Language

Language has always played an important role in a country's political process. It is one of the primary tools used as agents of positive or negative change. Most world tyrants have always employed neutral means to intervene in instances requiring the analysis and explanation of a written or oral communication event (Class lecture, 2017.02). They have always used spoken words or printed information to persuade their leaders.
Most dictatorships around the world, particularly ancient dictatorial power systems, made a lot of implication in trying to acquire political leadership through language. Most of these political figures, however, ended up taking advantage of the power vested in them to seek to stay in authority (Class lecture, 2017. 04). The result of negative discourse has always been adverse, and it causes a lot of suffering to the people of the nation. On the other hand, the beneficiaries of dictatorship through discourse are few and are those that aid in the continuation of dictatorship (Katalin, 1999, p.479). Language, therefore, with no doubt has a sense of bringing change and can be used by people to enhance dictatorship.
Political Discourse and Religion
Since time immemorial, religion has always been embraced by many groups. It is due to the belief about divinity and power that is associated with religion that makes it a centre of admiration by many (Class lecture, 2017.02). It is this aspect that makes the political figures to take advantage of this belief to launch their political regimes through religion. There are many ways through which political leaders try to remain in power by influencing the religious options that are available.
By dominating the leadership of political structure of a country to a specific language, leaders will expose those in positions of power to follow and act in ways that re-dictated by that religion (Gutas, 2002 p.100). King Constantin in early history, for example, made Christianity the language of the empire hence the Greek-dominated over other groups. The group in power will always therefore only hold onto the beliefs that are expressed by the specific religion and try to impose that on the general masses (Class lecture, 2017.02). They will also impose the beliefs and cultural relevance of their religious beliefs upon the people. It is, therefore, obvious that the people will be forced into accepting to follow a culture and language that they do not identify with.
The discussed above kind of religion might be imposed by the dictatorial regime through the heads of the various religious institutions. The political class will participate directly by either making sure the religion is strictly followed or by advancing some benefits that are related to accepting those religious perceptions (Class lecture, 2017.06). The heads of the religious bodies are the ones tasked to convince people about the divinity of leadership. Since most people will always tend to believe religious perceptions and beliefs, it will then be easy for the regime to hide under that religion to thrive and grow.
The growth of both religious groups and the continuity of paganism have been cited as a cause of bad blood between the two groups. In ancient times, for example, there frequently broke wrangles between the Christians and pagans among the Greeks (Gutas 2000 p.100). That is an indication that religion has a sense of language and those who embrace it are guided by a particular set of principles which they are supposed to follow. Those who embrace paganism, however, do not identify themselves with any religious effects but rather have a traditional conservative language dictated by culture Class lecture (2017, p.08). Dictators can, therefore, take advantage of these differences to make continuity in power.
Religious institutions such as schools, churches, mosques, hospitals and even religious, social amenities have over the years been a source of causing a social and political change in the minds of the people. According to Class lecture, 2017.2, leaders in Ancient Greek world would have an influence in these religious institutions as agents of change. They would lean towards the religious beliefs held by these establishments (Neuwirth, et. al. 2003, p.16). Also, they would enhance their leadership continuity by influencing the content that was taught in the religious schools (Fisher, 2011, p23). That would make sure that the direction continuity was enhanced as the people would not come up against such leadership even if it were dictatorial.
The spread of the Bible and Quran to reach many people has also been used by many political figures to enhance authoritarian regimes. Since many people will embrace religion as a form of belief, the political leaders will take this to make interpretations of the bible to suit their interests. In Ancient Greek, for example, the leaders would use the Bible which was widely used to undermine the Quran which had not been widely accepted at that time (Gutas, 2000 p.100). In this way, the leaders would create a political difference between the two groups with the aim of getting majority support from the majority Christians (Katalin, 1999, p.481). In this way, they would get a lot of support and hence continue their leadership even if it was dictatorial in the eyes of the people
From the early times, Quran apart from having a religious function has always been known to possess also a linguistic purpose (Gutas, 2000 p.103). In time immemorial, Quran has always been considered as an Arab book following the message by Prophet Muhammad to write the book in the Arab language. It has therefore been thought over the years that the Arabs, therefore, have the authority to implement the Quran and its teachings. It gave them a sense of political dominance over the other tribes. As a result, they took up leadership positions since they believed that leadership was mandated to them by the Quran which by all standards is considered a holy book of Prophet Muhammad.
