Within the works of Jason Stanley’s “Language That Silences” he discusses the idea of using words as an act of oppression or silencing, and the use of speech acts, how they’re affected by the false presentation of a particular word. At the beginning of the article, Stanley introduces a writer. The writer was a feminist scholar named Catherine MacKinnon. Mackinnon is famously known for her claim that pornography silences women. The discussion of the idea of speech acts is persisted by Mackinnon who states pornography would rob women of the ability to refuse. The argument on speech acts that Mackinnon makes can be argued to similar cases where people claimed that a certain form of media, for example, pornography or video games caused a certain
…show more content…
Words are mended and wild claims are thrown to the wind. Stanley tells us that the linguistic strategies are the arsenal of politics, like the act of silencing. The claim that someone can steal you voice is present, but only under certain circumstances. That the very first amendment right can be taken right out from under your nose, just by using some clever wording. Stanley sounds like a conspirator, saying things like it is possible to silence people by denying them access to the vocabulary to express their claims. Denying people a vocabulary would be denying someone an education, which is not seen very often. Stanley is sticking up for the little guy, the ones without the understanding of the arsenal of words the politics use in their everyday battles. Silencing is mentions often as words with hidden motives, in politics this was where you’d hear the wild rumors that undermines peoples trust. This is a common technique used by politics for god only knows how …show more content…
Politics is a constant war of who is right and who is wrong; this will go on forever as long as democracy is in place. Stanley brings forth the act of propaganda and the roles it plays. The point to make here is if we know its propaganda, why does anybody listen to it? The answer is clear; the propaganda sounds believable and maybe plays in some positive way in my interest. So politics is basically people using word to get others to believe and follow in what they believe in. In all honesty, politics tend to have it worst. Political figures always have to cover up some scandal with other scandal, and the public is constantly breathing down their neck, or watching their every move. How else are politicians supposed to do their job? Without the use of words, whether it is the truth, false, or somewhere in the middle, politics could never get anything done. The play on words continues when decisions are made like making an assassination plan’s named Operation Iraqi Freedom or instead of saying there is a tax cut politicians would rather say there is a tax relief. Tax relief is made to sound more appealing so more people will be interested and this will register as a good thing. Some people are that simple and others are more complex always asking questions, waiting for the moment a politician may slip up. Same with
Words are mended and wild claims are thrown to the wind. Stanley tells us that the linguistic strategies are the arsenal of politics, like the act of silencing. The claim that someone can steal you voice is present, but only under certain circumstances. That the very first amendment right can be taken right out from under your nose, just by using some clever wording. Stanley sounds like a conspirator, saying things like it is possible to silence people by denying them access to the vocabulary to express their claims. Denying people a vocabulary would be denying someone an education, which is not seen very often. Stanley is sticking up for the little guy, the ones without the understanding of the arsenal of words the politics use in their everyday battles. Silencing is mentions often as words with hidden motives, in politics this was where you’d hear the wild rumors that undermines peoples trust. This is a common technique used by politics for god only knows how …show more content…
Politics is a constant war of who is right and who is wrong; this will go on forever as long as democracy is in place. Stanley brings forth the act of propaganda and the roles it plays. The point to make here is if we know its propaganda, why does anybody listen to it? The answer is clear; the propaganda sounds believable and maybe plays in some positive way in my interest. So politics is basically people using word to get others to believe and follow in what they believe in. In all honesty, politics tend to have it worst. Political figures always have to cover up some scandal with other scandal, and the public is constantly breathing down their neck, or watching their every move. How else are politicians supposed to do their job? Without the use of words, whether it is the truth, false, or somewhere in the middle, politics could never get anything done. The play on words continues when decisions are made like making an assassination plan’s named Operation Iraqi Freedom or instead of saying there is a tax cut politicians would rather say there is a tax relief. Tax relief is made to sound more appealing so more people will be interested and this will register as a good thing. Some people are that simple and others are more complex always asking questions, waiting for the moment a politician may slip up. Same with