Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

The age of profanity

Bob Rae is not one to hide his feelings. When he is angry or annoyed, which isn’t uncommon, he speaks directly and colourfully.

Last December, for example, learning of a sophomoric spat on Twitter between two ambitious young Liberals, he tweeted: “What bulls--- is this?”

His profanity did not go unnoticed. Then again it came on Twitter, where anything goes, as it does for all social media. According to one study, 47 per cent of users of Facebook have profanity on their walls.

More recently, Rae was speaking to reporters outside the House of Commons. On the question of whether he was too old to be permanent party leader, he barked into the microphones: “That’s bulls---.”

The big story that day was Rae’s decision not to seek the leadership, which was too bad. It was also his choice of words, which was also too bad. So was the media’s eagerness to report them verbatim.

Twenty years ago, when Rae led the government of Ontario, columnist Allan Fotheringham called him “Premier Prude.” He will be pleased how Rae has loosened up.

In fact, Rae is an unlikely vessel of the new public profanity. Vulgarity has become a vernacular unto itself. While politicians have always sworn in private, today they’re swearing in public.

Cursing has become a contagion. It is no longer an exception; everyone seems to be doing it.

Last year Justin Trudeau offered his considered assessment of Environment Minister Peter Kent. “A piece of s---,” he observed in the House.

In February, Pat Martin, the perfervid New Democrat, called a Conservative MP “an a--hole” In November, angry over the government’s use of closure, he tweeted “this is a f---king disgrace!” To another critic, he sniffed: “F--- you!”

Recently Immigration Minister Jason Kenney called a visiting provincial minister an “a--hole” in an email.

Actually, Rae was right. So was Martin. Perhaps Trudeau had reason to be angry with Kent and Kenney had reason to malign his visitor. They apologized, if that means anything these days.

What we are left with is an emerging, artless frankness in public debate. The pattern today is to say whatever you want, wherever you want, regardless of convention. Let her rip.

Profanity is not confined to politics. Profanity in music, in books and on television is growing. S--- My Dad Says, On Bulls--- and Go the F--- to Sleep are bestsellers. Aaron Sorkin’s The Newsroom drops F-bombs. Actress Meryl Streep utters the S-word at the podium during the Golden Globe Awards.

There was a time a section editor of a newspaper could be disciplined for allowing profanity to slip into print. Fifteen years ago a friend of mine was suspended because she did not run a warning at the top of an article she’d edited that included an expletive in a quotation. Things have changed.

If popular culture is crude, we might ask, why not politics, too? Isn’t public language just a reflection of what people are saying on the street? Is concern over profanity passé, even quaint, in a society soaked in it?

Not really. We have a right to expect more of our politicians, especially in Canada, where they’re always wringing their wrinkled hands over the decline of civility.

Fundamentally, using profanity in public is linguistic laziness. It shows a lack of imagination in invective (which can be cutting and original) and a lack of self-discipline that once governed public speech. Then again, profanity reflects a deeper lack of respect for politics and its practitioners in a time, for example, when a Republican representative could shout “liar” at Barack Obama while the president was addressing Congress.

Curiously, the trend to profanity in public comes as we continue to embrace euphemism. In fact, this is the age of euphemism. A blind person is “visually challenged.” The dead don’t die, they “pass.” Soap is “a cleansing bar.” A used car is “pre-owned.”

We are sensitive souls today, you see, and we don’t want to offend. So we have dropped titles such as “publicist” because they don’t recognize this august position as emphatically as “outreach specialist.” A saleswoman is now “a customer service representative” (who is never at lunch or loafing when her line is busy; no, she’s “busy serving other customers.”)

Euphemism avoids telling the truth. Profanity is the opposite. It expresses anger or distemper with no holds barred. It is yet another example of the society that drops honorifics in favour of first names, gives us Casual Fridays in the office, tolerates loudmouths honking into their cellphones at formal dinners and has generally eroded standards of public behaviour.

In contemporary language, there are two trends: one is to avoid speaking honestly about people or things, lest we offend or understate. The other is to speak too honestly, which means insulting, defaming or discrediting.

In 2012, both coarsen and falsify our conversation and diminish us all.

Original Article
Source: ottawa citizen
Author: Andrew Cohen

No comments:

Post a Comment