Political Discourse through Bilingualism
Due to the varying nature of languages, there have always existed different and diverse languages. From the ancient times until the present day, languages have continued to come up, and this has enabled a wide range of different culture and belief among the various groups of languages (Gutas, 2000 p.103). Political dictators have however taken advantage of this diversity to cause a rift between the different populations speaking the different languages to keep on with their dictatorial regimes.
Bilingualism itself is a factor leading to dictatorship. When people speak different languages, it is always most likely that they will develop political, social, or economic disagreements. It is this lack of a universal stand that causes differences between the various groups (Class lecture, 2017.06). The political groups always take advantage of this state of affairs to extend their leadership. They will attempt to cause division between the warring groups and then remain as the only uniting person who the tribal groups can look up to. In this way, a dictator will always find a way through the dictatorship.
The knowledge of different languages enables a person to understand very well the culture, social and political beliefs that are associated with those languages (Unbegaun 1973, p21). Political figures that have a vast knowledge of many languages have always used this means to identify with the various groups that speak those languages. In this way, they can easily convince one group against the other and still convince the other team to get their support. According to Gutas (2000), the knowledge of Latin and Greek languages and culture enabled the leadership at that time to remain in power for a very long time. That was because the two groups had political, social and cultural differences but were united under a leader who could identify with both groups well. In this way, the dictatorial regime remained in power even if it was authoritarian as a result of the support from the people.
Translation of languages has been another factor that has in most cases led to political discourse. In ancient Rome, the Roman administration would enhance the interpretation of language in a bid to change some words so as to suit their political interests (Gutas, 2000 p.903). The translations would lead to a lot of loss of information or the addition of others in a manner that the one who intended to use the information would have a totally different interpretation. In this way, dictatorial leaders will always seem to hide any truth through translations that would hinder their continuity in power. They are therefore in a position to manipulate the different people who speak the various languages into embracing their form of leadership.
The above translations would also omit some vital information that would have otherwise prevented dictators ascending to power. The information loss is always an attempt to put the citizens in the dark concerning some truth which if brought to the public, would otherwise cause a revolution against the incumbent leadership (Class lecture, 2017.4). The leaders will, therefore, make any efforts to challenge the resistance that they get in the process. It is therefore always the aim of the leadership to use any available means to retain power. It is in this way that there is continuity in a dictatorship.
The translation of government documents such as laws and administrative procedures have always enhanced dictatorial regimes (Souris & Nigdelis, 1987, p.379). In the ancient Greek government, the administration translated all public documents from Latin into Greek which was already recognized as the official language of the state. The translation led to a massive change of content of the laws that were initially applied in Latin. The change was to enhance continuity of the current leadership but to punish anyone who revolted who stood in the way of progression in leadership. It meant that though dictatorial, the Greek government had used the change in language to remain in power.
Variation in translation is one such other way dictators have used to enhance discourse and hence stay in authority. The translation might change the meaning of a familiar word or phrase. That could be due to the imperfect knowledge of the translator on the new language or could be due to an intended move to alter such meaning (Souris & Nigdelis, 1987, p.905). Such a translation would lead to misunderstanding. It has always been thought that such translation could always be an attempt by the leadership to conceal some information or to add onto the existing phrase so that it may work in their favor. They may use that in most cases to try and remain in power.
