Persuasive Language and the Whistle Blower

The term “propaganda” is currently considered too harsh a word to use in the public domain. For many, the term “public relations”, is less old-fashioned and much less caustic for the brain. Then we come to the word, “torture”. It was during the Bush 2 era that this term, with a kind of magical stealth, became “enhanced interrogation”. In only the last few months the term has changed once again, to “rough interrogation.” In our not too distant past, the “Department of Defence” surfaced in the lexicon, replacing the much more aggressive title, the “Department of War” - Again, less caustic, less in-your-face, and easier on the ears.

In George Orwell’s book, “Politics and the English Language”, he states, "All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia..." Later he goes on to write, "The great enemy of clear language is insincerity." The use of language, particularly writing or speaking cliché’s, in politics, using euphemisms, is a strategy to manipulate the emotions and attitudes of the masses. By being aware of euphemisms, and over used clichés or unnecessary words that cloud the reader's understanding, we can be less affected by these efforts to move our beliefs in a certain direction.

The term “Whistle blower” has been transforming since the second term of the Obama administration. Its definition: “a person who exposes any kind of information or activity that is deemed illegal, unethical, or not correct within an organization that is either private or public. The information of alleged wrongdoing can be classified in many ways: violation of company policy/rules, law, regulation, or threat to public interest/national security, as well as fraud, and corruption.”

Now I believe this is important. Once “whistle blowing” denoted an act of civil disobedience, a moral and ethical action to protect the wellbeing of people, and/or in the name of national security. For certain, there is debate as to revealing the secrets of an organization or government is harmful to that said institution, however, when crimes are committed in secrecy, harming the good of the whole, in a democratic society, it is absolutely necessary. But now the term “whistle blower” has transformed to the word, “Leaker.”

“Leaker” has become a dirty word in politics. “Who’s the leaker in the Whitehouse?” “Leakers are unpatriotic and should be punished.” In a general context, the WH staffs leaking the POTUS personal details, whose being firing next, are not my concerns here. This is a different type of leaking, which to my mind does not threaten national security. In most cases, it merely embarrasses the president. “Leaker” now connotes the negative, a bad person, perhaps a traitor.

Granted, “Leaks” to the press can be miss leading, creating a false impression for the public.

Terms are changed in order to affect public opinion. A whistle blower will reveal illegal/criminal actions of a company, government or institution, believing that by “blowing the whistle”; they are doing a public service, usually at great personal risk to themselves.

The sole reason those in power have arrested and jailed ‘whistle blowers” is they revealed crimes and corruption. For example, Julian Assange published the crimes at GITMO; unnecessary murder by American soldiers upon innocence; the Clinton emails, showing a rigged DNC 2016 campaign, and a corrupt Clinton Foundation. The NSA, whistle blower, Edward Snowdon, revealed the illegal mass surveillance of American citizens, and foreign State officials, around the world. These men are currently wanted for espionage. When, in fact, they have never worked for foreign governments. The only reason they are wanted is the “powers that be” got caught committing crimes.

A whistle blower in present time is more necessary than ever before. Do not let the “language-powerbrokers” dissuade the people from the truth.

As President Kennedy once wrote:

“The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings...Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe...no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent...For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day…”