Can We Break the Cycle of Lies, Calumnies and Slander in our Political System?

You have just read the title of this blog, and you thought, great idea but impossible.  There is no way that we can stop the lies and misinformation that infect our political system.  I submit that you are wrong.  I submit that nothing is impossible if “We the People” decide that we have had enough.  I am sure that this year in the USA, we have all had more than enough.  I don’t care if you are a Democrat, Republican, Independent, Green, Libertarian, Constitutionalist or Socialist, I know that you are probably as sick and tired of the continuous lies that fuel our election process as I am.

“But wait” you say, “In twenty-five days, it will all be over.”  I sincerely wish you were right, but you are not.  No sooner than this election is over then you will get requests from someone running for dog catcher in Fairbanks, Alaska asking you for money.

Dear Sir,

Thank you so much for your generous campaign contribution for my election.  It was thanks to your help and thousands of other donors that I was elected.  But now is not the time to let up.  Our sleazy lying opponents have already collected a million dollars to fund their next campaign.  We must stop them now before it is too late.  Please pledge at least $100 dollars (or whatever you can afford) before midnight to help us reach our goal of 10 million dollars to re-elect me as dog catcher of Fairbanks.  My opponent says that she will ban stray dogs from wandering around our streets.  I promise to do better than that.  I will take all the homeless dogs off the street and provide adequate food and housing for them.  My campaign motto is “Make American Dogs .”  That stands for MAD because I am mad that we have so many homeless dogs.

PS:  You can buy a MAD hat at my office for the low price of only $39.99.  All proceeds will go to building more dog shelters

IF you think the above letter is funny, it is only so because you know it is true.  No sooner than this election is over, the cycle of lies, slander and calumnies will begin again.  How can we stop it?  Believe it or not we can stop it.  But before describing what I think we can do, it is important to define some terms.  What is a Calumny?  What is a lie?  What is a slander?  I will use the Oxford Online Dictionary to provide a common definition of each and a few examples.

A Calumny is the making of false and defamatory statements about someone in order to damage their reputation.  — https://languages.oup.com/google-dictionary-en

As an example, I have a flyer before me that claims one presidential candidate will send police door to door to seize firearms.  This is a lie because it is not true, but it is also a calumny because it is designed to damage the candidates reputation.

A Slander is the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person’s reputation.

Here is one example from another political flyer.  Candidate X has invited criminals, drug dealers and terrorists into our neighborhoods.  Another lie because no candidate on either side has ever done such an egregious offense.

If you study these two words, calumny and slander, they are very confusing.  One source describes the differences as follows:

“While both “slander” and “calumny” refer to making false statements to damage someone’s reputation, “calumny” is considered a more formal and serious term, often implying a malicious intent to spread false accusations, while “slander” simply refers to making a false spoken statement that harms someone’s reputation; in legal terms, “slander” is the specific act of making a defamatory oral statement, whereas “calumny” is a broader concept encompassing the act of making a malicious false accusation.”  — Generative AI

A Lie is an untrue statement with intent to deceive.  She told a lie when she said she didn’t break the vase.  He lied to create a false or misleading impression.

Lying is common to both calumnies and slanders but whereas slanders and calumnies can be illegal and subject to lawsuits, lies are a more generic family of comments that seem to escape legal action.  Part of the reason deals with intention.  A lie may be intentional, but it may not be meant to harm but only to deceive.  (Some might quibble about my distinction here).  For instance, I lie to my date because I want to impress her or him but not because I want to harm him or her.  I lie on my resume to get the job because I think the credentials required are ridiculous and I know I can do a great job despite lacking the formal requirements.

Today, we see lies about everything.  Sadly, people are willing to believe these lies.  The famous Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels and German Leader Adolph Hitler have both been described as partisans of what has been called “The Big Lie.”

“The German expression was first used by Adolf Hitler in his book Mein Kampf (1925) to describe how people could be induced to believe so colossal a lie because they would not believe that someone ‘could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously’.  The phrase “Big Lie” was used in a report prepared around 1943 by Walter C. Langer for the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing Hitler’s psychological profile.  The report was later published in book form as ‘The Mind of Adolf Hitler in 1972.’  Langer stated the following in respect to Hitler’s personality.”  — Wikipedia

“His primary rules were; never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.”  — “Mind of Adolf Hitler, 1972”

When I was a young student going to a Catholic School, I learned that there were two types of lies.  One was called “White Lies” and the other were simply “Black Lies.”  White lies were lies told for good reasons.  White Lies might be defended by those who believe that the ends justify the means.  Thus, politicians who believe they can save the USA from defeat by its enemies might tell “White Lies” to get elected so they can save the country.  Black Lies are generally regarded as lies told for selfish reasons or reasons to benefit someone else.  Using AI again, we find the following distinctions:

White Lies are told to please someone or to benefit the relationship and are generally considered acceptable. For example, telling a friend that their new haircut looks great.  White lies are often motivated by empathy and compassion.

