'Can Control of Written Language Create or Reinforce Power? Essay\r'

'By Daniel Whiting verbiage is the basis of communication among people, indeed if you ostracize the use of specific scripted language you are banning the communication of the ideas behind that language between people. People will still be commensurate to formulate their ideas about the contr everyplacesial subject entirely will find it difficult to spread the intelligence discipline on a large scale. This is because or so widespread media is in compose form like newspapers, books and most online content.\r\nIn our history lessons we have studied the recipe of Joseph Stalin and how he maintained total control over the USSR. He held strict censorship over the countries newspapers and both(prenominal) literature regarding the Soviet way of life and his riegn. Anything reprobate the Bolshevik leadership or critisising them in any way was banned. This clearly helped stop the spread of anti- Stalinist feelings amongst the Russian people and helped grant Stalin unchallenged endure right up until his death.\r\nThis is similar throughout legion(predicate) single party dictatorships in history for congressman Nazi Germany and Mao’s China. Many people may argue that banning original written language is not a way to subvention power. They argue that humans will create opposite words and phrases to get their ideas communicated. For example many historied fable writers even go as removed as to disguise the meaning of their stories behind former(a) language that does not literally mean the analogous thing.\r\nThis way they could spread their criticism of the other without the take a chance of being accused of directly defying the ban. The banning of certain written language backside have a negative effect on our gaining of knowledge. It is depriving our brains from gaining further information from which we rear learn from and use in the future. It sack up be argued however that most of the banned written language in modern civilized countr ies in the west for example is banned for the hold dearion of the indorser and to stop the spread of problems like racism and sexism.\r\nIt can be justified because of the fact that it is trying to protect the pillars of modern society rather than deceiving people into heaviness that is commonly linked with countries ruled under a ruthless dictatorship. Controlling written language can be overcome through clever play that find a way around the ban. however it has been proven to significantly hinder the spread of ideas that may challenge one’s power therefore it can be a useful shit in enforcing and maintaining your power.\r\n'