In 2009 the word “socialism” had been very visible in protests against President Obama’s plans for health care reform. This claim that President Obama is (and/or his policies are) “socialist” seems to have a powerful effect – why? The New York Times did an opinion piece in which several commentators with different backgrounds & expertise shared their thoughts on this use of “socialism”: http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/what-is-socialism-in-2009/?hp. Read a couple of the commentators. What do you think? Regardless of your political views or opinion of President Obama, how can a social constructionist view of language help us think about the meaning and effects of what is happening when people invoke the term socialism? For instance, does everyone mean the same thing when they use the word socialism? How do we know? How does historical context impact the meaning of socialism beyond just its dictionary definition? What is the effect of juxtaposing (and therefore creating a binary) “freedom” and “socialism”? Is it important to be able to say, “This is socialism” or “This is not socialism”? Why? Who gets to say and why them?
No comments:
Post a Comment