When two groups are speaking different languages, there is always easy to for one language to become dominant over the other. In most cases, the language that is acceptable in carrying out the government activities always becomes more noticeable (Class lecture, 2017.03). Those from minority groups would, therefore, want to gain recognition within the larger group by way of change of name. They will change their name to identify with the large group so as to gain the advantages that are associated with being the majority rulers. When this happens, the majority language gains dominance and can easily not be influenced by the minority who have no say (Loydd, 1989, p.363). This dominance over the small groups is in itself dictatorial, and the leaders can enhance continuity of this dictatorship by identifying themselves with the larger group who have control over the smaller ones.
Political Discourse through the Use of Languages
There have always existed various languages that have always been used since the early times. These languages have always been used as a means of identity by the different groups. The various languages are also meant through dictatorship can be enhanced. In any country, there will always be a language that is widely spoken that is considered as the majority (Class lecture, 2017.06). There is also that spoken language that is considered as the minority. In a dictatorial system, the minority are always oppressed because their small numbers do not give them a voice to resist being ruled.
When a single language is used as a means of commerce or doing business, it creates political discourse. The same will mean that the language is identifiable and since business is part of the daily lives of the people, everyone will be forced into sing that language (Gutas, 2002 p100). Such use will obviously undermine other smaller groups thereby giving dominance to the larger groups. The terms used in commerce will, therefore, influence the people into adopting its translations and understanding (Szarzy, 1996, p.9). The government may, therefore, use this language to exert its rule over the people through subjecting them into conformity with its ideologies. In this way, a government will have considerable influence over other smaller groups.
Language translation can always be used as a means of spreading propaganda by a government. In ancient times, the government of Persia used propaganda by way of interpretation of language to overturn the government of the Ummayas (Gutas, 2002 p106). Such propaganda will intend to put one group that speaks a language against another group that speaks a different language. A government will always use the publicity for the dominant group with the aim of gaining favour with the dominant group and have their support (Loydd, 1989, p.367). It is one form of extending dictatorship to the people and in particular the less dominant group.
Language often acts as a medium of doing government business. The same implies that all public discussions, documentation, and communication must be done through that specific language (Gutas, 2002 p100). It will, therefore, mean that anybody who will be interested in carrying out business with the government will have to have the knowledge of the particular language at least, even if they are not natives of speaking that specific language. It will hence exert to some extend dictatorship on the part of those who will be forced into adopting a new language as a means of communication.
Language can also be used to express culture and the social beliefs of a country as a whole. A government can therefore always choose one language as a means of expressing its culture and social beliefs. That will obviously disregard other languages whose existence is an integral part of the very culture which the country seeks to celebrate (Gutas, 2002, p.100. It will mean imposing the social and cultural belief of a dominant group over the smaller ones. It is always thought to be a government attempt to give more power or recognition to the people who are the natives of this dominant group (Class lecture. (2017).04). By gaining such attention, the government will have more support from the dominant group in extending a dictatorial regime.
Publications that bear consequences were also a tactic that was used by dictators to remain in power. They made written decrees that would prevent people from doing something. If the people went ahead to do the things, then they would face consequences which would be in the form of punishments put upon them (Loydd, 1984, p.371). The written decrees would also mean that people are forced into doing things even if it is not their will and they too would face some action on them if they failed to comply. This system was mainly used as a coercion tool by the leadership to demand respect from the people forcefully. The people would then become too afraid to stand up against such leadership as a result of fears of retaliation.
Political Discourse through Language as a Social Platform
Language can always be made as a source of knowledge and a medium through which that information is relayed from one generation to the next generation (Loydd, 1984, p.376). It can always be used in schools and universities as a medium of instruction to the students who intend to gain such kind of knowledge. Such a language is likely to gain widespread acceptance because of nature at which education is embraced by many. By gaining knowledge, the people who are the beneficiaries will have to undermine their language and adopt the new language as a medium of instruction (Class lecture, 2017.06). Such a language can always be abused by a government to extend dictatorship. Palestine government was one of the examples that used this language to extend dominance to its people.
