Good politicians are capable communicators. Without the ability to effectively communicate, political ideas cannot be properly expressed or understood; political arguments cannot be fought and won. The ability to communicate well is fundamental to political success.
It follows then, that language – political language, how it is used and the context in which it used – is just as important.
For over a century, moral and political philosophers have sought to understand the use and practice of language in human societies: how meaning is formed, its value understood and how this relates to the production and dissemination of knowledge and ‘truth’.
In politics, the accuracy of the language used to convey a political idea or message determines the power and value of both. In practice, this calls for the political communicator to deploy simple language. The use of simple language does not denote a simple political idea. Nor does it assume the inability of the intended audience to understand complex political messages. The reality is that simple language avoids ambiguity. As such, simple language enables clarity and, in politics, clarity builds trust and trust wins elections.
In contrast, difficult language often seeks to obscure meaning, is inaccessible to those with whom the politician is trying to communicate and breeds distrust. As a simple rule of thumb, left wing politicians will receive understanding, trust and support for speaking clearly about inequality and the need to share power, wealth and opportunity as the best way in which to solve inequality. Left wing politicians who talk about ‘predistribution’ will, despite their sincere intentions, receive scant regard. I believe this may have been tried somewhere.
Worse, the use of deliberately opaque language conveys an ‘exceptionalism’: a political mindset that seeks to exclude the mainstream from political discourse. This conveys the view that politics is only for the (self-styled) elite. Unforgivably, such an approach treats those with whom it is attempting to communicate as fools.
Politicians of all parties are guilty of this approach, yet when political actors seek to use language devoid of meaning or use language to communicate a message which means the direct opposite to the actual meaning of the words being used, then meaning is not just lost: it is corrupted.
George Orwell captured this grotesque practice perfectly: ‘All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.’
In a sentence, the cultures, practices and hypocrisy of Sovietism were destroyed.
The Labour party is the greatest force for social progress that our country has ever seen. Our achievements are unparalleled. In a purely technical sense, the party belongs to its members, but great political movements belong to the people. The Labour membership leading up to the 1997 watershed undertook incredible work, but the people of the United Kingdom elected that Labour government. As such it was not simply their government, but their movement too.
The Labour party can, and at some point will, become a national movement again. Doing so will require the abandonment of both exceptionalism and the corruption of language.
Nowhere can these destructive practices be seen more clearly than through the events leading up to and following the suspension of Naz Shah MP from the Labour benches this week. I have never met Naz, and up until this week I confess to being impressed by her victory in Bradford and what little I had read about her life story up until that point.
Having made appalling and unacceptable comments about Israel and the Jewish people, Naz apologized with a statement and also, uncommonly, in the House of Commons. The apology appeared to be both genuine and sincere. Prior to this a Party spokesperson was asked whether or not Naz was, in fact an anti-Semite. The spokesman responded ‘We’re not saying she’s anti-Semitic, we’re saying she’s made remarks that she doesn’t agree with.’
Tragically, this explanation represents exceptionalism of the worst kind and a truly appalling corruption of language and logic. Serving only to raise the temperature further, one hour later, Naz had been suspended from the Labour whip. If only this could have been the end of the assault upon the senses and loyalties of ordinary Labour voters. Sadly not.
The party statement announcing the suspension of Naz read: ‘Jeremy Corbyn and Naz Shah have mutually agreed that she is administratively suspended from the Labour Party by the general secretary.’ I have never encountered any situation whereby an individual negotiates their own suspension with their party leader only for that suspension to then be attributed to somebody else.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
As I did after our general election defeat, this week I again apologise to every man, woman and child in our nation who needs a Labour government. In a poisoned environment of debased meaning, I have no other words than these: I am truly sorry and my heart is breaking.
———————————
Jamie Reed MP is member of parliament for Copeland. He writes The Last Word column on Progress and tweets @jreedmp
———————————
The second sentence should read, “without the ability to communicate effectively…”
seriously you’ll have to clear out every labour student organization in the country and about half the councils if you want to stop this anti jewish sentiment from turning into something MORE hideous than it already is.
labour ignored this for too long, it festered under your inattention and has now seeped into labour mainstream dialogue so much so that the perpetrators can no longer identify when they are guilty of race hate or suggesting ethnic cleansing because “we’re far to intelligent, caring and nice people to suggest that!”.
“my room mate Mary Is getting paid on the internet 98$/hr”..,……..!wc500ctwo days ago grey MacLaren P1 I bought after earning 18,512 DoIIars..it was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k DoIIars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly payouts..it’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over. hourly 87 DoIIars…Learn. More right Here !wc500:➽:➽:➽➽➽➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsMagazineGetPayHourly$98…. .❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦:❖❖:❦❦::::::!wc500……
I agree what both these people said is terrible, and they have both been suspended. In the case of Livingstone, I hope he is ejected from the party – he is an embarrassment at best and a racist at worst. What I cannot abide however, is how people like you (Jamie Reed) have used this as another attempt to undermine the Labour parties chosen leadership. Please stop to think what would happen if you get your way and you can replace Corbyn with Jarvis or some other proto-Blair – all of the enthusiasm that gathered behind the Corbyn leadership will be lost. Perhaps if yourself, Rachel Reeves, Liz Kendall, Wes Streeting,Tristram Hunt etc spend more time working for the party than against it then Labour might have a chance. The public have rejected your ilk for 2 elections in a row, it is clearly time for change rather than a return to the austerity-lite status quo.
