Political Discourse Empowers Dictatorship

Throughout history, political speech has aided dictators. Dictators throughout history have used written and spoken language to affect the path of a people's culture. Tyrant rulers in history have been known to impose their language in the lives of the conquered people, in liturgy, administration, law, education, and business as they use force, swords and guns, lands and kingdoms in conquering new lands and kingdoms, making their marks that would certainly last beyond the fall of their reign. The evolution of a language reflects the power of empires and kingdoms. They use language because it is a potent tool of power, and since dictators rule by force, they have found in language the perfect ammunition to strengthen their empire.
Dictators Manipulate Human Instinct
Tyrants take advantage of human instincts to get what they want. It is human instinct to expect compensation for a job done. People innately pursue abundance, and endeavor to achieve this at all cost. Where bounty is, there is bound to be followers. Dictators are themselves followers and fellow pursuer of rewards. In a government framework, the ruler, king or president are tasked to monitor people they do their jobs and manage their businesses where their subordinates are expected to is established wherein people calculate their efforts to gain rewards, making adjustments to what is deemed necessary and expected. A ruler does not follow a solitary path. His council or officials support him, enforcing the laws and taxing the people, with the same mindset of generating influence among the people to gain their rewards. The subordinates on the other hand, need leaders they can follow as they pursue their goals. A powerful discourse from a leader can drive people to follow his rule. It remains one of the world's most significant contractions that the people who are recipients of dictatorship are its very own drivers. The influence of powerful discourse does not affect a single person but it radiates to a people.
In the pursuit of working hard for the expected compensation, the ruler's officials are bound to cheat on the workers thinking that the subordinates are not doing the corresponding work. In the same way, the subordinates also have a choice of not giving their end of the bargain or not giving the exact taxes to government. But the officials outweigh the subordinates in power but not in number. So the subordinates end up getting beaten, in modern times through law enforcement like fines and even jail terms; while in the olden times, through literal beating. As the rulers' middlemen, the oppressive officers use force in governing and collecting taxes, because it is written in politic discourse that force is always on the side of the government.
Even if subordinates outweigh the officials in number, they cannot take advantage of their size, because firstly, they don't have power, and secondly, they are afraid to lose their compensation. The concept of government has always been few people governing the many. Such is the paradox of collective action endeavors to explain this contradiction of dictatorship. To complain or talk back to these middlemen endangers the status of the resisting party, and that of the other subordinates who are not even complaining.
People are convinced of teamwork as the route to abundance; that subordinates can achieve their compensation if the collective do their part in work. In the process of calculation, hard work from the collective is always significant compared with solitary endeavor. The possibility of more abundance for all makes the ruler more attractive. But it also makes the collective subordinate less resistant to dictatorship and punishment by force. Political discourse makes the struggle to achieve compensation and abundance worth it.
Discourse Enables the Establishment of Treasury
Dictators are lawfully tasked to establish a treasury as storage of the taxes and money that are meant to go back to the people as compensation and rewards. In essence it fosters trust among the subordinates that they are going to get their compensation for their efforts. At the same time, these subordinates continue to calculate compensation and effort ration, and become more convince that their efforts are not worth their pay. But since they cannot resist for fear of power, they resort to free riding and tax evasion. The ruler's middlemen and law enforcers consequently use their authority by enforcing punishments and fines. Political discourse makes it legal for government to enrich this treasury through investment, taxation and fines. It is expected from them because it is in written in liturgy, educational books, the Constitution and business regulations. And so they have all the legal opportunities to build the treasury but to enrich themselves in ways that are illegal for subordinates to do.
