Wednesday 11 December 2013

On Right vs. Left: An Ideological Battle for the Meaning of Words

What is in the meaning of a word? With many words, context is needed to understand the intent in using it. When terms like environmentalist, progressive, conservationist, conservative are used it could be true that for each person reading, a different meaning is conceived. It is also true that as history is made, words can take on new meanings and contexts. Often ideological arguments revolve around the use of these words and the side that wins is the side that controls the definition of the word. Leftist ideology, primarily consisting of socialism and liberalism in Canada, and mostly liberalism in America, dominates in many aspects of the public sphere. To be certain, and to be fair, rightist ideology, primarily consisting of conservatism and certain tenants of liberal thought, dominate in some places too.

While leftist ideology dominates in our education system and universities, rightist ideology dominates in the business world. This is evident when we look at the common perception of certain words. The common perception of the word 'economy' is largely based on a rightist understanding. A leftist-controlled definition of the term would likely involve a more 'holistic' and egalitarian approach that would shape it in a way that stresses overall well-being rather than as purely financial. Instead, a leftist is often forced to admit their own concern for other issues over the economy because they are forced to use the more specific definition stemming from rightist thought.

I do feel that within political discourse the left is overwhelmingly winning the battle for the control of words. In America, rightist intellectuals have caught onto this and have began trying to take-back or redefine words like liberal and conservative. In Canada the road ahead is longer but I feel it may be less problematic. This is because I see Canada as more conciliatory and pragmatic; we thrive on consensus. While Americans are more oppositional and idealistic; thriving on conflict. In the ideological battle for the meaning of words, Canadians can come to a consensus on some sort of mid-way point; whereas America seems fated to eternally play out a battle-to-the(-never)-end.

Which brings me back to the terms I brought up in the beginning. Can an environmentalist support the Enbridge Northern Gateway project? Can a progressive be a conservative? Is a conservationist just what rich people who appreciate parks are called? Given the common use of these words the answers would likely be “no”, “no”, and “yes?”. This is because the left has largely controlled the discourse surrounding environmentalism and progressivism and the right has all but conceded completely. To the point where many a conservative would answer the same way.

What if one is greatly concerned about the natural world around them? He sees the immense importance in preserving and supporting natural ecosystems, in educating society about the importance of a healthy environment, and in making decisions with a constant concern for society's impact on the Earth, generations from now. And, yet, he also understands the importance of resource development and fossil fuels in driving the economy. He understands the need for development as economies and populations grow.
Today this world-view would likely be described as conservationist, although the word itself has gone out of popular use. It should just as easily describe an environmentalist. However, in the ideological battle for the meaning of words the left has controlled what it means to be an environmentalist and it does not intimate an approval of fossil fuels.

In these battles the right has often missed the mark entirely. Instead of attempting to control the use of the word intellectually, they have sought to de-legitimize it. Instead of controlling the narrative and putting a conservative spin on the terms environmentalism or progressive, they often instead slander the terms; associating them with extremism and giving them negative connotations. Let us allow for the fact that terms like environmentalist and progressive have positive connotations. This is something no amount of discourse can change. Instead of doing battle against the word itself, we need to use the word to help us win the battle.

Of course, in Canada most provinces' main rightist party is the Progressive Conservative Party, so this is not an original concept. It is one that is not often enough adhered to. The effort needs far more intellectual weight thrown behind it. For the sake of success in this ideological landscape we need to refocus our efforts on winnable battles and at the same time extend outwards to a greater audience. Instead of preaching to the choir, reach out to the greater congregation, and attempt to win converts. Our success in these efforts will, in large part, depend on our intellectual ability to control messaging and the usage of words.