“enthusiasm that gathered behind the Corbyn leadership”. The Corbyn enthusiasts are exactly the same people as the Ken enthusiasts and they will ensure that the Labour Party is unelectable as long as Corbyn is leader.
Many, many members are getting very, very tired of Progress and its agenda.
The Blairites are resorting to witchunting to undermine Corbyn who has been a critic of the Zionist Apartheid state for over 30 years.
“Zionist Apartheid state”? Yes, you and Corbyn and Livingstone are in the same boat. I would remind you that Ken Livingstone lost the mayoral election and the post-election analysis showed that it is because the Jews and other non-Muslim ethnic minorities (Buddhists, Hindus, etc.) did not vote for him because of his anti-Israel mindset. Everyone can have their own country except the Jews, is that it? As for this constant mouthing of the “Apartheid” slogan, you don’t have a clue how Apartheid operated, why not go the whole hog and say “Die Juden sind unser unglück”!
” the Zionist Apartheid state”
There you have it folks – a spot of ‘legitimate criticism’; profound ignorance and a blatent lie that’s believed because it originates from a left-wing source. Left-wing people are nice and nice people tell the truth, yes?
Peter, would you please tell me how Israel is an apartheid state?
Salim Joubran— the first Arab Supreme Court justice in Israel (guess there were a fair number of black Supreme Court judges in Apartheid S. Africa too)
Abdel Rahman Zuabi— former Israeli Supreme Court Justice
Khaled Abu Toameh – Leading Arab-Israeli journalist
Mira Awwad – Arab-Israeli singer who represented the country in 2009’s
Eurovision Song contest.
Walid Badir – top Arab-Israeli footballer – appeared in 74 games with the
National football team
Ashraf Barhom— Arab-Israeli actor – made numerous films
Sayed Kashua— popular Arab-Israeli comedian and star of a comedy show that
looks at looks at relations between Jewish and Arab Israelis
Yusef Mishlab— a former general of the IDF
Angelina Fares— a former Ms. Israel
Ayoob Kara—- a deputy minister in the Israeli parliament
Majalli Wahbee— former PRESIDENT of Israel
Miriam Tukan— the first Arab to appear on the Israeli version of Pop Idol
+ the Arab/Israeli members of the Knesset – google them if you want.
Learn some facts and then you’ll be able to criticise Israel instead of demonising it.
It is members such as you Jamie who sabotage any chance of Labour winning power – you do a better job of damaging our great party than the Tories. Put your vanity aside, get over your disappointment that Liz lost – and help return to power Labour MPs, mayors and councillors across the country. Thousands of us are doing just that.
Yes, it is heart-breaking and it is all due, as usual, to Ken Livingstone whose ruthless quest for power has left many broken people in its wake (Reg Freeson, Illtyd Harrington, Andrew Macintosh). Like Corbyn, he is under-educated and believes every crackpot theory that fits his worldview (denial of the right of Jews to self-determination, everyone else can have self-determination, and support for the IRA). He has always relied on the gaggle of ignorant “useful idiots” the ones who have ensured that he gets the most votes of any elected member of the NEC. I am sure they will support him this time as he has finally hit upon a really popular trope, Jew-hatred.
Gareth’s point is a good one. Before Corbyn there was no leadership and Labour was unelectable. I have been trying all week to get a definition of anti-Semitism. Even Lord Sacks says it is not the same as anti-Israeli. Nor is it anti-Zionism – many Jews are anti-Zionist. Naz Shah was wrong. Ken Livingstone is historically correct (almost) but should have kept schtumm. John Mann was OTT and should also be sanctioned. If you want to go against the elected leadership then you should resign.
Increasingly the Title Commissar Corbyn seems natural although it is run a close second by Emir Corbyn..
Given the title of this post I’m amazed that Jamie Reed MP avoided the crux of the issue, ie; the sloppy use of language that allows those on the right to create an illusion of Labour as anti-Semitic.
The word “Zionism” has become charged with conflicted meaning. From a movement to establish a Jewish homeland (recognised by the UN) the word became associated with the waves of expansion of the State of Israel (condemned by most of the international community) and thence a short-hand for criticising the actions of the State of Israel in removing families from their land to make way for Jewish settlers (condemned by most of the international community).
It is not difficult to see how the use of the word Zionism has resulted in charges of anti-semitism, as the purpose of Zionism is to benefit only Jewish people. Thus, an attack on the Israeli policy of expansion can easily be misrepresented as an attack on the Jewish people, even though so many Jews are appalled by such actions of the State of Israel.
As far as I can see, Naz Shah was brought down days after she exposed what she feared was anti-semitism among Tory councillors in her constituency. A Tory blogger then exposed her for having shared a Jewish academic’s concerns about the State of Israel, before she was elected. She apologised for some of her comments, they were clearly offensive to people who support the actions of the Isreali state but anti-Semitic? We are allowing a good MP to be hung out to dry.
Ken Livingstone’s reference to the historical agreement between the Nazi’s and German Zionists was essentially factual but completely irrelevant and far from helpful. He should have known better, but the party is being brought in to disrepute by those who are stoking the fires in an attempt to undermine the elected party leader by creating a picture of guilt by association.