Incitement by the political dictators is always a way to which dictatorship is enhanced. That is done by causing a problem to exist between two or more different tribes (Loydd, 1984, p.368). The incitement is always accomplished when a political figure talks ill about another group and does the same thing when he met the next group. This kind of provocation causes great animosity among the different groups. It is always, therefore, most likely that these groups will rise in arms against each other. In this way, the dictatorial government finds a way to rule the divided groups.
A government has a function to provide cultural and social cohesion through political means. In order to bring people together, a government will use a common language that can easily be understood by a majority. It means that the people will tend to adopt the new language while trying to ignore their native language with the aim of enhancing cultural and social cohesion (Loydd, 1984, p.374). But still, a government can take advantage when the social stability of the nation is attained. It can try to use the dominant social language to exert influence over the minority who have not adopted the social attainment through language. A government will enhance continuity by the support of the majority who speak that language while disregarding the minority who do not have the ability to converse using the same dialect.
Priming with large cues by politicians could be a tool that they use to convince the electorate and the whole population into remaining in power (Class lecture, 2017.04). Examples of large cues are those employed by Obama "yes we can." Such words would make the people believe in the leadership and have so many hopes that the elected leader is going to perform. In reality, dictators just use them to remain dominant in their political games. He does not have the people's interest at heart but rather only thinks about his political gains. For such leadership, there will still always be a vacuum regarding the service to the people, and there will also be a social gap between the leadership and the people.
The use of a specific language as a medium in the administration of a country is one way to which dictators enhance the continuation of their regime. According to Souris and Nigdelis (1987, p.789), Rome after conquering the Hellenic East imposed the Latin language to the Greeks. That is enabled the Romans to have a higher hand regarding the power to make a change. They, therefore, could have power over the Hellenic group. It is in this way that the dictators can easily use language by overcoming the minority group. That leads to a dictatorship which is enhanced by the majority tribe.
Political agents may also use metaphors that are implied to raise the standards of leadership to very high and respectable levels. It may include reference to the crown or large offices that are associated with royalty (Loydd, 1984, p.372). Such reference made to a political leadership in power is in a position to influence the people into thinking that the administration is royal and cannot be overturned. The political leaders will then take advantage of this fact and use it to launch a dictatorial rule upon the people. The people, finding hard to resist, will just sit and get oppressed under the authoritarian rule.
Political speeches can always be one of the major ways through which political leadership will enhance their stay in power (Souris & Nigdelis, 1987, p.776). The dictatorial political figures always have a strong will to readily convince anybody about what they can and how they can achieve great development agenda for their people. Such a leader always employs the use of so much propaganda that is aimed at earning the trust of the citizens (Szarzy, 1996, p.12). The dictator may serve as a means to express his rule give promises of what he will be able to accomplish to continue earning the interest of the people.
Political Discourse through Repression
Repressors have always been used by political leadership as a way of retaining their political relevance and remaining in power. The repressors are always given a reward for maintaining the leadership (Loydd, 1984, p.371). Their work in to keep the general public under the limits of control and to make sure that the public as a whole does not go against the wishes of the political leadership. However, the political head of the government must take charge and be in control of the repressors otherwise; they would also take control and have so much influence and power. That would pose a threat to the leadership since the repressor could try to overthrow the government and assume the leadership of the state.
The political class can always use the efforts of the repressors to have a social and political influence on the social groups (Class lecture.(2017).03). They will try to convince the people through platforms such as churches, sports activities, meetings and in political rallies about the leadership that is in power. The work of the repressors is to retain the leadership in the authority by taking the good of the administration. They will also have the primary task of dealing with anybody or any group that it views as a threat to the continuity and security of government continuity. These facts will mean that the people will be in so much fear of facing dire consequences if they dare protest about anything that they feel they are not comfortable with.
