Accurate description or inflammatory rhetoric?

by Jack Stapleton, Jr.

One doesn’t have to be an Ivy League graduate or even a junior college grammarian to realize that the adjectives we place on our society have a great deal to do with how we view a subject. As an example, we are inclined to look with favor on proposals or government programs that are “good for business.” This is a perfectly innocent phrase that implies wealth for the commercial class who, in turn, will benefit the rest of us with additional employment opportunities, higher tax payments and all sorts of capital improvements that will improve our daily lives.

On the other hand, there are the pejorative terms that immediately imply something evil or anti- American. Words such as “welfare-class” and “bureaucratic dogma” pretty much guarantee the listener’s negative response. Persons engaged in public service, product sales, law enforcement and even journalists know how it feels to be classified as an enemy of the public, one dedicated to the diminishment of human rights and dignity.

The pejorative terms we choose pretty much set the tone of forthcoming remarks. One of the state’s largest newspapers recently headed an editorial on the last General Assembly with the words, “Perfectly Wretched,” leaving no doubt about the writer’s view of lawmakers who failed to support programs endorsed by the publication, even when it switched sides on such tender subjects as subsidies for baseball club owners and programs beyond the boundaries or the interests of the editorialists (when you read the word “rural” in this particular publication, you have a head start on knowing the author has already reached a negative conclusion, so please don’t confuse them with the facts.)

Our tendency is to place the best or worst spin on any event or region or personality. Virtually all of us have a tendency to characterize-by-description. If you’ll pay close attention to the remarks of state or federal officials, you’ll get a first-class lesson on how the experts do it. A Missouri Democrat serving in Congress recently described a group of his political opponents as “mean- spirited, vindictive and indifferent to the needs of the poor.” This well-hone statement referred to some proposed changes in work rules for persons receiving federal allowances. The less obvious purpose was to extend funding so that other deserving citizens could be included. Since when do we become vindictive when attempting to extend a helping hand to an underprivileged constituency?

I recently heard a White House staff member refer to Muslims as “faceless cowards.” As I was applauding his patriotism, it occurred to me that the official had just indicted every member of one of the world’s great religions and that many of its followers who were willing to die for their beliefs were being anything but cowardly.

I suppose it’s only human to put the worst possible spin on our enemies. I’ve know few persons save my saintly grandmother and a mere handful of nuns in a convent in Northwest Missouri who weren’t culpable. Of course, in our defense, our enemies sometimes change before we do, as witness our Japanese friends who, when I was growing up, received all the guilt-by-association we could hurl at them during the early 1940s. No they’re our friends and trading partners. Even the faltering yen becomes a concern to officials who 60 years ago would have applauded placing even those with U.S. citizenship behind barbed-wire internment camps. Recently our President met with and philosophically embraced the supreme ruler of Russia, an act that a few years ago would have earned him the scorn of Sen. Joseph McCarthy and his Un-American Activities committee.

The enemy is in the eye of the beholder. But the acceptance of this dictum should include a reversionary clause that allows for subsequent revision. No one should be more aware of this than our President, whose father was excoriated for saying “Read my lips, no new taxes.” When he subsequently recommended something closely resembling new taxes, he acted to stem inflation caused by his predecessor who did cut them.

We need to be careful about those we trash lest they’re as intolerant as we have been.

[Missouri News & Editorial Service, Inc. Copyright (C) 2002 MNES Corp.]