Political Discourse Enables Establishment of Power
Politics is today is often generalized as a self-motivated path to ambition and self-interest. As such it becomes a contradiction to the paradox of collective action. These generalizations regarding politics disregard the fact that the collective action is a necessary step before individuals decide on what actions to take. Discourse can change the calculation of action to expected reward. Discourse interferes in the collection and elucidation of text, which refers to any event that is informative. Discourse gives reason and order in uttered and written texts. As they are spoken or uttered texts are products of selected lexical processes and syntax. The texts in a discourse are arranged in a way that informs its truest meaning, with interrogative elements followed by declarative ones in a sequence. Even each element has different means, their collective presence and arrangement drives the truest interpretation of the texts. Discourse uses figures of speech in order to get the messages across and achieve its desired effects. It uses metaphors, assonance, alliteration and even puns. It also strives from coherence that is based on individual interpretation. An individual with knowledge of discourse will interpret the texts according to his stored references. And such knowledge would also prevent the individual from picking up the incoherent spoken words. Discourse interrupts the collection and elucidation of linguistic texts that can be heard, seen and touched, by choosing among the accessible syntactic and lexical options in order to produce meaningful texts. In driving collective action discourse carefully chooses the precise syntactic or lexical texts among other less powerful options. Discourse has the power not just to use words exactly what the speaker want it to mean, it also enable the uttered text to mean many different things. Politics therefore is interpreting meanings in the unique process of choosing a master.

Political Discourse Provides Solutions to Conflict
The dictator does not have to endeavor for an award due to the conspiracy surrounding the process. But his men and poor subordinates are spread out in different localities making the monitoring process challenging. Such arrangement can stop or enjoin collective action of the poor because the lines of communication can inhibit them from gaining information. Such collective action provides these law enforcers with many opportunities to free ride, or have rewards without effort. But during these times of oppressive law enforcement, the ruler's officers always attack the poor in numbers bringing them advantage.
The option not to share in the endeavor to gain rewards is what hinders collective action. But the ruler's law enforcers find themselves in favor of collective action if the rewards are too attractive and distractive, creating the bias despite the necessity of efforts. Still it can create further divisiveness among the ruler's enforcers and subordinates. Both sets of individuals have different motivations. From the onset, individuals are motivated to reach an desired object like food guided by spatial information. The varying efforts of reaching based on size, path and location serves as foundation of an individual's concept of effort. The achievement of goals often depends on the how an individual sees himself and his environment. If the individual sees himself as fit and capable, then all the obstacles in the environment will serve as motivating factors to achieve the end goal.
Political Discourse Enables Obedience Among the Poor
It has always been political discourse that empowers non-democratic governments. One of the chief reasons for this is the way tyrants take advantage of illiteracy, lack of representation, poor command of language among their poor subordinates. A good example is the Sumerian Rule. As early as 3000 BCE, cities had control over most of the irrigated farmlands in Ancient West Asia, lording it over Mesopotamia and other localities that have now become Turkey, Syria, Israel, Lebanon and Iran. The Sumerian rule was established in a way that predicted the pattern of rule in other places where one leader exercised the ultimate rule as often as people pray to a god. Large organizations often had a council of leaders, but villages surrounding the area were often left without representations in large councils dominated by males. So essentially these councils characterized what dictatorships are: leaders and councils that do not represent the population.
Communication was also a primary problem because of the complicated scripts they were used, making it hard for people that are monolinguals to understand. Language is vital in the formation of societies, and during this time not being able to distinguish phonograms, classifiers, logograms and allusions made scripts hard to learn. Going to school was also expensive, so only a minority has the capacity to read. In schools, the Sumerian rule made it legal for officers to enforce corporal violence and oppression. Oppressors were held to a high esteem.
Political Discourse Elevates Power
An example of how dictators are elevated to the highest esteem is how the Egyptians named their ruler. Egypt is one of greatest sources of written language. However, their rich cultural reservoir was not enough for them to name their ruler. Political discourse drove them to come up with the leader's name.
Egyptians painted or carved art on surfaces, subsequently translating these artworks into scripts that have evolved into hieroglyphs either in cursive, abstract, and demotic. These figures typified things, events or even sounds of the depicted hieroglyph, which enabled it to function as a phonogram or ideogram. To make them more understandable, they also feature determinatives specifying the classification of the object or activity. Egyptians initially only had consonants in their alphabets and vowels are arbitrarily assigned. Many of the consonants in the Egyptian alphabet made it the English alphabet, with the addition of diacritics. One of the most famous words to come from Egypt, which is Pharaoh, was a word that was mistakenly pronounced by a foreigner referring to the leaders' estate or the big house. But Egypt adapted it as the name of their ruler.
