Words matter to me. They are my literal stock in trade. I write them and speak them to make a living.
I endeavour, when using words, to ensure that my meaning is clear. I don't always succeed. As a result, I try harder. Seeking clarity whilst also being entertaining (or else people would not wish to return and read what I have to say again) is vital to me. Practising getting my words, sentences, paragraphs, and message right is not an obsession of mine, but it is something not much less than that. If it seems nerdy to say so, I don't care. I cannot see what is wrong with trying to do something as well as I can.
In that case, I found a comment that Nigel Farage made yesterday particularly annoying. He said:
You should always take everything Donald Trump says seriously, you shouldn't always take things Donald Trump says absolutely literally. I think that applies very much in this case.
Not only was this comment by Farage ambiguous as to its meaning, suggesting that his own approach to this issue was disingenuous, but his willingness to excuse the impression of Trump was much worse.
Trump does not have the right to be imprecise, unclear or ambiguous. Without a doubt, lives depend on what he says, how he says it, when he says it, to whom he says it, and what he means by doing so. His words have meaning, whether he appreciates it or not.
More than that, if he does not speak literally but, like Gollum, chooses to speak in riddles where it is left to us to work out the meaning of what he says and their potential consequences, the world is, at best, a more uncertain place, and at worst, a profoundly more dangerous place for many, including those for whom the resulting anxiety is intolerable.
Trump is, then, abusing his privilege by being imprecise. We are entitled to believe what he says. He has a duty to be clear. We need to be able to act, knowing that what he says is a fair representation of the truth as he sees it. How else are we supposed to make decisions?
Farage must also know this. He is a fool, but not when it comes to the use of language, which he has mastered. His own comments are, in that case, deliberately misleading. He is very obviously seeking to condemn Trump, but in the mildest of tones, keeping open the option of simultaneously being Trump's friend, as if such a thing was actually possible with a person who you know does not always speak the truth, meaning their expression of friendship can never be relied on, making your desire for their acquaintance appear desperate.
What are the consequences of this?
We have to assume Farage is unreliable.
We know that Trump is unreliable.
We face much greater risk because of the influence of politicians of this type.
They wish to exploit that fear, which they are deliberately creating, knowing that this is the consequence of their words.
It is, then, beholden on others to speak with greater clarity.
We should expect political condemnation of the imprecision of Trump and Farage.
We should presume that those with influence will demand clarity from them.
We have a right to expect their actions to be called out unambiguously.
Instead, we get Starmer fawning to Trump because he is desperate for the photo opportunity of a day trip to Washington next week, the purpose of which Trump has already said he does not know.
Starmer is, in that case, also failing to provide leadership. His own desperation, uncertainty, self-doubt, and lack of conviction strip his words of any meaning, almost as much as Trump's desperate desire to spread confusion does so with regard to his.
In a world where words lack meaning, what can we know? How can we decide? What can we do? I go back to Viktor Frankl for an answer to this. In his post-war book,
Right now, in the midst of the chaos, confusion, and uncertainty that our politicians are seemingly deliberately creating for us, I suggest that is our purpose. And when we succeed in finding our meaning, as best we are able, then our job is to use that knowledge to inform our collective future. It is the only way I can think of to survive the current mayhem.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Words shape minds.
We moved into a “post-truth” era during the Brexit referendum campaign, red buses, NHS Slogans etc.
It was a calculated deliberate step change from the “ordinary” sort of political lies because with Alexander de Pfeffel, there was no shame. We knew he was lying, he knew we knew. That whole campaign was a lying competition, who could lie most effectively, and Bullingdon Boris was chosen because he was the best liar, and he was proud of it and praised for it, even loved for it. That, IMHO crossed a significant moral threshold. Starmer did the same, as the core of both his leadership and general election campaigns, both of which were based on deliberate deception (Corbyn is a friend, 10 pledges, green new deal, no tax on working people, Great British Energy, “we can’t afford it”).
That prepared the territory for Fa***e and the lies that are built into the very core of fascism. And he can’t be challenged for his lies, by the hypocritical liars in other parties for their political houses are also built on a sandy foundation of lies, and the storm and the flood are coming.
I’m amazed your language is so restrained.
We have a major MORAL problem at the moment, but we lack the moral equipment to deal with it, because morality is so often weaponised (by both left AND right) that we get nervous about referring to it.
But perhaps we need to stop and ask, “Why AM I bothered about >40 thousand deaths in Gaza – so what, if the lies of Trump or Starmer mean people die alone in their homes through lack of medical or social care?”
Because it’s WRONG, VERY wrong. Why?
We have weaponised morality for political ends, we have an excess “morality supply”, we have “moral inflation”, so that REAL moral outrage has lost its value.
The right are outraged that anyone can criticise Israel, and call it “appalling antisemitism”, the left are outraged that someone is innocently misgendered, but meanwhile in the mainstream of politics and international relations we have sunk into the sewer, and we are being ever so polite about it, when screaming with rage would seem far more appropriate.