Black Lies are told to gain personal benefits or to avoid a deserved penalty.  Black lies are generally considered universally wrong.  For example, a used car dealer lying about the condition of a car. Black lies are often motivated by selfishness.  — Generative AI

The nuances depicted in many of the definitions given above make ascertaining any criminal liability for lying very difficult.  One person’s “good intentions” might be another person’s “road to hell.”   Lawyers and pedants would have a field day debating these distinctions.  For those of us who know a horse from a cow, the distinctions are quite clear.  Namely, we are sick and tired of being lied to and having to listen to calumnies and slanders from either side attacking and trying to destroy the reputation, character and morals of people whom we personally respect.

I do not care which side you are on, left, right, up or down, enough is enough.  To demolish the character of people with lies and more lies simply to win an election is wrong.

It is wrong. 

It is sick behavior, and it is destroying our country.  You can proclaim all you want that the country is too divided, but it can never come together when one side demonizes the other.  Lying Fascist Greedy Right-Wing Republicans versus Lying Commie Radical Left-Wing Democrats.  What if someone called your mother or wife one of these terms?  How would you feel?  What would you do?  I know what I would do, and it would probably land me in jail.

What is my solution? 

Let us start a national movement that puts power back in the hands of voters.  You can argue all day long about false ballots, hanging chads, illegal voters, fake ballots and you will get nowhere.  As long as we have a voting process there will be human errors and even some iniquities in the process.  But what if we refuse to vote?  There are no laws against NOT VOTING in the USA.  What if we say, “I have had enough.  I am not voting in any election until we have a fix against political slander, lies and calumnies.”

There is no law that could put us in jail for not voting.  Imagine what it would do to the political process.  It would be like throwing a giant monkey wrench in the system.  The elections systems all over America would come to a grinding halt.  All we have to do is “NOT VOTE.”  We agree to stop voting for anyone until some efforts and sanctions are enacted for lying, slander and calumnies in the political process.  Until then, I say we sign petitions not to vote.  Buy yard signs saying “I am not voting anymore.” Start a National I Am Not Voting Party consisting of people like us who are tired of a system built on money, greed and lies.

Please feel free to share this blog with anyone else who is sick and tired of lies and more lies. 

Don’t Tell the Truth, Hide Behind a Euphemism

Collateral-Damage

A “New” Introduction: Circa 11-3-2024

Back again with this blog.  In light of the war in the Mideast it is very relevant.  We are now calling for a “Pause” rather than a “Cease Fire” because Netanyahu has said there will be no “Cease Fire” and Biden has supported this Genocide and Second Massacre and does not have the fortitude to stop it.  When did two wrongs make a right? 

My addition to the euphemisms noted in this blog is the term “Anti-Semite Police.”  These are the Israel supporters who attack and denigrate anyone who protests what is happening now.  Mention one thing about Palestinian rights or the horrid conditions that Palestinians have been living under before the Hamas Massacre and you are labeled an “Anti-Semite.”  Talk about an un-equivalent response and you are labeled an “Anti-Semite.”  Talk about the deaths of Palestinians and you will be labeled as an “Anti-Semite.”  The news is full of retaliations against people speaking out against the Israeli response to Hamas’s Massacre. 

The horror of this war will not be diminished by those who want to deny the protests and anguish of either side. 

Previous Introduction:  May, 2021

I wrote this six years ago.  Last week, (May 2021) I was teaching a class on Orwell’s “Animal Farm” and was explaining the difference between analogies, metaphors and euphemisms.  I remembered that I had written this blog several years ago and decided to see if it still had any relevance.  I was struck by what I had said about policing back then since my comments have been supported more recently by numerous examples.  I decided to republish the original blog.  I will go through and correct some egregious editing and grammar problems.