Spatial Cues Empower Dictators
Greece is an example of how spatial cues empower dictators. Two significant event events in Ancient Greece provide evidence to this. Firstly, although political discourse was one of the primary activities, it was mostly done in their own language. So non-speakers of the Greek language were totally abandoned in the country. Secondly, gender and class segregation was in full practice. In the olden times, Athens was ruled by a council comprising of nine men, called archon, which means first, manifesting a spatial cue since the idea of first represents a sequence that discriminates the others that are not first. Back then archons came from the richest classes. Only the male population were considered citizens particularly in Athens, and were classified in four classes, according to their measure of production namely elongation, enlargement, enlargement, and all others. Later reforms in Greece enabled suffrage, but still exclusively to men.
Political Discourse Fosters Nepotism
Political discourse also empowers rulers to appoint from within the family. Macedon, a region that is both part of Greece and Macedonia, forms an alliance of Greek cities in the northwest Athens using armies it has conquered. When it conquered Chaeronea in early - it ruled over the Greek cities in Sparta's northern regions. Macedon is an example of a dictatorship where rulers inherit their positions from their fathers, uncles, or brothers. The ruler leads together with his philoi and his syntrophoi, which refers to people that are nourished together. Along with philoi and syntrophoi, the elected ruler leads the army in conquering lands effectively. Victory is achieved though brotherhood and teamwork, closeness with each other but separate from others, potential to collective action and organization in battle. Discourse has had consequences to the Macedon's conquests. Chiefly, the Semitic language Aramaic has been replaced with Attic language in ruling discourse all over ancient Western Asia. Greek remained a distancing language among the common people in Greece. While Greek was still used as a common language among rulers and officers the locals never used this language.

Political Discourse Enables Dictatorship of Culture
Linguistic consequence is also apparent in other parts of the world where languages of the oppressive rich and the poor intermingle. The Japanese, for example started to master the Chinese language in the fifth century because of the prestige that China and Chinese studies exuded in early Japan. But diversion was also due to a lack of a native writing system, which came only two centuries later. The Japanese adapted written Chinese very early on. This can be found in Japan's historical archives where legal codes, essays, poems, literary anthologies all written in orthodox Chinese. Japanese scholars delved into Chinese studies until the ninth century with the help of patrons that valued Chinese traditions like the courts, whose ruling language is also Chinese. After experiencing a decline, Japanese documents that were usually in Chinese became interspersed with Japanese texts about Japanese subjects that are written in bad attempts at Chinese. But while before Japanese writers did not endeavor to establish a streamlined Chinese that can be used in Japanese linguistic settings, the Japanese finally established the henti kambun as a unique Japanese linguistic entity, a hybrid of two written language that reached maturity in the 12th and 13th century.

Political Discourse Creates Language Systems
How two words combine to make a word has been part of in the evolution of many language systems. Classical Greek was the language used in Ancient Greek, particularly the Attic-iconic dialect, which the Greeks famously used for discourse. Classical Greek also had many inscriptions and rich text, which has been passed on to present day. Thus the Ancient Greek language system along with Hellenistic Koine drove the inflectional system of the Medieval and Modern Greek language. The inflectional morphology features a difficult form that is rooted from Indo-European morphology. These languages are both manifest external and internal inflection. Externally, they have the inflectional affixes that have morphosyntactic roles that exemplify the link between a word and the rest of the syntactic system. A big proportion of the Ancient Greek language have suffixes that are found at the end of the word. The nominal and verbal inflection system between the Classical Greek and Indo European language are also distinct. Their inflectional morphemes are not only rich in variety but also employ many functions, where each one is served by many inflectional morphemes.
