Victories in the Language Wars

There is one political battleground where Republicans triumph virtually every time — and control of this arena could determine who wins the White House in 2024.

Republicans are masters of verbal jiu-jitsu. It’s a form of linguistic combat in which the practitioner takes a political phrase or concept popularized by their opponent and gradually turns into an unusable slur. Like the Japanese martial art known as jiu-jitsu, its devotees avoid taking opposing arguments head on and instead redirect their opponents’ momentum to beat them.

He uses the example of “woke.”  That originally meant “actively aware of social injustice.”  That’s the way it is defined in (woke?) dictionaries.  But now, Blake says, conservatives have turned the term into a scourge and a threat.  It is true that “progressives” used to proudly use that term.  Now they are claiming that it has no meaning.

But, contrary to what Blake says, this was not just linguistic jiu-jitsu.  It was the specific manifestations of this particular manner of being actively aware of social injustice–identity politics, cancel culture, social media mobs–that has discredited the word.  I don’t think the original “woke” community would have admitted to “allyship” those who are actively aware of the social injustice of powerful adults killing children in the womb.  “Woke” denoted a particular ideology, and that ideology persists, even though its adherents are now running away from the word.

Blake also complains about what conservatives have done to “critical race theory.”  He says it was “once  an obscure academic discipline that insisted that racism is more than individual prejudice; it’s embedded in laws, policies and institutions.”  He himself is pulling back from the term by calling it “an obscure academic discipline.”  The issue is that this “obscure” theory has emerged from the ivy covered walls of academia to enter schools, boardrooms, and government offices.  He says that now any investigation of “systemic racism” is delegitimized as “critical race theory.”  No, the charges that our laws, policies, and institutions are little more than covers for systemic racism, as taught by critical race theory, are what the general public is objecting to, not the term itself.

Blake says that Democrats can’t say “global warming” anymore.  It has to be “climate change.”  I would argue that it was the left-leaning environmentalists who switched to “climate change” to make their proposals more palatable to mainstream Americans.

He says that even “liberal” has been contaminated, so that liberals now have to call themselves “progressives.”  Again, he has this turned around.  “Liberal” comes from the Latin word for freedom, and since the 18th century it has referred to a political system that values liberty, individualism, and free market economics.  That is to say, it used to refer to the beliefs of modern conservatives.  (Except for the new strain of “illiberal conservatives.”)  But early 20th century leftists, not wanting to be associated with Marxists, used it for themselves, even though they remained committed to big government, collectivism, and non-capitalist economics.  They were the ones who performed linguistic jiu jitsu!

Liberal remained a proud label until Ronald Reagan decisively turned the country against them.  I remember when this happened and noted at the time that politicians of the left denied that they were “liberals” and that they were “progressives” instead.  After all, who could be against “progress”?  That evolutionary term fit to a degree, but, again, it was a word that used to be used of Republicans like Teddy Roosevelt.

Other good words that Democrats used to use that Blake says have been spoiled by Republicans include “social justice warrior,” “diversity,” and “equity.”