I’ve been fascinated with bad language ever since my son — then, age 4 — came home from his best friend’s house, with a new favorite word he’d picked up from his friend’s father. It sounded sort of like, “fuckinboot”, and was apparently intended to apply to any frustrating situation involving footwear.
More recently, I came across a dissertation on the subject of ‘bad language’ written by Dr. Adam Gibbons, an assistant professor at Lingman University in Hong Kong.
He writes:
Politics abounds with bad language: lying and bullshitting, grandstanding and virtue signaling, code words and dogwhistles, and more. But why is there so much bad language in politics? And what, if anything, can we do about it? In this paper I show how these two questions are connected.
Politics is full of bad language because existing social and political institutions are structured in such a way that the production of bad language becomes rational. In principle, by modifying these institutions we can reduce the prevalence of bad language. However, as I show, such practical efforts are fraught with difficulties.
Obviously, Dr. Gibbons is using the term ‘bad language’ differently from what most of us, here in America, are accustomed to. He’s not talking about off-color phrases like, “grab ’em by the pussy”, or “shit-hole countries”…
… or referring to an athlete who takes a knee during the National Anthem as a “son of a bitch”.
Or the Chinese as “motherfuckers”.
Maybe in Hong Kong, politicians don’t use that kind of language? But I bet lots of them use the kind of ‘bad language’ Dr. Gibbons is referring to. Lying, bullshitting, dogwhistles, virtue signaling. You know, bad language.
The kind of language necessary to get anything done, if you’re a politician.
Especially, I would say, lying and bullshitting.
Am I using bad language when I say that?
Not at all. It’s good to be truthful, and to honestly admit that no self-respecting politician could get elected to office in America, unless they were willing to resort to lying, gaslighting, dogwhistles and all the rest.
And the same thing goes for the Lamestream Media. Who would buy a newspaper or watch a news channel that didn’t spread misinformation? Boring.
How about social media? Seems like the platform ‘X’ (formerly Twitter) stands head-and-shoulders above the rest, in terms of sharing bad language. In the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, lies and misinformation have been flooding the disaster-stricken communities on the East Coast.
Like this one, posted to ‘X’ by influencer Matt Wallace.
Don’t worry guys, weather modification isn’t real! It’s just a coincidence that Hurricane Helene is one of the most devastating ‘inland damage storms’ in history and that hundreds of pro-Trump counties are being massively impacted during the most important election of our lifetimes.
That post received 11 million views.
Obviously, this is a lie. Weather modification is absolutely real, and it’s not at all a coincidence that Hurricane Helene swept through one of the most pro-Trump regions of the country, a month before the election, and where most of the homes damaged belonged to Republicans.
Meanwhile we sit here in Democrat-ruled Colorado, with not a single hurricane or tornado as far as the eye can see. Not even an earthquake, or anything.
Just bad roads.
But bad roads aren’t really a problem, because we have mail ballots. Our Democrat Secretary of State made sure of that. No need to drive to the polling place.
It doesn’t solve the problem of bad language, however. As Professor Gibbons notes in his essay, the use of bad language by politicians and news media is “rational”, given our current political system where we allow practically anyone over the age of 18 to cast a ballot, for the cost of a first class postage stamp.
It makes absolute sense, to lie and bullshit and make things up out of thin air. If we outlawed bad language, our politicians wouldn’t know what to say.
Ditto, our journalists.