Dictatorship Drives the Adaption of Language
A language survives if country's citizens speak it on a regular basis. The possibility of frequent usage is higher if the ruling party adapts the language. Evidence to this is the French language. French was chosen from among Latin-derived romance languages to be used by king and his court. Only after becoming an international language during the medieval times did France adapt French as its official language. Through colonialism, French also became a worldwide language. As kingdoms conquered lands through long-fought battles, the adaptation of languages entailed more thorough educational and legislative processes that ran through five centuries. The French language survived because it was chosen as the language of the ruling entity.
Another evidence to this is the Gallo-Roman language. When the Romans conquered France in 52 BC they added Latin into the native's language mix comprising of hundreds of Celtic language through an official Roman policy to make integration easier and way of life more attractive. Even native Gauls adapted easily to Latin particularly since they had no official written language, which made the fGallo-Roman fusion relatively closer to Classic Latin. The spoken Latin, on the other hand had an entirely different effect. As spoken by native Gallos, Latin was inflicted by their speech habits, and soon it the fusion became a new vernacular. The fusion became easy for the natives because Latin language had a flexible administrative system, which made integration easier. Back then it was considered the language of progress because it was the used by a constantly moving society.
Political Discourse Enable Language Survival
An example to this premise is the Spanish Language. It is common for languages to die through time and evolution, but even if they are not used, they are integrated into the eternal development of human speech. In this sense, the romance languages continue to exist in the languages French, Portuguese, Italian, Sardinian and Spanish. As a modern Latin language, Spanish today is being spoken in Central America, Caribbean South America, Iberian Peninsula, Caribbean, and United States. Although the Spanish variants in these areas are different from each other, Spanish speakers can essentially easily understand each other. However in Spain the official language is actually Castilian based on their current Constitution. The decision was influenced primarily by politics considering that Castilian was a local dialect of a formerly unknown area of Spain. When the North African and Near East warriors conquered and occupied Spain during the eighth century they made Spain a cultural frontier like most of Western Europe. But the African invaders imposed to Spain the influence of Islam, which was considered a dynamic religion. They also brought with them a different language and culture which was easily fused into the country's culture. Before the invasion, Spain had German-speaking rulers, the Visigoths, whose political influence was starting to weaken in the seventh century. Their kingdom had no structure causing factional struggles and quarrels. At that time, disasters like famine, and poor harvest drove the people discontented leading to the weakening of the kingdom. A faction of Spain's nobility called for the African invasion as a result of quarrel in the kingdom. After experiencing struggles caused by natural and political disasters, the people did not resist strongly to the occupation.
The Church as Dictators and Language Influencers
The church has influenced the written languages of the general world population. Example to this is the Russian language. Russians first written language was Old Church Slavonic, was their church language and not their vernacular. The dialect sounded strangely Macedonian using Bulgarian type. But it was spoken by the Salonica natives, a linguist, two brothers that later on became saints, an administrator of the Bezantine empire and a theologian luckily spoke the language. They elevated the Macedonian vernacular of Salonica to become the first official Slavonic language and their official liturgical language. The Slavonic influence was apparent in the phonetics and morphology of the language, but the Byzantic Greek influenced its syntax, word formation and vocabulary.
Kieve and Xovgorod integrated it as its charge language before the 11th century. There were no challenges in the intelligibility of the language among the Slavs of the East, South and West even if the Common Slavonic language had already been divided. But because of the ruling scions had a close relationship and so the Old Church Slavic was adapted as a local albeit more sacred vernacular. There was no need for translation because the language of the church automatically became the language of other written subjects like science, philosophy, and literature. The Old Church Slavic was easily understood and adapted because its linguistic elements were close to the vernaculars whether in Kiev or Novgorod, which were the cultural hubs for two centuries. Naturally the vernacular contaminated with the Old Church Slavonic until the language dropped the old.
Latin is another example of written language that was influenced by the church. Latin was harder to understand for the French, German and English reader. Its being a church language was driven by its being the language of civilization. Latin had all the criteria for a language of civilization. Many sectors of society used Latin including the church, literature, philosophy, theology, administration and law. Latin was the medium of communication around the world during the vast Roman empire. Latin was often combined with the language of the conquered land. The Graeco-Roman civilization resulted when the Romans conquered Greece, where the natives of the provinces became bilinguals. The combination of Greek and Latin remained distinct from each other because Greek was used in all matters cultural, while Latin in all maters political.
