se a= ASP. “POLITICAL CORRECTNESS” AND HATE SPEECH The Word as Sword MEANING IS COMPLEX Neutrality is advantageous only if it can be exploited and extended into an effective means of persuasion. Language both creates a message, through devices like framing and presupposition, and uses that message winning the uncommitted over by assuming the “normality” and “neu- trality” of the speaker's position, as transmitted through arguments that (because they rely on neutrality) need not even be overtly stated and therefore need not be exposed to the rigors of examination. This and the remaining chapters of this book explore several recent cases in which ‘anguage becomes a locus of struggle over self-definition and societal co- hesion. The battle is joined at all levels of language from word to sentence tonarrative, This chapter focuses on the use and definitions of the small and concrete details of the linguistic message, words and phrases: who setsomake up the words of our contemporary language and invest them with meaning. Later chapters will explore the creation and function of the stories we contemporary Americans construct out of these elements and the question of how our“POLITICAL CORRECTNESS” AND MATE SPEECH / 67 you, as a speaker of English, you will form in your mind an image of a particular sort of piece of furniture. If say “table,” your mind will pro- juce another image, with some similarities to and some differences from desk.” In these cases reference i ca Il we need to worry about: most of us t attach positive or negative connotations to these words. But there _many words that involve much more complex kinds of understand- g. These are the words that win (or lose) wars, the shooting kind and more subtle kind we fight with one another in the name of politics, gion, and relationships. New words are created, old ones given new ings. Links between form and meaning are forged and strengthened people use those words‘n specific contexts, with specific nuances 4 connotations. Whoever gets to establish those connections first and controls the meanings (in the larger sense) of these new words and pressions. And since words are at the forefront of our persuasive ef- ¢s, controlling meaning brings victory in the continuing war for hearts minds by defining our cultural “values” and personal “identities” — elves words currently in the front lines. Twas about fifteen, I read Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. At the Twas starting to learn Latin and reading Caesar's Gallic War. 1 him a fascinating figure and set out to read what I could about Tread the play on my own, with no authority I could turn to for pretive guidance. Things were pretty clear until I got to the funeral ‘where Brutus offers the citizenry a justification for his assassina- ‘of Caesar. “As Caesar loved me, I weep for him; as he was fortunate, Goice at it; as he was valiant, I honor him; but, as he was ambitious, hhim,” he says. That is all the people need to hear: they express hearty support. ‘confused by the argument. Clearly Brutus meant to contrast worthy qualities, for which Brutus admired him, with one bad to justify his murder. But where was that? The last clause, n- Iyced by “but,” rhetorically and semantically ought 10 be the bearer ‘bad news, but I could find none, As an adolescent in 1950's Amer 1 “ambition” only in a favorable sense: the get~ i ial American virtue. I couldn't imagine because he was ambitious? ing apple pie or ice cream! ved the mystery. Thearcrngss" AND MATE SP" apouiricat 6O8!