An incisive and original explication of the psychology and politics of language in America, Talking Right illustrates with wit, keen insight, and perceptive psychological and social commentary the ways in which conservatives in America have dominated public conversation on a range of political issues. From education to social security and environmental protection, they have injected conservative values and prejudices into seemingly objective political discourse with powerful consequences for American politics and media and the quality and content of American political discourse.
Conservatives and liberals alike will find this book illuminating. Nunberg's analysis is passionate, but never dogmatic, and it is objective. It is a cautious and well-crafted analysis of the subtleties, duplicities, and disguises of conservative political rhetoric. Although Nunberg is transparently liberal, his political and moral convictions do not distort the quality of his arguments, which are rigorously made and well documented.
Nunberg argues that, as John Dewey noted, “It's only in private conversation that political opinion crystallizes, as people absorb the words they read or hear from on high and incorporate the ideas they stand for into the stories they tell about politics and their lives” (3). What were once contested ideas and perspectives have now become accepted as mainstream conventional wisdom, and “the basic vocabularies that most Americans rely on to form their political judgments” have become infused with conservatism.
Part of the conservative strategy, Nunberg explains, has been to use words associated with liberal conceptions of human rights and freedoms in ways that actively undermine those very ideals in a practical policy context, but that cloak themselves in the emotions and associations those words generate. Policies that are fundamentally hostile to environmental protection, public health and safety, the alleviation of poverty, and civil rights and social tolerance are rendered palatable to the American public by masquerading as though they were progressive in nature. Expressions like “inclusive,” “color-blind,” “hate speech,” and “environmental sensitivity” have become coopted by conservatives and are used in ways that contradict their original meanings.
Another conservative strategy has been to use language to avoid political discussion of issues that are likely to threaten support for conservative policies, particularly economic ones related to poverty and inequality. Realizing that average Americans, and especially middle-class and working-class voters, have nothing to gain economically from conservative policies, conservatives have diverted
resentments that have their roots in economic inequalities to debates over “values,” making programs that chiefly benefit the wealthy sound like they're aimed at benefiting the middle class, turning government into a term of abuse, and making reservations about the direction of American foreign policy sound like signs of weakness of purpose or questionable loyalty. (15–16)
The success of conservative rhetoric in America has also hinged upon the relentless use of certain words that evoke feelings of fear and indignation, potent emotions that are tapped by conservatives to generate support for conservative policies on issues such as gay marriage, immigration law, and welfare reform.
Conservatives, Nunberg argues, have achieved an extremely comprehensive and believable narrative anchored in symbol-words, such as “freedom,” which have now taken on conservative meanings in common speech:
Precisely because they're so vague and general, those basic symbol-words are particularly subject to manipulation … It's in the nature of political discourse to draw those words as expansively as possible, so as to reduce the details of an issue to the purely emotional response that items like freedom or values can evoke. And when words become purely connotative or evocative, it can be easy to extend their auras by multiplying their meanings or applying them to things they didn't originally refer to. (31)
Nunberg analyzes how the mainstream media have often unintentionally propagated conservative rhetoric. He describes the way in which newspapers and newscasters describe liberals and discovers that when liberals are referred to in the media they are almost always described as being white and middle class. Few references are made to Hispanic, black, and working-class liberals, although these same ethnic groups are often described as being conservative.
Language affects our perception and understanding of social and political realities, irrespective of how accurately it reflects them. If the only context for the word “liberal” that we read and hear in the media is white and middle class, then our perception of who is liberal in America becomes severely constrained by such rhetoric and our political and moral convictions distorted by them.
Talking Right synthesizes the insights of linguistics, psychology, media and cultural studies, and political science in an engaging manner that sheds light on the often hidden and unconscious workings of language and its consequences on politics and public policy. Nunberg's arguments are fresh and well reasoned; there is vitality to the ideas and explications in this work, and scholars and laypeople alike will find much of value in its pages.