January, 2015

I woke up at 3 AM the morning of January 2, 2015 with military euphemisms on my mind.   Knowing that I would forget the ideas I had, I jotted down a few notes on paper before going back to bed.   A few of the specific euphemisms that were running through my brain included:

  • Collateral Damage
  • Surge
  • Village Pacification
  • Enhanced Interrogation
  • VUCA
  • Shock and Awe
  • IED
  • Drone Kill

Thinking that this was probably a very incomplete list of the euphemisms out there, I decided to Google the following:  Military Euphemism Examples.  Here is what my screen looked like:

Pages of Search Query

You will notice that I now had 254, 000 results.  I next went to the “Glossary of Iraqi War Euphemisms” and I found a site full of euphemisms that I had not thought of.  At this point, I realized that any possible list of euphemisms that I could compile far exceeded the limits of my prose for this blog.  I had originally thought to list a few of the more commonly heard euphemisms and discuss the implications of these words in respect to our thinking and behavior.  I would still like to accomplish this objective but now with more deference to those who have gone before in this effort as well as with increased humility in terms of the extent of the problem we are facing.  (Following this blog, are two references which anyone who wants to explore this problem further should pursue.)  See the late great George Carlin on Euphemisms.

What is the problem you may ask?  David Bromwich put it very succinctly:

“The frightening thing about the use of euphemisms is their power to efface the memory of actual cruelties.  Behind the façade of a history falsified by language, the painful particulars of war are lost.”David Bromwich

Dangerous-LiarsLet’s take a concrete example to illustrate the problem more.  The United States Senate recently released a report officially titled as:  Committee Study of the Central Intelligence Agency’s Detention and Interrogation Program.   Unofficially, it has been called the Senate Report on Torture.   I downloaded and saved the above report (525 pages) which I assume is the condensed version or summary of the full report.  Just for curiosity sake, I searched for the word Torture in the summary.  There were 131 instances of the word in the 525 page summary.

I then typed in “enhanced interrogation” and found 997 instances of the term in the report.  Apparently our Senate is no fonder of the word Torture then its intended victims were.  Given our penchant for euphemisms, I am almost surprised that they did not call it the “Senate Report on Enhanced Interrogation Techniques.”  With such a title, they could probably sell it to Human Resource Managers looking for better ways to screen potential new hires.  I also typed in the word Victim to see how many times this was in the report.  It was found a total of 6 times and in each instance, it was related to the phrase:  “United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture.”  Apparently, the word victim is too harsh to use.  Maybe we should call victims of torture something like “unintended recipients of undesired attention.”  You must admit it has a sort of ring to it.  I think it sounds a lot more interesting than “victims of torture.”  We could abbreviate it as URUA which can then be used when needed so as not to offend anyone.

grave yard euphemismA euphemism is a word or phrase used in place of another word or phrase.  However, a euphemism is different than a synonym.  The difference is important because it is insidious and it strikes to the heart of the problem that we are facing here.   This is an example from Baker Editing Services on the use of synonyms versus euphemisms which I think does a good job of illustrating the differences:

“You need to select your synonyms carefully.  Euphemisms are sometimes a good choice as a specific category of synonym when selecting an alternate word.  They are neutral, mild, or vague terms that can be used to express a more offensive or traumatic word or situation without giving offense.  Rather than saying a coworker is a competitive ass, you might say that he is “driven” or “very dedicated to achieving his goals.”

war picturesNotice the difference?  When we use a euphemism, we may be trying not to give offense.  We may also be trying to hide the truth or something that might be unacceptable if rendered in plain English.  Thus in war, words like casualties replace deaths and “suppressing the enemy” replaces “killing” the enemy.  American casualties are reported but not enemy casualties since we don’t really care about the number of freedom fighters (Oh, I meant terrorists) we kill.   We did not really destroy the village and all the women and children and freedom fighters (Oops, my mistake again, I meant terrorists) in it.  We pacified the village.

(‘It became necessary to destroy the town to save it’, a United States major said today. He was talking about the decision by allied commanders to bomb and shell the town regardless of civilian casualties, to rout the Vietcong.)Peter Arnett

We certainly pacified the town of Bến Tre which now has a population of over 140, 000 people.  Of course, back during the Vietnam War, they were not people, they were Gooks.  I was curious to find out just how many people were killed while we “pacified” the village but I could not find any specific figures.  (If anyone knows the number of people killed at Bến Tre during the offensive, please let me know.) 

Another euphemism or at least it seems to be a euphemism is the concept of “force continuum”:

force continuumA “Use of Force Continuum” is a standard that provides law enforcement officials and security officers (such as police officers, probation officers, or corrections officers) with guidelines as to how much force may be used against a resisting subject in a given situation.

excessive forceThe principle idea here is to use only the amount of deterrence necessary to protect oneself and also accomplish the objectives needed by the situation.  Practically speaking this means that if someone calls you a name, you do not shoot them.  If someone comes at you bare handed, you may use the minimum level of force necessary to protect yourself.  This might mean you would use tear gas or a Taser before you would blast them with a shotgun.  I mentioned that the concept of force continuum seems like a euphemism but perhaps it is more of a misnomer since it often seems like it is an upside down continuum with police shooting first and asking questions later.

