In his timeless essay ''Politics and the English Language,'' George Orwell explored how manipulation of words can change how people think. Orwell noted Stalin's use of the word ''liquidation'' as a delicate synonym for execution of political enemies among several other examples.
Generations of freshman English students and aspiring journalists have read their Orwell and are supposedly alert to propagandistic euphemisms. But judging by recent successful spin-doctoring of language, many editors and writers could use a refresher course in their Orwell. Herewith, some notable examples:
Prolife. All of us can be described as prolife. Most Americans don't like abortion but don't consider it murder, and support a woman's right to have one. But the antiabortion lobby has succeeded in appropriating the phrase ''right to life.'' Conventional usage has become ''prolife'' versus ''prochoice.'' Both terms are propagandistic. An accurate substitute would be antiabortion groups versus abortion-rights groups. Otherwise, the antiabortion lobby gets a lock on approving life. Faith-based. Shame on the nation's journalists for taking an Orwellian term on faith. President Bush wants to allow tax dollars to support religious institutions that provide social services. This is called ''faith-based.''
In fact, many churches already get government support to provide such services as child care. Religious-affiliated hospitals get Medicare dollars. But current policy insists on a strict separation between a church's religious mission and its services subsidized by taxpayer money. This is the wall Bush would tear down.
''Faith'' has a warm, fuzzy sound. It tests nicely in focus groups. But the real issue here is not ''faith'' but government support of religion, something prohibited by the Constitution. Any time a gullible reporter is naive enough to use the phrase ''faith-based'' as objective rather than propagandistic usage, an editor should change it to the correct adjective - ''religious.''
Death Tax. The right made a valiant effort to get reporters and commentators to refer to the tax on large estates as a ''death tax.'' Some recognized this for what it was, but a surprisingly large number just lazily adopted the propagandistic usage.
Even though only 2 percent of estates are large enough to be taxed, the ploy helped do the job. As part of the Bush tax cut, the estate tax will be phased out over 10 years.
Tuition Support. This is the most recent offender, and it seems to have flown entirely beneath journalists radar. President Bush is promoting public school vouchers. Schools deemed substandard would lose part of their public funding. Parents would receive vouchers to pay part of the cost of putting their kids into private schools.
This is a highly controversial program. There is no evidence that voucher schools do any better than public ones. Vouchers also divert money from free public education. The administration has stopped using the word ''vouchers,'' which has the effect of conveying accurately what is being proposed. Instead, they invented the benign-sounding term ''tuition support.'' This is Orwellian because with public education there is no need for tuition support; public schools are free.
Major papers took the bait. The New York Times, just as the White House hoped, now uses ''tuition support'' as a neutral descriptive word. The administration uses the same ploy with its effort to voucherize Medicare, which is now termed ''premium support'' to disguise the raid on a universal service.
PNTR. For a century, trade law has had a category known as most-favored-nation treatment. This means that a given nation receives the same trade concessions (such as no tariffs) as the most-favored-nation with which the United States deals. Other nations get less favorable treatment.
In trying to get Congress to approve MFN treatment for China, the Clinton and Bush administrations changed the concept to ''permanent normal trade relations.'' This seems innocent enough, but note two subtle effects. First, note the addition of the word permanent. Traditionally, there is nothing permanent about most-favored-nation treatment. Secondly, there is no such thing as normal.
Lots of nations, such as Cuba and Russia and Iraq, are treated differently because they don't play by the rules (as China doesn't). But in a gullible usage shift that Orwell would have appreciated, all the papers and networks seamlessly started using PNTR.
As we look forward to the Fourth of July celebrating this nation's independence, let's recall the words of the abolitionist Wendell Phillips. ''Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.'' Words are the stock in trade of journalists, and nobody should be more vigilant. Otherwise, we become unwitting propagandists, and the liberty of our readers erodes.
