Anarchism and the English Language/ English and the Anarchists' Language

[BIXX]

I recently attended a debate between one of the Crimethinc. Writers' Bloc and Kristian Williams, discussing how we use our language. Kristian was of the opinion that a lot of the words we use, we use in such a way as to trick ourselves, to make us seem more important than we really are, and to a degree, be flat out dishonest, even if the words we use can convey the truth to one another.

He states that we say "contradictions" instead of conflicts, that some people use "uprising" or "rebellion" instead of riots. "Actions" instead of protests.

An example he uses to describe our dishonesty in language is our use of the word "community". He contends that when we are talking, we realize it sounds more impressive to say "community" than "me and my friends". So we say community when we mean scene, and scene when we mean clique. But the fact is that we used community in a way that excludes our neighbors, mailman, family, etc...

Williams also talks about how he believes our language is often not even understood by some of us (I witness this a lot with the anarchists in my school), so we resort to spouting off vague saying that we have an idea of what they mean, but not really an in depth understanding.

On the other side, the Crimethinc members say that it is ok to say things the way we do, because language is a technology, and what is the point of a technology if you can't use it in a way that suits you?

Also, sometimes a sentence shouldn't mean the same thing to everyone. Just cause the original idea of a sentence is good, doesn't mean the idea that spawns from a different understanding of the sentence isn't great.

Crimethinc also states that in the beginning, a lot of what draws people into anarchism is its level of mystery. The language helps that process along, it encourages people to study, to learn, and to think more.

As another argument, they state that language is already constantly evolving. If it's constantly evolving, it's hardly a bad thing to push it in a direction that suits us, right?

I wanna here the opinions of the folks here. Do you think we should be more careful with our words, and have definite meanings to everything we say, that are open and honest? Or should we allow the words to be interpreted in as many ways as the number of people who read them?

[Palmares]

Man, pretty abstract linguistic arguments here...

I dunno how deep you want to go into this, or infact how much I do, but...

I do agree to some level that, yes, there is perhaps some dishonesty is the way we use language. However, in looking at we, that isn't simply limited to radicals, or whoever is supposed to be the focus of this discussion. With the plethora of words at our disposal, we could word a sentence so many different ways. But then, it's more complicated than simply us painting our words to sound nice, or friendly (or similar), as some words also have loaded negative connotations.

Well, duh.

Our enemies (ie capitalists) will word the same sentence in a negative context.

In our honesty, do we want to word things the same way as them? I think not.

Everyone has their own views, beliefs, ideologies, so of course, people will want to word things in a way that is positive to thus viewpoint. Especially if they want others to also think thus.

As radicals, the capitals are our enemies, and rather than a technology, I think it a tool, and this tool can be our weapon. Let's not surrender it to our enemies...

And indeed, language is evolving, and always has been. It's beyond words, but in that realm, to take control of our lives, I think it's important to challenge and change language and the way we communicate in opposition to the powers of global capital.

I'm not a fan of dictionaries for example. Haha.

I guess the last thing I will say, given I don't think there heaps more to say unless you want a fully fledged linguistics discussion, is simply that I think also on that point of dishonesty, I think it's actually important on some level (but not to the point of denial) to use language, say like community, rather than scene, not to pretend it's something it's not, but in the hope to push it beyond the constraints we currently have, and to use it as something to aim for in the future.

A language of positivity perhaps. In a world of negativity...