The Power of “Magic Words”
How Words are Used as a Means of Control
The term “Magic Words” tends to invoke the small-time illusionist, or magician, waving their wand and saying “Abracadabra” or “Hocus Pocus.” These are supposed to be special words which create an act of magic. Traditionally, those who practiced true magic did have magical incantations that were supposed to invoke a spell or hex.[1] However, I am using this term differently. In today’s world, certain words are treated as magical because they are supposed to automatically change people’s opinions of things. Consider how a phobia is an irrational fear of something, so if you characterize someone as “phobic” then they are, by definition, irrational and their arguments should not be seriously considered.
A number of years ago now, radio personality Rush Limbaugh insisted that “Words mean things.” Limbaugh often used this as one of his catch phrases to insist that “Liberals” were wrong and show that “Conservatives” were right. However, it struck me that the more proper dialectic was not Conservatives vs. Liberals, but Modernists vs. Postmodernists, with Limbaugh as the champion for Modernism.
The Postmodern Understanding of Language
In the mid to late 20th Century, philosophy turned its attention to language, and the movement known as postmodernism arose. Postmodernism rose out of linguistic theory and argued language has no inherent meaning. Rather, a word has meaning only because the society has agreed to use that term for something. This is most easily seen in how different societies use different words, and this is not only true from language to language but even within the same language. For instance, in Canada you use a public “washroom,” while in the US it is a “restroom.”
Not only that, but words shift in meaning over time. Why, after all, does one use the same term, “drive,” for operating a motor vehicle and a hammer? Well, originally vehicles were pulled by horses and oxen. To get the animal to go, one would strike, or “drive,” the animal with a whip, with “drive” having the same idea as used with a hammer, striking something to get it to move forward. When the horseless carriage, or car, came out, there was no animal to strike, so the term “drive” evolved to mean operating pedals and turning a steering wheel.
The point behind this is words do not, inherently, mean things. Meanings change and can be changed. Not only that, but the words we use and how we use them affects how we think. In fact, there are certain thoughts that we cannot think if we do not have the words for the concepts. Bertrand Russell argued Language actually makes thoughts possible: “Language serves not only to express thoughts, but to make possible thoughts which could not exist without it.”[2]
Words and Power
French philosopher Michel Foucault argued that all relationships are infused with power. Foucault saw power as something that is found in all layers of society and binds all relationships like a grid. He wrote: “Power is everywhere, not because it embraced everything, but because it comes from everywhere.”[3] Foucault saw power as an often unseen and therefore unrecognized but intrinsic aspect of all relationships. He argues that those who have more power can exercise this power by controlling information and therefore what a society believes to be true.[4] This idea came to be simplified to the notion that power is the core reality for all relationships.
When applied to language, Postmodernists concluded words are just masks for power. For the postmodern, words do not convey truth, but rather are a means of trying to foist your beliefs, “your truth,” on others. They argue that since people converse with words and, they believe, all relationships are really about power; whenever someone speaks or writes something, it is really a hidden power play aimed at controlling the other person through those words.
It was from this belief they developed the practice of deconstructing texts. The basic idea behind deconstruction is to find out what power plays one is making with their words. So, if one speaks of something as good, then this must be a power play to get what you want. Likewise, even the very words are designed to influence others. For instance, the fact that the word “man” is in “woman” must have been done to assert male dominance. This is why some invented the spelling “womyn” to get rid of this hidden misogynism that is believed to be in our language.
This also means if you can control the language, you can control what people think. This is not a new idea; this was behind George Orwell’s 1984 in which he depicted a society where the government controlled the people by simplifying and even distorting their language with slogans like these: “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.” Orwell even had the government (“Big Brother”) control this through the “Minitrue” (Ministry of Truth) which was in charge of propaganda.
Magic Words
One failing of those who rejected extreme postmodernism was to not take the radicals seriously. After all, there is much to laugh about. There are those who write articles and even books where they argue that “There is no meaning in a text.”[5] Which, if you think about it, means the text he wrote has no meaning. This led many to essentially laugh at postmodernism. Deconstructing the deconstructionist became something of a parlor game for conservative intellectuals.
The problem lies in that there are those who believe words are just a means for power, and this affects how they use words. If you take seriously that words are just a means of exercising power, how will you use words? If you think everything is ultimately about power, will you not act to try to gain and use power for your own agenda?
One of the ways that this has been done is through what I am calling “magic words.” What I mean by magic words are words that are specifically defined and/or created in such a way as to manipulate others and gain political advantage. Certainly, words have been used to sway people, such as when Pope Leo X attached the word “heretic” to Martin Luther, he intended to change people’s opinion of the burgeoning reformer. What has changed is we now have words that are being either created, like “homophobia,” or redefined, like “gay,” with the intended purpose of changing public opinion.
In future posts, we will look at some of these magic words to see where they come from and how they are used and, more importantly, to not be manipulated by them.
[1] This ancient practice is alluded to in Acts 19:18-19 when Christian converts in Ephesus burned their magic books.
[2] Bertrand Russell, Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1948), 60.
[3] Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality: Volume 1, an Introduction, trans. Robert J. Hurley (New York: Penguin, 1990) 93.
[4] Pluckrose and Lindsay, Cynical Theories, 93-94; Christopher Watkin, Michael Foucault, Great Thinkers: A Series. (Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P&R Publishing, 2018), 35ff.
[5] Joseph C. Bentley, “Joseph C. Bentley: Words Have Only the Meaning We Give Them,” The Salt Lake Tribune, 23 October 2020, https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2020/10/23/joseph-c-bentley-words/.
PASTOR, I really appreciate, though never wrote you, about your writing. This one struck a nerve with me as I have been examing how the newer versions of God's Own Words have been corrupted by editors who think they know better what God is saying the He did when he inspired them. At some point I would LOVE to hear what you think about this! Love staying in touch though I am not quite as good at it as you are! Thanks so much