{"id":1235,"date":"2017-04-25T16:09:37","date_gmt":"2017-04-25T15:09:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/?p=1235"},"modified":"2017-04-25T16:18:43","modified_gmt":"2017-04-25T15:18:43","slug":"words-and-politics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/2017\/04\/25\/words-and-politics\/","title":{"rendered":"Words and Politics"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201cFor last year’s words belong to last year’s language
\nAnd next year’s words await another voice.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/h2>\n

\"Words<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Do T.S. Eliot<\/strong>\u2019s words above say it all? Language is continuously changing<\/strong>. Heraclitus<\/strong> was persistent in reminding us about \u2018change\u2019<\/strong> with such quotes as \u201cThere is nothing permanent except change\u201d<\/em> and \u201cYou cannot<\/strong> step into the same river twice\u201d.<\/em> More modern voices such as John F. Kennedy<\/strong>\u2019s told us \u201c<\/em>Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n

Change, whether rapid or gradual, is happening even to the very language we use and to the very meaning of words. But change is all embracing and covers everything in life from our physical reality to such non material features as politics, business, education, and even fashion<\/strong>. So is it the meaning of words that is changing or is it the situation that has changed? I would imagine it is both. Let\u2019s take a non-controversial example of the shifting sands of the meaning of political language<\/strong> that is popularly used in the media today.<\/p>\n

\"Lord
Lord David Cecil (left) and T. S. Eliot, photographed in 1923<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Many people describe themselves as social liberals and economic conservatives, while others describe themselves as conservative on social issues with liberal outlook on the economy. Then we have socially liberal internationalists who espouse a creed of individual freedom and diversity while claiming to be social conservatives who value tradition and collective cohesion. Everyone seems to have their own particular view of what they stand for<\/strong>, which is a far cry from the bland labels of conservative or liberal of the past. Consensus seems impossible today<\/strong>. Maybe someone can tell us what Mr. Macron<\/strong> in France stands for.<\/p>\n

In the United States we have Republicans and Democrats<\/strong>. Are they names or descriptions? Most Republicans are democrats in that they believe in the democratic system, while most Democrats believe in the Republic and reject other forms of government. So the label here is not a description<\/strong>, the real difference lies elsewhere. But this is nothing new.<\/p>\n

\"Emmanuel
Emmanuel Macron, September, 2014. Source: French Government<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

In ancient Rome, for example, we had the Optimates (Conservatives) and the Populares (Liberals)<\/strong>, but this division was not entirely on social, class or financial standing. Julius Caesar<\/strong> came from an aristocratic family yet he represented the Populares, while Cicero<\/strong>, who was an outsider, represented the Optimates. So the difference, like today, must lie elsewhere. Another such opposite is that used by Marx<\/strong> in his bourgeoisie-proletariat division. So what is this real difference? The differences are confusing because many words are yesterday\u2019s words<\/strong>, as T.S. Eliot has told us.<\/p>\n

In the European tradition, liberalism, broadly speaking, favours reform<\/strong>, and liberals are seen as being progressive and forward looking. Conservatism, on the other hand, favours tradition<\/strong>, and conservatives are seen as conformist, traditionalist, and orthodox. So what party did Margaret Thatcher belong to?<\/strong> She was labelled as a conservative, but was she one? Many labelled her as a classic liberal (one of those Whigs of yonder years) and a far cry from the one-nation conservatism of Harold Macmillan<\/strong>. Her beliefs had more in common with the philosophies of John Locke<\/strong> than with those of Edmund Burke<\/strong>, the intellectual founder of Conservatism.<\/p>\n

\"Ronald
Ronald Reagan et Margaret Thatcher at the White House. Courtesy Ronald Reagan Library<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Theresa May<\/strong>, the current prime minister, unlike Mrs Thatcher, is clearly a Tory at heart<\/strong>. She sells an image of pragmatism (ability to change her mind without apologies), nationalism and conservatism. As one writer put it \u201cParties steal each other\u2019s clothes and poach each other\u2019s supporters as part of the grand game of politics\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n

So where does the word socialist fit in?<\/strong> It doesn\u2019t seem to have an opposite. We don\u2019t have a capitalist party. Socialism tends to support a \u201cjust society\u201d<\/em>. But what would a \u201cjust society\u201d <\/em>be actually like?<\/strong> Would there be any need for political parties if we reached a \u201cjust society\u201d?<\/em> Would there be any need for politics even? The answer is \u2018no\u2019, as we would have reached perfection. As we know that this is impossible, we have invented a practical alternative term in \u2018Social Democracy\u2019 which signifies that perfection won\u2019t be reached and that politics is necessary<\/strong>. So an opposite term to socialism was found in Europe, \u2018Christian Democracy\u2019<\/strong>. But today many of the ideas of social democracy, as with a more open view of the economy, can be found in all parties, so we can assume that the sentiments expressed in the W. H. Gilbert<\/strong> little rhyme below are now dead.<\/p>\n

I often think it is comical<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

How nature always does contrive<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

That every boy and every girl<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

That\u2019s born into the world alive<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Is either a little Liberal<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Or else a little Conservative! <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

But this convenient division is not open to us anymore. So we do have a problem of how others label our ideas<\/strong>. I saw one writer say that labelling is necessary for communication, otherwise it will be a puzzle for anyone to understand what any writer, commentator, politician or citizen stands for. Labelling is not intrinsic, but is applied by others to others for identification purposes<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

How would I describe my political beliefs using modern language?<\/strong> Perhaps I am a liberal-cum-centralist on economic issues and a mild conservative on social issues. Confusing? Yes, it is. \u00a0But today that is the way for most of us.\u00a0I suppose this is better than being described as a \u2018Green Tory\u2019, as someone once called me<\/strong>. Pigeon holing<\/a>\u00a0people or stereotyping them today is just getting harder and harder as most of us encircle the centre ground of politics and can change radically on individual issues. So how do we label Mr. Macron and the movement he has created?<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I saw one writer say that labelling is necessary for communication, otherwise it will be a puzzle for anyone to understand what any writer, commentator, politician or citizen stands for.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":313,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[90235],"tags":[97979,20418,80201],"class_list":["post-1235","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-current-issues","tag-ideology","tag-language","tag-politics","megacategoria-mc-leadership-and-people-management"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1235","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/313"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1235"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1235\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1249,"href":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1235\/revisions\/1249"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1235"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1235"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.iese.edu\/leggett\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1235"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}