A badly written rant on the misuse of language

I read today that for the 2012 Presidential Campaign the US President is hosting $38,000 a plate fundraisers for his Wall Streetcontributors.

Apparently Barack Obama will raise somewhere in the region of $1 Billion for the election.

In 2004, “Evil” George W. Bush hosted $2000 a plate fundraisers.  That’s an increase of 19 to 1 in two election cycles.

Obama ran a campaign of “hope and change”.  In 2012 he will do much the same thing.

So where does the money come from?  What does it buy?

You know the answer.  Rich backers, and access.  Eventually, Government policy.

But it isn’t called bribery, oh no no.  Not corruption, goodness me no.  That happens in Zimbabwe and Pakistan, and those other ignorant backwaters.

This is called campaign finance.

In the UK, all the big supermarkets, pharmaceuticals and big business sponsor each annual political party conference; setting up workshops and such, advising how private finance can consult with (and profit from) public sector budget-holders.

Not corruption.  Consultation.

Just recently, “the markets” freaked out when the Greek president threatened a referendum to decide the outcome of the bailout.  To let the population decide whether these horrendous sacrifices demanded should be made in return for some money they’ll immediately hand back to the banks in the form of debt reduction.

Within days the president had gone.  No elections, a government of national unity will be raised instead and the crippling pay cuts and firesale selling of state assets will be rammed through against the wishes of 99% of the Greek people.

They call it “austerity”.  And something about democracy.  I forget.

But austerity sounds so much better doesn’t it?  We all have a rigid, fixed understanding of “austerity” in our heads, even running completely contrary to the original intent and usage.

Cuts to public services, children’s start-up programmes, street lighting, border controls.  Cuts everywhere you look.  That’s austerity.

Creating money out of thin air to buy up debt in a massive paper exercise that affects no one except the money man who make a living trading imaginary currency?  That’s called Quantitative Easing, or QE for short.

“Another £75 Billion of QE” they say.  No problem.  It’s all made-up anyways.

Cutting Billions from life-improving, taxpayer funded services in the name of satisfying the market wolves baying for blood?  That’s called Deficit Reduction.  Who can be against Deficit Reduction?  Only commies and students, I’ll bet.

Reducing over-time for Firemen, and Firewomen, the bravest people in the land, giving less job security, pensions and take-home pay?  That’s called “modernisation of working practices”.  Who can be against that?  Commies?  Yeah, probably.

Making it easier to fire staff, pregnant women, reduce maternity leave and pay, increasing contracted staff over permanent.  They call that “increasing flexibility in the labour market”.  Who wouldn’t want to be flexible?  It’s so...flexible.

Allowing millionaires to avoid tax, offshore tax havens, creating tens (maybe hundreds) of Billions of lost tax revenue, accounting for the entirety of our budget deficit.  That’s “maintaining a competitive tax environment”.  To argue against competition is to argue against reason, surely?

Language is being narrowed down, the vocabulary of public discourse reduced as meanings set in quick drying cement.

Democracy, Freedom, Tyranny, Terrorists, Free-markets, Defence, Spending (bad), Austerity (more austerity, more!) Economy, and my favourite, Elections.  All with manifest meanings, all generally understood, and used completely the opposite in practice.

Defence means selling weapons to further war.  Democracy means do what we say.  Tyranny is people we don’t like.  Freedom is people we do.  Free markets mean giving up your corner stores so a single supermarket can make you go there instead.  Elections give you the chance every four years to decide the face of your overlord, but not the policy.  The economy is whatever we say is good for your financial health.

Those protestors at St Paul’s, and the 24-hour news hounds that want bite-size digestible talking points from them, have both missed the point.

The economy, is working fine.  Really.  It is.  You might be watching apocalyptic scenarios play out on the news but actually it’s going great.

If you’re in the 1%.

If you’re not, and not hanging around at the margins trying to get a look-in, ah yes well you see, not so good.

The fallacy is that on some kind of level, we still believe that while these thieves are enriching themselves, receiving bailouts and bonuses while the rest of us slog through permanent “austerity”, it is the result of an accident.  As if the perfect economic system to benefit us all is temporarily spinning off its axis and just needs a few corrections.

It is not.  It’s working just fine.  It’s merely the natural consequence of what the 18^th century economist Adam Smith called “the vile maxim of the masters of mankind": “All for ourselves, and nothing for other People”.  (Thank you Noam Chomsky, I'm quoting your Adam Smith quote.  Saved me having to read The Wealth Of Nations)

And they’re using language to control how we view the situation, and think.

While George Orwell may have missed the mark in some elements of 1984 (to which we must give him a break, as he had no way of knowing decades later how Soviet-style totalitarianism would play out, much less the more subtle propaganda elements and entertainment)  when it came to Newspeak and social class, he was bang on.

A limited, thin dictionary will defined words defining thought, most importantly preventing rebellion.  85% of the population left to their squalor and pig-ignorance, while a small minority of outer party members work to further the interests of the 1% inner party.  Perfect.