Latin represented the heritage of Roman Empire. It was the required language for imperial service and the language of the ruling and upper classes. It was also the language required in government from the higher leaders in the capital, to the ones in civil service, the law, and the army. Education incorporated Latin into its Greek rhetoric, which is a clear manifestation of the linguistic influence and vast usage of
Latin also influenced the creation of educational systems for the elites. Along with the Greek educational system was open for rhetoricians, and the Latin educational system was open for the jurist. But it was not a fair competition because Latin has always been more powerful and rich in rhetoric while Greek was studies for the sake of studying a language. Many people in that era would agree that they owe their careers to the Latin language proficiency. Latin was deeply entrenched in the culture of that their oral and written discourse are done in Latin.
The Roman Empire and the Latin paved the way for many Languages including the English language. The overthrow of the Romans from Great Britain by different batches of armed bands, including the group called Danes which paved the way for the development of seven separate and a radical change in language and the enforcement of the Daneslaw. The armed men spoke in theodisic dialect called East Old Norse, which had a unique lexical morphology and different that signified grammatical usage. To simplify these new languages, the natives particularly the children would cut the grammatical ending. The language was transferred gradually by learning both lexicons through representation of related but varied meanings to words with the same sounds. The transference resulted to the Englisc dialect that gradually took the place of Anglo-Saxon and East Old Norse. Notably, Beowulf was written in 1000 CE using this dialect. Indeed assigning meanings to words has influenced the evolution of the English language.
During most of the Anglo-Saxon rule the kings segregated property into holdings. King William confiscated some holdings and gave them to his soldiers who became tenants of the land. The tenants segregated the grants to their tenants, who are also expected to subdivide. As a result of these grant, the chiefs and their tenants owe the king military service or monetary payment that may be fulfilled at a later time. The discourse among villages in Great Britain's southern and eastern regions used the Englisc dialisc. But Gailic was still the dialect used in the western and northern regions including the mountainous areas in Scotland. Englisc was the primary language of the Anglosaxon ruler and repressors. Meanwhile before the Normans invaded England, they spoke the Old French dialect and wrote in Latin. After the invasion of France, the dialect transference paved the way for Anglo-Norman.
Parliamentary records remained to be written in Latin in the 13th century, but the Anglo-Norman language was beginning to be used by tenants requesting fro petition. Many problems that arose among tenants in chief drove King Edward II to address the problem through a speech in Parliament. He spoke in Anglo-Norman, which marked the shift in language use at the Parliament. Spatial Cues in Anglo-Nornan manifested in the words that were used to addressed the rulers, which also evolved from other languages to English. For examples: From Dux (Latin) to Duke (English); archiepiskopos (Greek) to Archbiship (English); seior (French) to sir, sire, lord (English). By 1362, the chancellor used the English language to open the Parliament although the summary report was still in Anglo Saxon. Parliamentary reports started to use English in 1394 which was an order by King Richard II for Earl Arundel to apologize to the Duke of Acquitaine and Lancaster.
Linguistic problems that drive a dramatic change in text even in sacred documents and books, like the Qur'an. AA set of stylistic and linguistic proof to restructure a precanonical text in the Qur'an uses the traditional Arabic language to signify a close association to the Arabic culture and linguistic system. However, the scripture that the book is based on is codified in Greek and Hebrew, and the books circulation was primarily in Syria, which also hosted many liturgical texts in Arabic. Thus, one can see influences of other languages mixed with Arabic in the book. Historically, it was in the ninth century that its orthography fully evolved to completely embody the texts' sound structure. Linguistic specialists supervised its final orthography, in which the inconsistent text was organized and the framework preserved according to the standards of classical Arabic and its derivative language of old Arabic poetry. The oral transmission of the Qur'an that is based on tradition is vital in preserving the fundamental framework of he sacred book.
