To What Degree Is Politics Deceiving?

According to George Orwell, a renowned English novelist and essayist of dystopian literature, the nature of politics itself is deceiving.

Orwell is not only a renowned English novelist and essayist but also a strong political writer who outlines the rules that political writing should comply with in his essay Politics and the English Language.

1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech that you are used to seeing in print.

2. Never use a long word where a short one will do.

3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

4. Never use the passive when you can use the active.

5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

As noticeable, the clauses of the rules primarily focus on the use of language in politics. A common feature is that Orwell promoted explicit and direct wording in political writing. He viewed the “literary use of language” in politics as deceptive. According to George Orwell, the use of metaphors, Latin and Greek words, foreign phrases, and scientific words “blur(ring) or even chang[e](ing)” the meaning that is to be delivered. He adds that This alteration in the delivery of meaning through literary language is abused by politicians. Politicians talk in a literary way, incorporating numerous rhetorics and literary techniques in their speeches to euphemize the malicious intentions concealed between their lines.

However, is it true that the more precise the language is, the less deceptive politics become? Look at the image above, which is a visual demonstration of research conducted by the University of Carnegie Mellon on the use of language, divided into vocabulary and grammar, by successive US presidential candidates. It concluded that “most candidates use words and grammar typical of students in grades 6-8, though Donald Trump tends to lag behind the others”. Do you see a clear correlation between a candidate elected to be the president, especially a good president, and the use of simple language? It is highly doubted.

Indeed, literary language alters the message, and it can be used to deceive the public in some cases. However, isn’t it the beauty of political speeches that they use rhetoric to persuade people aesthetically? It is the common practice to ask ourselves the borderlines of righteous actions, and it seems necessary to determine whether using linguistic techniques in political situations is deemed wrong. We cannot dump the beauty of political language as a form of literature at the expense of avoiding deception.