Yet somehow we have to hang on to our sanity and our sense of humour too because once we give in to our anger we can lose the capacity for compassion – the sort that results in effective action – the kind act done for an individual – the compassionate political action that saves thousands.
But just to be clear, I personally regard Trump as a deeply evil abhorrent felon and all who co-operate in his overt fascism, as complicit in his crimes.
The rot started when Blair was re-elected despite his lies about WMDs in Iraq. Politicians suddenly realised that lying did not affect their career prospects. It’s been downhill ever since.
I think you have described most admirably the dreadful state of current world politics, Robert.
The owners of the English press have a lot to answer for, regarding brexit. As does the Tory party. How to fight back is a real problem. Political activism as a physical thing is confronted with serious gaol time. Leftist meeting venues are disallowed. And , dare I say it, postal voting is a little more than suspect. The `Labour Party` is now Thatcherist and Zionist, and completely divorced from reality, which is that the UK looks and feels like it has lost a war.It hasn`t taken long for the USA to realise that they have been conned royally. Our only response now seems to be online communication (that seems to be what has enabled the fascists,) to propagate the vital and cogent truths expressed in this blog. We have been conned royally too, and a word of dissent here or there might meet a sympathetic hearing.
But, who to turn to?
It is just an excuse. Don’t listen to what the racist uncle says. He means no harm. It is just they way he is. He has a heart of gold really.
As Maya Angelou said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time. People know themselves much better than you do. That’s why it’s important to stop expecting them to be something other than who they are.”
Trump gets a free pass for his rambling nonsense or straight lies and disinformation, just as Boris Johnson did. He doesn’t necessarily believe anything he says, but he says it anyway. The problem is that the leader sets the tone. And in this autocratic style of government, people “work towards” the leader.
Trump is very fond of breaking all sorts of rules. Either he gets away with it, in which case he shows he is not bound by the rules (and if he is not bound, why should anyone else obey?), or he can use his current position of power to retrospectively ratify the rule breaking, or at least avoid any consequences for the rule-breaking.
Much to agree with
Trump lacks the mental capacity to be anything otger than what he is. An absolute fool with a serious dose of sociopathy.
When I was counselling I told clients that if we find meaning and purpose, it helps us survive all the other crap. My example was an old person with arthritis and failing senses still finding delight in the five year old’s drawing given to them as a present.
We said more than that but it was important.
Thanks
Related to the period before Canute is time of the Danegeld -or the sum paid to the Danes not to invade.
Quoting Kipling may cause some followers of this blob to tut-tut but I like some of his poetry. This seems appropriate to our time.
The poem Danegeld ends thus:
It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say:—
“We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that plays it is lost!”
He was right on that
Blog not blob
Farage a fool? Perhaps, more of a tool if you ask me.
Your survival strategy is sound.
It beats becoming full of hate, blaming immigrants and others and not realising that it is being kept poor and robbed blind that is killing you.
(My thanks to Alan Parker).
Words – indeed.
Its a shock to understand how fragile the US constitution is – and how weak the checks and balances are, and the separation of powers .
Trump seems to be executing Project 2025 which is a Heritage Foundation plan formulated over several years – this seems to be the method in his madness :
Wikipedia:
“the unitary executive theory that states that the entire executive branch is under the complete control of the president.[6][7] Proponents of Project 25 say it would dismantle a government bureaucracy which they say is unaccountable and mostly liberal.[8] Critics have characterized it as an authoritarian, Christian nationalist plan[9][10][11] that would steer the U.S. toward autocracy.[12] Legal experts say it would undermine the rule of law,[13] separation of powers,[5] separation of church and state,[12] and civil liberties.[5][13][14]
The project calls for merit-based federal civil service workers to be replaced with people loyal to Trump to take partisan control of key government agencies, like the Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Commerce (DOC), and Federal Trade Commission (FTC).[15] Other agencies, like the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Education (ED), would be dismantled or abolished.[16] ”
Whatever words he uses – Trump and Musk seem to be implementing this project – and his ramblings and blizzard of executive orders are part of the strategy – to keep opposition discombobulated.
Trump’s use of words – seems to be very clever in his own terms – making good use of the multiple meanings in English – and in conveying quite clearly that he knows that you know when he’s lying – so that sort of makes the lies OK – and can be reversed later if necessary.
He has been quite consistent in some things – notably that climate change is a scam , and his anti science stance is truly frightening – but ironically it seems to have been his denial of pandemic science and his woeful response to sars covid which lost him the previous election .
The Trump regime will probably want to keep Starmer dangling – to divide and rule Europe with the hint that UK is still sort of special – although UK will inevitably become more closer integrated with military Europe . But any sort of rearmament strategy fills one with dread – self fulfilling prophesy of war , and probably end up trying to buy both US and European arms – since UK’s have gone down the pan.
‘Find our meaning’ Richard – yes indeed, but as a community, a society, a country – not only as individuals.
Accepted
But we have to know as a start point.
Like the guy who keeps threatening to break your arms, then saying “Hey man, I’m just messing with you!”
You should take him neither seriously nor literally, but have as little as possible to do with him.