Both Trump and Clinton have been highlighted in the media for their shortcomings, their arguments, and their past. None of these issues pertain to their platforms or what they intend to do if elected as president. The political landscape has transformed from one of mature and delicate sentiments meant to mask their meanings into one of directed and blunt attacks intending to bring light to all the faults of their opponents. Orwell states “All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia.” Orwell was correct, although a candidate’s statement may have nothing to do with politics it is true that all issues will be discussed in politics. Everything said will contribute to the complicated web of information, confuse the general population and ultimately help manipulate people’s perceptions of political candidates.
               Orwell’s analysis of the 1940s remains true that political language is a powerful tool. However, Orwell’s analysis is outdated. His analysis is outdated as the syllables and ancient structure of the selected words mean significantly less compared to how the media portrays candidates. Politics is nothing without language, and language has become a weapon that candidates, media sources, writers, and the general public use to sway opinions and manipulative candidate's words. Our political system has turned into a competition of whether one can effectively use their language as a weapon to defeat their opponent and is not based on the general wellbeing of the country.

1 comment:

  1. I couldn’t agree with you more when you mentioned how most of the speech between our presidential candidates has had little relevance to their platforms and intentions. I personally feel that after seeing several speeches from each of our candidates and hearing them get interviewed, the general public still has very little knowledge of what they actually believe and how they intend to achieve the promises that they are making. For example, I have heard Trump asked several questions on how he plans to implement many of his policies, and he gives a weak reply by merely stating the need for a new policy.

    I also completely agree with you that Orwell’s analysis has its shortcomings. As he said, political speech can be used to promote deceptive, and often lacks insight through the use of meaningless words and bland imagery. However, as we have seen in this election cycle, using speech that has fewer syllables or more vivid imagery has still left us feeling deceived and uninformed. It is my opinion that if politicians and media do not want to give us an answer, they will simply dodge the subject. As you mentioned, we have seen plenty of that in this race, as candidates have mocked each other for things like looks, controversies, and past mistakes, rather than speaking on their focus for America. While language is a very powerful tool, it is useless and destructive if not used in the right way.

    ReplyDelete