Is there Danger in the Words We Use?

Blog Post #1 – Is there danger in the words we use?

When looking at the society in the United States it is important to ask “is there danger in the words we use?” Modern media and society has become saturated with language, catch phrases, and emotionally numbing terms used to describe ethnic groups, beliefs, and lifestyles that dehumanizes others. Karen Stollznow of The University of California defines dehumanization as “…a cognitive process with a multi-faceted social production (i.e., a ‘way of thinking’ that an result in linguistic, semiotic and physical manifestations, e.g., violence or verbal abuse).”  Historically, it’s been demonstrated that such dehumanizing language is truly dangerous for society and contributes to unethical acts such as genocide. 

There is danger in the words we use, but how should a society which embraces freedom deal with such language?  Is this language protected by the First Amendment? Is the media protected when it uses language that further dehumanizes groups within society?  To examine this there must be an understanding of what freedom of speech is, both socially and legally, within the United States. 

With a basic understanding the topic of freedom of speech, and that the right is not absolute, it becomes possible to examine dehumanizing speech in media and in public.  Is freedom of the press absolute?  Or are there limits to the freedom of the press?

In both cases, freedom of speech and freedom of the press, citizens of the United States need to understand that these freedoms are not absolute.  It is not allowable to yell “fire” in a public building endangering others and it is not possible to publish lies (through various forms from print to modern media) without potential damaging recourse.  How do these limitations apply to hate speech and dehumanization of groups in the media?  For the advancement of the society these are important questions to ask, research, and determine. 

Words: 307 

Works Cited:

Crashcourse. "Freedom of Speech: Crash Course Government and Politics #25." YouTube. YouTube, 2015. Web. 13 July 2016.  

Crashcourse. "Freedom of the Press: Crash Course Government and Politics #26." YouTube. YouTube, 2015. Web. 13 July 2016. 

Stollznow, Karen. "Dehumanisation in language and thought." Journal of Language and Politics, vol. 7, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2008..doi:10.1075/jlp.7.2.o1sto.

Is Your Neighbor Human?

Do you ever wonder if you neighbors are even human?  Do you use words like libertard, neocon, sheeple, queer, illegal, or such terms in your description of them?  How does this effect how you think of them?  Many hyperbolic statements about society begin with “in Nazi Germany” and are followed by weak examination of history focusing on some argument the speaker wishes to support, such as “first they come get your guns.”  The horrors of Nazi Germany actually began with application of how words were used in language, creating a monumental shift in the society’s moral structure and humanity.  How you describe your neighbor may not be a judgement on them, but a gauge of your humanity.  

Professor Philip Zimbardo is well known for his studies of how good people become evil, he calls this the Lucifer Effect.  In his TED talk, The Lucifer Effect, he examines how dehumanization permits good people to do truly horrible acts against others.  His point is as long as there is a human connection, any empathy, human nature is generally good.  If you can remove that connection, that empathy, acts against others become simply acts against a system, or things, and morally acceptable.  This need to dehumanize in order to commit great evil is part of every mass shooting and all the way to genocide of entire groups of people.  Words are the most effective way to dehumanize or trivialize other individuals or groups of people.

Is this important to us today in American society?  When was the last time a news program reported of a father of three dying an unspeakably horrible death of dehydration alone in the middle of the desert?  Or does the news media simply report about the number of "illegals" dying crossing the border?  Even this "humanitarian piece", from CBS News, while reporting on the tragedy they also dehumanizes those that are the subject of the report.  The report does not challenge society's label of the people who are dying, instead it allows society to dismiss the human impact and continue saying "they deserved to die because they were illegals."  

  The modern saturated news cycle is permitting American society to turn a blind eye to suffrage, but is that the same as creating evil?  That question can be debated, yet it would be hard to find someone who did not believe the rash of mass shootings over that last decade is anything other than acts of evil.  What is the common thread that runs through each one of these mass shootings?  It is the shooter felt the act was justified.  They felt their actions were justified because it was against "the gays", "the minorities", "the liberals", "the system", and other stereotypes popular in today's media.   The popularization of these stereotypes might be a ratings hit, but it is poison to the moral fiber of the nation.  The Nuremberg trials of 1946 sentenced the publisher of a weekly newsletter to death for infecting "the German mind with the virus of anti-Semitism and incited German people to active persecution" (Harvard Law Review 2769).  Americans understand the importance of free speech, but also know it is dangerous to yell "fire" in a crowded theater.  It is important for continued social growth to determine how to balance these two.

With the approaching election the popularization of speech that dehumanizes as begun to saturate the political system.  Campaigns are not run on ideas about the future, but about fear and defending ideals that are truly not at risk.  There is no rich immigrant working in a field living better than you who came here to take your job.  There is no secret gay agenda to turn you gay, and that natural disaster is not "God's wraith" against gay marriage.  Liberals are not building camps to put you in once they take your guns.  When a politician tells you to fear "others" realize the "others" they are talking have more in common with you than that rich politician.  Before fearing other remember is not actually different than you, race is a social construct  according to science.  Religion and political beliefs are not biological differences but ideological variations.  You are not that different than the "others" you are suppose to fear. David Engleman points out that humanizing others is the cure to our social ills.  History teaches us that we should fear words more than spears.  

Sources Cited:

"International Law - Genocide - U.N. Tribunal Finds that Mass Media Hate Speech Constitutes Genocide, Incitement to Genocide, and Crimes Against Humanity." Harvard Law Review 117.8 (2004): 2769. Web.