Opinion / We The People

Don’t Surrender Your Words!


George Orwell warned about language being used to disrupt communication. How can society solve problems if language is modified in a way to confuse communication? Perhaps that is the goal…

Constant word redefinition, or elimination of certain words are traditional methods used by power grabbers. Samuel Adams warned in 1776, “How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!”

Did you know that the National Archives actually posted “Harmful Content” warnings on our Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, and other founding documents in their digital collection???

We must not aid today’s tyrants by using the words they dictate that we use! George Orwell wrote in his 1946 essay, “Politics and the English Language” that the worst thing one can do with words is to surrender them. He protested not just sloppy use of language, but intentional misuse of language for political purposes.

“Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable,” Orwell warned, adding “Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness.”

Don’t surrender your words, they are powerful weapons in the arsenal of free speech, and free speech is essential to freedom. It is a self-evident truth. 

“Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government: When this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins.” – Benjamin Franklin

Diana Erbio is a freelance writer and author of “Coming to America: A Girl Struggles to Find her Way in a New World”. Read her blog series “Statues: The People They Salute” and visit the Facebook Page.

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
2 months ago

You are so right about not surrendering our words. I have watched thr left redefine our culture and holidays over time. Then they wonder why these things are empty!! I’ll not define myself as “she/her” and use that when I sign my emails, but the government actually promotes use of pronouns in signatures, and I was a government contractor. My point is that language choice is a freedom we need to preserve. And we need to stop using the “F” bomb.

Mciahel Lewis
2 months ago

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was one of the three Reconstruction Amendments which, along with the 13th and 15th, was primarily intended to establish equal civil rights for former slaves. It was passed by Congress on June 13, 1866, and ratified by the states as of July 9, 1868.
1868 Fourteenth Amendment
Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
“Samuel Adams warned in 1776, “How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!”
Isn’t it ironic that the 14th Amendment became cornerstone the Supreme Court used to determine corporate personhood and that corporations have superior 1st Amendment claims to free speech and press?

The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA, enacted February 7, 1972, 52 U.S.C. § 3010) is the primary United States federal law regulating political campaign fundraising and spending. The law originally focused on creating limits for campaign spending on communication media, adding additional penalties to the criminal code for election law violations, and imposing disclosure requirements for federal political campaigns.
1974 FECA revised after Buckley v Valeo. Corporate media exempted, because their First Amendment rights could not be abridged: 52 USC Ch. 301 (9)(B) The term “expenditure” does not include— (i) any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate.
The above “unless clause” is proof Congress acknowledges political publications by corporate media have value. Why shouldn’t they be considered donations for or against candidates and issues. Why are they considered to have zero value just because they are published by a business whose function is mass distribution of communications.
Before Congress exempted the corporate media from Federal Campaign Law, because they could not abridge their speech, did they consider the media themselves are special interests, capable of bribing officeholders with favorable press and coordinating with them to help them get re-elected. Examples the spiked Hunter Biden story, the Twitter file!
1832 Bank Veto Message: “Every man is equally entitled to protection by law; but when the laws undertake to add… artificial distinctions, to grant titles, gratuities, and exclusive privileges, to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society the farmers, mechanics, and laborers who have neither the time nor the means of securing like favors to themselves, have a right to complain of the injustice of their government.” – President Andrew Jackson.

Roger Wiley
2 months ago

I am a simple man. My needs, and ideas are both few, and small. I have long decried the *hijacking” of the word Gay. It is a perfectly good word. Yet, it has been “hijacked” to obfuscate truth. I’m guessing that “homosexual” was too brutal. Reality, and truth, are sisters. They are both quite brutal. Sympathy, and Empathy are the ugly, ill defined step children. Sympathy can be found between suicide and syphilis. Empathy is between eliminate, and execute.

anna hubert
2 months ago

We live in times when government directs the speech in the school armed forces etc It’s newspeak now not speech It must not offend the protected species

Richard Conard
2 months ago

Add this to the discussion:

“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
George Washington 

If memory serves me it was Nikita Khrushchev who said “We will bury you!” He didn’t get it done, but his fellow travelers in this country have worked tirelessly thru the decades since and are in position to do exactly that…. with the help of the Chinese hordes.


David Millikan
2 months ago

Excellent article.
I will NEVER surrender my U.S. Constitutional Rights.
Especially, FREE SPEECH or OUR 2nd Amendment rights or any other of my U.S. Constitutional Rights.

Rob citizenship
2 months ago

This topic ,the connection between freedom and the words we use in the exercise of freedom of speech has been, is at present and I reckon will be in future one of the most important things that hold the foundation of the United States of America together. ” Don’t Surrender Your Words ! ” Absolutely right Diana , Great article. Strength of thought, strength of character and the vocabulary we use is constantly developing. I sincerely believe that there is a connection with the will of God, expressing ourselves intelligently and clearly and having a clean sense of humor. By a clean sense of humor I mean humor that is respectful and uplifting and does not use crude, vulgar or obscene words or expressions. Same standard for music would be a good idea as well. In 1961 , at age
eleven my parents and I visited Independence Hall and since then the Declaration of Independence has been an important part of how I understand what the history of the country is all
about and what is going on now too. Respect for truth , respect for Liberty, In the spirit of appreciation for the principles of Faith, Family and Freedom.

Rob citizenship
2 months ago

Regarding the matter of the National Archives label on the Declaration of Independence ,a harmful content label, I intended to include this in comment sent earlier, I had to take .care of another matter, ( pertaining to construction project where I live ) so the mindset of those responsible for doing that is in the , actually finding it difficult to describe , really strange category. Did just a bit of research on it , that was 2021, I remember hearing about it on a couple of Conservative radio stations then . And apparently a harmful content label was attached to the Bill of Rights too. The fact that it was actually done ,even if has been removed, is an indication of the validity of the warnings those like George Orwell, Sam Adams and Ben Franklin had on the topic. Your writing this very important article is greatly appreciated Diana. Well Done !

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x