The church was a significant influence in the English Parliamentary. Even with its text, it began using curial lines using the English language in the 15th century, making curial prose common entities that took on a literary level even for documents from the people. Despite grave restrictions by curial style, compilers at the Parliament still delivered interesting accounts that suggested literary skills. Still it was not seen as the onset of literary development but an act reminiscent of the Anglo French literary expression. Because it was not encouraged or complimented, the century saw written entries that were stiff and lacking of rhetoric structure. The transmission of curial style from written language to literary prose was not a new phenomenon. In the late fifteenth century curial features were found in literary prose. These features include dedicatory epistles, epilogues and prologues, where it is apparent that the author wants to use a more respectful style of treating subjects. It is an indication that the subject is important.
The Roman Empire encouraged bilingualism with usage of Latin languages that eventually became romance languages. But Classical Latin or written Imperial Latin was immortalized through the liturgy, law, history, commerce and education. But the fall of the empire dragged Classical Latin back to a slow pace, and elevated oral tradition in business and government. The new rulers found it hard to write in Latin, or even use writing for secular government. For six centuries, writing became purely ceremonial. Latin writing was essentially associated with the Roman Church, which carried on the Empire's mantle. Latin was a symbol of importance and ambition. As a national language it served as the core of national memory. Latin enabled the growth and transmission of national traditions. Through the language living on in liturgy, jurisprudence, literature, administration and education, the Roman Empire lived on. But Latin continued to be displaced in many European countries because of the usage of vernacular languages, furthering the decline of Roman influence. It was during the 10th century that a King Alfred insisted on replacing written Latin with a vernacular. As a result, his secretariat set off to establish a national standard.
The creation of Anglo Saxon standards has been attribute to the Benedictine reform because its oldest documents were written in other European vernaculars were linked with religious activities which indicated clear resistance to Roman rule. Charlemagne in 789 asked the clergy to utilize the vernaculars for fulfilling the laity's needs, because he believed that there is no need to worship God using three languages. When man's prayers are just, God hears them regardless of the language used. Such declaration of the emperor marked the birth of European nationalism and national languages. Two decades later the Council of Tours ordered the written Roman or German translations for the comprehension of the faithful. When a program was established to translate liturgical documents from Latin to English, it was met with religious and linguistic resistance: Luther translated the bible to German, Wycliffite wrote in traditional English, Calvin insisted on writing theological treatises in French. Standards language continued to be used in government and businesses. The first examples of official documents that were written in the vernacular were the Strassburg Oaths in 842 Louis and Charles against Emperor Lothair, and 960's Placiti Cassinesi, which did not reduce the extempore phrases of the vernacular.
These examples exemplified the usage of chancellery where the judge required Latin formulas for the witnesses to swear by using the languages French or Italian. As witnesses, they knew about the Latin formulas and used the vernacular only the audience's sake. Writers that had not been educated in Latin were not allowed to do free and extempore composition during that time. As an documents with official Latin translation into the vernacular began to decline the what was considered the age of memory where people wrote in the dialect and not the standard language.

Dictatorship Establish Standards for Written Political Discourse
Standard European languages rose during the Middle Ages at the same time dialects dwindled. The same has happened in varied histories of languages around the world. Standard languages in general surfaced in written forms and were established not by literary people but by government secretariats. Oral standards were created in the 17th and 18th century basing their pronunciation and grammar on the standards of written form. It is a less recognized part of history because speech has always been considered the primary form of language treating written language as a supportive entity of speech. Linguists also extol the uncertainty of the link between writing and speech. But the written form is important to all forms of language with some, like Mathematics, that are almost impossible to expression without it. Logic also relies on writing in terms of definition, organization and formulation. Historically speaking it is also illogical for to give to much credit to speech when there is much more link between thinking and writing. The six standard languages in Europe during the early days were Hebrew, Anglo-Saxon, Greek, Old Church Slavonic, Arabic, and Latin. By the twentieth century, there were already 23 European languages.
Standard languages in Europe are gaining ground in the present century, which is the source of the biggest number of new languages. Historically spoken European dialects signify a continuum in which people in the villages can understand each other whether the village is located in the northern, southern, eastern or western...