Collective action implies that people come together in a bid to enhance continuity of leadership (Loydd, 1984, p.371). A government might be holding onto power through the efforts of many repressors who are being used to enhance government stability by avoiding any uprising. It is always a government's responsibility to ensure the safety and security of all citizens. However, this is not true as the repressors are awarded for their efforts of using even force to prevent any uprising (Class lecture, 2017).03). The collective action of the repressor is, therefore, to jointly control the various groups of people who could be covering a broad geographical region to remain within controllable limits by the government.
Political orders are also one common way through which the ancient leadership would always remain dominant. It did not matter what kind of demand the leader gave and the effect that it had. The orders were, however, final and could not be challenged by any other powers (Class lecture, 2017).05). That in itself is a high level of dictatorship, and by this way, there is a show of might by the leader that is uncontrolled from any quarters. That is what gives dictatorial continuity to the political system.
Political leaders will always try hard to extend a hard political stand on matters related to governance (Class lecture, 2017).03). That will be through having a management team that will help in the delivery of a vocal governance structure that will rely on its top leaders to enhance continuity of the leadership. Such hard political stands are a result of vocal leadership that will always be ready to punish those who don't follow up with the need for the regime. On the other hand, those who obey the vocal leadership needs will in a way get rewarded for their loyalty and respect to the government.
Political leadership that is dictatorial can also use the means of not paying or poorly compensating its subject. That could be through written decrees that enhance such minimal or no payment for work done by servants (Class lecture, 201.04). By way of ineffective payment schemes, the subjects of the leadership will always remain wholly reliant on the leadership. It is a means of earning forceful obedience from the people by way of force and oppression. The people are subjected to inadequate means of livelihood and are an issue of induced poverty. They, therefore, offer minimal resistance as they are weak to put up a fight. The dictatorial regime will therefore flourish and support the leader in his political quest without due regard to the minority.
By way of forcefully commanding respect from the subjects, a dictatorial leader is looking for means to strengthen their leadership. They will be so strict and stern to the leaders and make them have a sense of fear (Class lecture, 2017.04). It is this fear that drives the subjects to become so afraid of ever thinking of resisting heir master. That is leadership through coercion, and it enables the political leader to exert authority firmly on the subject. They are then able to extend this kind of leadership to all the other people of the nation.
There has always been dictatorship through the way of infringing on their rights (Class lecture, 2017.03). The minorities often suffer the most since they represent a small population that may be out to against the rule. The dictatorial government will always impose mostly verbal decrees barring women or a minority which is against their leadership. Such persons do not, therefore, take part in the daily running of the government and are always part of the oppressed. Such groups of individuals cannot raise a voice or try to fight back and gain their rights since there is always a general fear of retaliation from the ruling government.
Due to the power vested in them by the people and their constitution, some political dictators always step up their mandate and become so powerful that they make decisions that are not challenged. These decisions mostly are towards seeing them remain in power and continue to rule over the people. Such political figures are always ready to punish or execute anybody who wants to rise to oppose their rule (Class lecture, 2017.03). It is, therefore, tough for a person to come up and go against the wishes of the government for fear of retaliation. Such a government will also have the power even to change laws that are related to the presidency. All these are done to ensure continuity of the presidential dynasty (Blumenthal and Kahane, 1979, p.189). In the end, it is still the few minorities who are the oppressed that bear the weight of the suffering.
Apart from the physical warfare, political figures that are known to enhance a culture of dictatorship always employ also the verbal warfare. This involves a fight, mostly in the public domain that is primarily characterized by insults and attacks on personal achievements. Dictators take advantage of this by making a lot of propaganda and accusations to the opponent with the aim of severely denting their image (Class lecture, 2017.04). On the other hand, the political figure will try as much to avoid the same verbal warfare coming from the side of the opponent. That is aimed at tainting the image of the rival and making it seem quite bad in public. It will enable the continuity of the dictatorial regime.