The problem of euphemisms is evident in policing as well as in military situations.   However, it is more insidious and subtle here and thus more difficult to recognize.  Nevertheless, it plays an important role in police efforts to prevent crime and violence.  If instead of looking at someone as a human being or a citizen, police label them as “violent perps”, then they will likely use more force than they need to.  Many of the recent examples in the news of “police brutality” reflect this overuse of force due to the stereotyping of African Americans as more violent and dangerous than Whites or other ethnic groups.  Again, we see the problem here is that we are labeling people not as they really are but as we are programmed for them to be. Human life becomes cheap.  Maybe we should call it a “killing” continuum instead of a “use of force continuum.”

euphemismMadison Avenue has become an obscene part of the communication process in both the military and law enforcement.  Hide it.  Obscure it.  Obfuscate it.  Give them what they won’t understand.  Make it sound benign.  Sugarcoat it and they will buy it every time.  We did not kill the man.  We neutralized him.  We did not choke him to death.  We used acceptable deterrence procedures.   We did not abuse the woman; we used standard assault control techniques.   Let’s not say what we mean.  Let’s not call it what it really is.  He injured himself in the course of our investigative process.   She was injured while we were restraining her for her own safety.

Euphemisms are dangerous.  I would go so far as to say they are evil.  They hide the truth.  They convey a message which does not fit reality.  They paint an inappropriate picture of what is happening in our lives.  They distort the facts.   Without seeing things as they really are, we are lost in a fog of illusion.  We are navigating in a maze without any sense of direction.  We are looking in a mirror that shows us what others want us to believe and not what is really happening.   Here is a recent news story about a 90 year old war veteran who was arrested for feeding the hungry.  Notice the euphemisms:

“While video available on YouTube shows Arnold Abbott and ministers being taken away in police custody, the Mayor states that Mr. Arnold had not been arrested, but rather was detained, cited, and ordered to appear in court.  Those cited face possible jail time and have taken the city to court to fight the ordinance.”  CNN,  11-5-2014

Should you get arrested, I hope you will remember the difference between detained and arrested.  It might help in your plea to the court.   Here is another example of a euphemism that has evolved over time.  It is from the pen of the famous cartoonist Scott Adams known for his Dilbert series.

“You’re fired.”  (1980)

“You’re laid off.”  (1985)

“You’re downsized.”  (1990)

“You’re rightsized.”  (1992)

Do words matter?  Of course they matter.  Why would advertisers, marketers, PR people and political pundits go to such trouble to use words to disguise meanings if they did not matter?

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. ‘Of course you don’t — till I tell you. I meant “there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!”‘

‘But “glory” doesn’t mean “a nice knock-down argument”,’ Alice objected.

‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.’  (From Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass.)

bank exampleThe golden rule applies unilaterally when euphemisms and misinformation must be spread.  The golden rule is “he, who has the gold, makes the rules.”  In most cases, this easily answers Humpty Dumpty’s question about who is to be the master?  The person who has the most gold is the master.  The poor, the underprivileged, the defeated, the economically disadvantaged, the bottom of the pile minorities, and lower income groups do not get to choose the words and make the euphemisms.   If they did, it might lead to a type of new grammar which I would call “reverse euphemisms.”  This is euphemisms named by a group that has nothing to hide or would really like to see the truth out.  Thus, in Michael Brown’s case it would have been said that he was:

  • Indiscriminately slaughtered
  • Butchered in cold blood
  • Executed
  • Assassinated

Eric Garner did not die from aspiration or asphyxiation or not being able to get a breath while in a police restraint.  Eric (it would be more accurate to say) died from:

  • Being strangled to death
  • Choked to death
  • Unwarranted and unnecessary application of dangerous and lethal police procedures

article-eric-garner-wife-1203All lives matter:  Black, Brown, Yellow, White, Blue, Pink or any other color.  No exceptions.  No one’s death is a cipher.  When we diminish the victims meaning and their importance through the use of sophistry, euphemisms and carefully crafted words to hide behind, we increase the probability that no lives will matter.  We must not allow others to hide behind words designed to conceal the truth.   Start speaking the truth.  Say the truth.  Change the words you use to reflect the truth.  The truth may just set you and the world free.

Time for Questions:

What is your favorite euphemism?  Why?  What do you think would happen if we stopped using so many euphemisms?  Would we have more truth or less?  Do you think euphemisms are helpful or harmful?  Why?  Can you trust what anyone means anymore?   What is the difference between a lie and a euphemism?

Life is just beginning:

Here are some good sites to visit if you want to explore this subject further: