8/7/2019 political language -

1/2

POLITICAL LANGUAGEbyRoberta Kimmel

W hil e m uc h social science research of th e past fewdecades has focused o n po l icy format io n a imed atreducing economic and social inequal i t ies, surprisinglyl i t t le ef for t has been devo ted t o quest ion ing why such alarge number of unsuccessfu l po l ic ies have come intobeing, and how these dramatic inequal i t ies have been sosteadfastly perpetuated. Political Language: Words thatSucceed and Policies that Fail,a ne w Inst i tu te for Researcho n Poverty Mo nog rap h by Mu rray Edelman, of fers anorigina l an d p rovoc ative analysis of these issues.Language and the Formation of Beliefs

"Chronic soc ia l problems, recurr in g belie fs abou tthem, a nd re curr ing language forms that jus t ify the i racceptance re inforce each other. Only rare ly canthe re be d i rect observations of events, and even th enlanguage forms shape that meaning of what thegeneral pu bl ic an d gover nm ent off ic ials see."

The s tudy is found ed o n a broad epis temologica l base thatexplores h ow pat terns o f be lie fs are formed. I t examinesthe evoca t ion o f pe rcep tions abou t pover ty and re la tedsocial proble ms that are nonem pirical ly based, thro ugh t helanguage emp loy ed i n everyday discussion and analysis ofthese problems. The re l iance of e l i tes and nonel i tes a l ikeo n what th e autho r descr ibes as symbol ica l ly enge nderedcogn i t ive s tructures has pro fou nd consequences for pub -l ic pol icy .

Au tho r M urra y Edelman, a professor of po l i t ica l sc ience atth e Unive rsi ty of Wisconsin, has had a longstanding in-terest in po l i t ica l symbolism. I n The Symbolic Uses ofPolitics (1964) he examined the way in which e l i tesstructu re the expectations mass publ ics have of the m a ndcon t r i bu te s ign if ican tl y t o the accep t ing re la ti onsh ip o fpeo ple to autho r i ty i tse lf . I n Politics as Symbolic Language(1971) symbol ic e leme nts engender ing reb el l ion andescalation of co nf l ic t w ere scrut in ized. The present s tudyuti l izes a similar approach: that is, analysis of th e r ole o fsymbols by e xamining thei r recurr ing and pers is t ing l inkst o observable pol i t ical behaviors that vary wi th socialsi tuations and wi th changes i n signif icant symbols, rathertha n wit h emp irical ly based observations.The data for t he analysis consist of (1) c om m on terms,metaphors, and other everyday f igures of speech as theyappear i n the s tatements of publ ic of ficials, o f g overnm entagencies, in m edia accounts and in terest grou p l i terature,( 2 ) terms emp loyed in re levant professional ar t icles andeco nom ic analyses, an d (3 ) publ ic act ions and react ions tothe m tha t common ly recur .The Language of the Helping ProfessionsI t is, Edelman maintains, thr ou gh l inguist ic devices andpubl ic gestures that com plex an d un fou nde d assumpt ions

POLITICAL LANGUAGE: WORDS THATSUCCEED AND POLICIES THAT FAILby

Murra y EdelmanAcademic Press, $12.50 ($4.95paper)

regar ding social issues are evo ked in people's minds. Th echal lenge resides in d iscover ing th e process by wh ichlanguage and gestures are transformed into these myths.His method is to examine everyday react ions to chronicsocial prob lems b y analyzing th e explanations and actionsused to co pe wi th them. H e concen t ra tes o n pub l i cof f ic ia ls and o n th e author ity , language, and ideology ofth e "he lpin g professions"-psychiatry, social work , an dteaching-because of the i r obv ious in f luence o n bel ie fsand pol i t ica l actions re levant to pove rty and re lated i lls ,and a lso because they "exempl i fy th e t ie b etwe en lan-guage and cog nit io n i n a way that is readi ly accessible t oobse rvation a nd analysis." These professions arepart icu larly reveal ing in th e terms they use t o categor izeevents and just i fy restr ic t ive courses of act ion i n orde r t ode f ine and de fen d h ie ra rch ies o f power .

Consider ho w th e most c om mo n of activi ties-exercising,talking, and even reading, are label led as" th e r ap y" 4a nc e the rapy, rec rea t ion the rapy, g rouptherapy, b ib l io therapy. Wh en constra in ing acts arebrought under the rubr ics of educat ion, therapy, orrehabi l i ta t ion they are thereby conve rted in t o a l t ruis t icones.

"To label a com mo n act iv i ty as though i t were amedical on e is to establish super ior an d subord inateroles, t o make i t c lear w ho g ives orders and w ho takesthem, and t o us ti fy i n advance th e inh ib i t i ons p lacedup o n he subo rdinate class."

Bes ides def in ing and mainta in ing s tatus and powerhierarchies, accord ing to Edelman, th e language of t hehelp ing professions can also serve t o enlarge autho ri ty. Asa t ten t ion is d i ve r ted f ro m th e economic a nd soc ia l roo ts o fa problem, the i r ow n base of p ow er can be broadened. Juston e o f th e forms th is takes is constru ing th e absence ofdeviant behavior as a precursor of i t . In psychiatr ic l i t-eratu re on e reads o f the "prepsychotic"; social w or kl i terature makes reference t o th e "predel iquent . ""At ten t ion is hence focused on preven t ion and contro l ,a n d d i v e r t e d f r o m t h e l i n k b e t we e n p o v e r t y a n d d e -l inquency." Such terminology a lso ins t il ls conf idenc e i nth e professional's abi li ty to predic t those w ho w i l l exhib i tan ti soc ia l behav io r i n he fu tu re and those who wi l l no t .

The use of a special symbolic language to e ffect socialcon form i ty and d iscourage cr i t ic ism is not , however,

8/7/2019 political language -

2/2

unique to this group. It i s also characteristic of muchbureaucratic language.The Languageof BureaucracyThe language of bureaucracy often serves to perpetuatebasically ineffective organizations. The survival of ad-ministrative agencies seems, on occasion, to depend moreon publicanxiety about the problems they are dealing withthan on their performance.

"Language shapes what administrators and the publictake for granted, whose expectations they accept aslegitimate and whose they ignore, how they definetheir functions, and what meanings they read into theoutcomes of their policies."

Because of conflict ing goals or ambiguous language, eval-uations of controversial organizations often reveal nothingabout those organizations' effectiveness. Vagueobjectives-"national security," "decent housingf'-canproduce evaluations that exaggerate both util ity of servicesand results. The more concrete the terms that are used todescribe their objectives, the greater the conflict andmore ineffective they are likely toappear.Social Adjustment through ContradictoryBeliefsThe flavor of Edelman's style of argumentation can beillustrated by what he describes as social adjustmentthrough contradictory beliefs.The most common cognitive reactions to poverty fall intoone of two alternative patterns. The first pattern sees thepoor as responsible for their predicament and in need ofcontrol "to compensate for their [alleged] inadequacies,greed, lack of self-discipline, immorality. . . ."This view isoften espoused by legislators and administrators whooppose increases in welfare benefits, and by traditionalpsychiatrists and social workers, among others.The alternative view sees the poor as victims, deprivedthrough social, political, and economic exploitat ion ratherthan personal defects. Liberal politicians and helpingprofessionalsare he likely proponents of this pattern.While most people will choose one of these two as thedominant theory, they learn to perceive both, i n Edelman'sview, uti liz ing each as i t suits a particular purpose. This notonly expresses individual ambivalence, but also fosterscontradictions in political rhetoric and in public policy.The language in which both explanations are couchedencourages quiescent public acceptance of poverty as afact of life. To perceive poverty in terms of theinadequacies of the poor i s to treat its symptoms, while thecategories used to define it in terms.of the functioning ofeconomic, social, and political institutions-the "system"and "economic lawu-make the battle appear futi le.Political Constraint through SymbolicReassuranceHow is it, Edelman asks, that governments can pursuepolicies that are unsuccessful, and even at times con-tradictory to the values those very policies are supposed to

support? How i s it that rhetoric on peace and disarmamenti s abundant, for instance; yet disarmament conferences donot make significant headway and the defense budgetcontinues to takea major porti on of the national coffer?

"It is language about political events rather than theevents themselves that everyone experiences; theunintended consequences of actions and language areoften more important than the intended ones; andconventional observation and conventional researchmethods (notably opin ion and attitude research)chiefly tell us which symbols are currently powerful,no t what 'reality' is."

Why, in the area of consumer protection, have manymeasures proven t o have far greater symbolic thansubstantive value; and how i s it that regulatory agenciesand public u tili ty commissions end up serving, at least inpart, the ends of the business groups they "regulate"?Once these bodies have become cued as beingbenevolent, or their specific officials have become cued asconsumer advocates, their ineffective actions orcounterproductive results often fade into obscurity.People want to believe in the integrity and efficacy of theirgovernment, says Edelman. So they accept a degree ofambivalence that permits continuation of the policies thatengender the ambivalence. To do otherwise would mean apolitical life f illed with protest and resistance, a strain fewwish to accept.

"The overwhelming majority want to believe thattheir own roles are meaningful contributions to agreater good, and so have good reason to accept thereassuring perspective on public affairs, rather thanone that upsets both their belief in institutions theyhave supported and their belief i n themselves."

ConclusionThe most serious issues for Edelman are no t the ones thatinvolve conscious deception, although such cases arecertainly significant for their public policy implicationsandinteresting from the standpoint of scientific analysis.Rather, he i s most deeply concerned about authoritieswho are as involved in their symbolism as the nonelitesunder their dominance. The kinds of linguistic symbolismexplored in Political Language both perpetuateinequalities that would not otherwise be tolerated andensure mass acceptance of ineffective or harmful politicalpolicies. The economic, social, and psychologicalconsequences of governmental measures to deal withpoverty are sometimes themselves major contributors topoverty and related problems. Recent history has shownthat, for relatively powerless groups, resistance can andfrequently has brought benefits. The mythical perceptionsthat our political language engenders present potent(although not insurmountable) deterrents to suchresistance.