In order to gain political dominance, the political class will always use discourse in this attempt. Since politics thrive just by having majority back-up and support, it will be so easy for the political class to succeed when they have an overwhelming support (Class lecture, 2017.05). The only way to get this kind of assistance is by convincing the people to offer political support. The politician will, therefore, have to use his oratory skills to have the people behind him. In order to even remain to be in power, the political class will also have even to convince the population more to still be in authority (Blumenthal and Kahane, 1979, p.186). By extension, this could lead to a dictatorship since the people will have no free will to decide who can lead the.
Though not widely used, dictators can always positively impact the population by speech or through written decree that positively impacts on the society (Class lecture, 2017.02). The same they do with the main aim of having the majority support to remain in power and enhance dictatorship. They will try and convince the population on how to improve their livelihoods and have a better living. It is one political means that is of many advantages to the people but if not well managed can make the leader too powerful to receive resistance from the population or any other body.
Wooing political support is one imperative step in attaining political stability and enhancing dictatorship. Political support among other factors is accomplished when the politician tries to get the support of the population (Class lecture.2017.03). The earliest civilization would attain this by organizing for meetings with the perceived supporters. It makes an excellent opportunity to have a hard stand support using promising the people benefits of the leadership. Once the leader had a group of fans who could not be swayed by any other political force, then it would be easy to continue being in power. The supporters would be very instrumental in this continuity.
Discourse has on many occasions been cited as a leading cause of political vulnerability in many dictatorships. When a language or a community fails to gain identity and popularity, they will always fall prey to a dictatorship since they cannot sustain their leadership. According (Class lecture, 2017.12), the Visigoths failed to maintain their leadership and fell into the hands of the dictatorship of the Muslim majority. The fact that they could not have collective unity exposed them to becoming a target of a dictatorial regime. They failed to win a war against the Muslims, and as a result, they faced defeat.
Conclusion
From as early as the civilization time, the earliest kingdoms and governments have always used political discourse process in a bid to hold on to power and extend a dictatorial rule upon their governments. The discourse has always not gone entirely unchallenged, and though some leaders have managed to enhance this kind of dictatorship, others have always failed in trying to hold on and remain in power. For the purpose of this work, discourse can be widely categorized into various groups and thus the different kinds of discourse that arise analyzed. There can occur a political discourse by way of religion, and some of this may include the political class influencing the religious beliefs, use of a specific language in the religious process and spread of the Bible and the Quran. Discourse can also arise as a result of bilingualism. Some of the references that are made through bilingualism include speaking a different language, difficulty in translating languages and use of an official language to enhance the running of the government.
Political discourse through language use leading to dictatorship can also exist. The factors leading to this will include the utilization of a single language in carrying out the government businesses, poor language translation and the use of language in doing the business of the government. Language as a social platform is used by the various education centres to impart knowledge to the learners. It is considered that for most students, learning presents an excellent option for being able to grasp concepts and use them for effective leadership and governance structures. Political dictatorship among other things can be enhanced by way of repression. The repressor can use excessive force to gain elaborate favour for his principal. Helping the local people to gain popularity may be the primary drive that pushes these leaders to gain political advantage. The repressed will always have to comply with the created process since in doing so they manage to easily warn the repressors to stay away from power and continuity.


References
Blumenthal, H and Kahane R. (1979). Decline and survival of western prestige languages. Linguistic Society of America, 55(1), 183-198.
Class lecture. (2017). 02.
Class lecture. (2017). 04.
Class lecture. (2017). 05.
Class lecture. (2017). 06.
Class lecture. (2017). 12.
Class lecture. (2017). 03.
Class lecture. (2017). 08.
Fisher, J.H. (2011). European Chancelleries and the Rise of Standard Written Languages John H. Fisher. Essays in Medieval Studies.
Gutus, D. (2002). Language and imperial ideology in late antiquity and early Islam. [No place of pub...