1. On language: In 1984, George Orwell created a totalitarian universe that has since become so famous it gave birth to its own adjective. Both sides of the political spectrum have used it ad nauseam to bolster their fear and distrust of their political opposition.

2. The digital panopticon has become a universal concern, but that’s easily observable. The more subtle and nefarious aspect of the novel, and in our sociopolitical environment, is the use of language as a means of control.

3. Thought is preverbal, but we use language like bricks; to structure and build our understanding of the world. They organize and limit the parameters of thought that we’re capable of expressing. In the novel, we get “Newspeak.”

4. An agency controls the structure of language to make disobedient and rebellious thought unlikely. Regulating the language effectively makes all other modes of though impossible. While not on this scale, control of language is hugely important in political rhetoric.

5. Plus, physical punishment in a “free society” is hard to administer. Psychological tactics though can be continuously applied to the public without raising fear or opposition. This is why language is so important in politics and society.

6. Both sides use it. For example, politically damaging events are couched in obtuse verbiage to make them more palatable (e.g. “civilian casualties” or “collateral damage”). But, unequivocally, there are attempts to alter the minds of the public through changes made to language.

7. And, though both sides use it, the left has become particularly adept at cloaking disagreeable policy with neutral language. For example: pro-life/pro-choice. The right uses language obviously. “Pro-life” frames the opposite as “pro-death.”

8. But when your stance is that you should be able to abort a human life well past the embryonic stage, you can’t let the right frame your position rightly as “pro-death.” Instead, it’s framed as something empowering.

9. It’s a woman’s right to choose. We want to empower people. There’s also no shortage of examples here of positive re-framing on the left (e.g. illegal immigrant vs. undocumented workers), so feel free to add your own below.

10. Also see this piece below from 2013 examining how they can rebrand certain accepted political catchphrases for their benefit. http://addictinginfo.com/2013/02/24/10-phrases-progressives-need-to-ditch/

11. One of the more deleterious aspects of this attempt to control speech, which is also veiled with positive language is “political correctness.” To be clear, there are benefits here as well. Terms often carry emotional baggage and can be used for insult or harm.

12. But this idea can be used, intentionally or otherwise, to justify all measures of social intolerance and can be wielded as a tool for ideological control. The problem with being overly PC is that people become irrationl and viciously intolerant of dissent...

13. in their zeal to enforce “tolerance.” These behaviors ultimately undermine important freedoms as well as many of the professed goals of “social justice,” another good catchphrase.

14. There are a myriad of ways in which PC culture is dangerous, but focusing on language for social control, it’s easy to see how negative labels are used as political tools. People use negative labels (sexist, racist, etc.) or even create new pejoratives…

15. to label speech they disagree with. They’re used to shut down ideas that accusers cannot, or do not want to, content with rationally; limiting the parameters of acceptable thought and discourse. One of the most striking examples of this

16. is that criticizing some Islamic beliefs, or the Quran, or debating negative impacts of mass immigration of Muslims is labeled “Islamophobic” or “racist.” While some of this is done in good faith, it has an overall negative effect.

17. It prohibits many people (on left and right) from even examining evidence that may bolster, or weaken, arguments in favor of limiting mass migration. And, like in 1984, these linguistic forms of thought control are administered in concert...

18. with a compliant media that is skilled at engineering “truth” through language. We can see this in their objection to the President’s use of the term “spy.” In Orwell’s novel, the Ministry of Truth’s job was largely to modify news items

19. that made the party look bad. What is our media doing now? Instead of using spy, they suggest “confidential informant.” They’re fighting against the president who’s pushing correctly for a negative framing.

20. Like with the Ministry of Truth, the media’s job is to obliterate and control history so that centers of opposition can’t grow. Here’s the ultimate truth: this is why decentralized social media is a threat to the establishment.

21. They’re incubation platforms for “centers of opposition.” In 2016, the political/media establishment lost complete control of the narrative. The outsiders who ditched the script succeeded because people were leaving legacy media in droves.

22. Trump won on the right, and Bernie, if it wasn’t for the meddling of the crooked DNC, would have won as well. Fortunately we got @realDonaldTrump and he’s providing suppressing cover with his own linguistic machine gun.

23. He’s forcing them to play defense rather than offense, and he’s breaking through the programming machine. This is why they’re deplatforming us. They ban us for imaginary infractions of loosely policed terms of use.

24. They manipulate algorithms to suppress free, conservative voices. And they use their control of language or “tolerance” to avoid rational discourse, or worse, legitimizing our voices. In spite of all this…

25. We’re winning. The legacy media is dying. And though they’ve spent the better part of two years trying to marginalize us, delegitimize or remove our president, our movement is growing. Not just in America either.

26. And they’re panicking. This is the great awakening, and spoiler alert: They don’t get to fucking win. A couple of years ago, I was a hardcore liberal. And, in my personal circles, I’m not alone. #MAGA #TheGreatAwakening

Addendum. @ScottAdamsSays had a relevant periscope earlier about Trump critics' use of the "silent, racist dog whistle" filter. Though his video is about cognitive framing, this is another way that the left uses language to control thought and discourse.

2. Trump speaks off the cuff. And like anyone else, he often finds clunky or questionable ways to construct ideas. He's said things that I find ambiguous or even problematic, but my cognitive bias is in favor of Trump, so I tend to chalk those up as mistakes.

3. The left, and their media thralls, can take one of these statements and present it as a "silent, racist dog whistle." Though it sounds innocuous enough, they argue that it's really a way of winking at his racist base without drawing the ire of the wider public.

4. This is then packaged and repeated by "experts" in the media who reaffirm that this is the case. If you dislike Trump, AND you're particularly socially conscious (see the above about PC language), your cognitive filter will allow you to believe this is correct.