essay on politics and power

Sample essay on Politics as Power

Finally, we come to the broadest definition of politics. Adrian Leftwich insists that political science should adopt a process definition of politics rather than focus on institutions of government. He says, “Politics is not a separate realm of public life and activity.

On the contrary, politics comprise all the activities of cooperation and conflict, within and between societies, whereby; human species goes about organising the use, production and distribution of human, natural and other resources in the course of production and reproduction of its biological and social life”.

Rather than confining politics to a particular sphere like the state, the government or the public domain this view understands politics as an aspect of all social relations and social activities. Leftwich further says, “……………………….. Politic is at the heart of all collective social activity, formal and informal, public an< private, in all human groups, institutions and societies”. Politics, in this view takes place at every level of social interaction; from the domestic sphere the global stage.

What distinguishes politics from all other forms of social behavior is the existence of power. Power is the ability to achieve a desired result, through whatever means. Politics is in essence power. Harold Lass well’s book “Politics Who Gets What, When, How?” presents such a view of politics. Hence politic is about disagreement and conflicts over scarce resources. Power is the mean through which this struggle is conducted.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Marxists and feminists also advocate such a view of power. Karl Marx, the founder of the ideology of communism, located the roots of political power in the class structure of society. However, politics is not only about oppression and domination, it is also a means through which exploitation and injustice can be challenged.

Feminists hold a similar view, but on a different basis from the Marxists. They oppose the exclusion of the family and domestic responsibilities from the domain of politics. Modern feminists have attacked the public/private divide and proclaim that “the personal is political”. They believe that what goes on in the domestic and personal life is political simply because there is exercise of power in these spheres of life too.

Kate Millet, hence, defined politics as “power structured relationships, arrangements whereby one group of persons is controlled by another”. Such a notion of politics has helped to bring to light a new dimension of women’s position in family and society.

The four conceptions of politics and political science present a fair view of what a student, stepping into this discipline for the first time, is going to study in future. While it cautions us about serious disagreements among scholars on the definition of the subject, it also exposes us to a broader view of its meaning, nature and scope.

Related Articles:

• Essay on Politics as Public Affairs
• Here is your free sample essay on Politics
• Essay on Politics as the Art of Government
• 737 words comprehensive essay on Politics

Essay on Politics for Students and Children

500+ words essay on politics.

When we hear the term politics, we usually think of the government, politicians and political parties. For a country to have an organized government and work as per specific guidelines, we require a certain organization. This is where politics comes in, as it essentially forms the government. Every country, group and organization use politics to instrument various ways to organize their events, prospects and more.

Politics does not limit to those in power in the government. It is also about the ones who are in the run to achieve the same power. The candidates of the opposition party question the party on power during political debates . They intend to inform people and make them aware of their agenda and what the present government is doing. All this is done with the help of politics only.

Dirty Politics

Dirty politics refers to the kind of politics in which moves are made for the personal interest of a person or party. It ignores the overall development of a nation and hurts the essence of the country. If we look at it closely, there are various constituents of dirty politics.

The ministers of various political parties, in order to defame the opposition, spread fake news and give provocative speeches against them. This hampers with the harmony of the country and also degrades the essence of politics . They pass sexist remarks and instill hate in the hearts of people to watch their party win with a majority of seats.

Read 500 Words Essay on Corruption Here

Furthermore, the majority of politicians are corrupt. They abuse their power to advance their personal interests rather than that of the country. We see the news flooded with articles like ministers and their families involving in scams and illegal practices. The power they have makes them feel invincible which is why they get away with any crime.

Before coming into power, the government makes numerous promises to the public. They influence and manipulate them into thinking all their promises will be fulfilled. However, as soon as they gain power, they turn their back on the public. They work for their selfish motives and keep fooling people in every election. Out of all this, only the common suffers at the hands of lying and corrupt politicians.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Lack of Educated Ministers

If we look at the scenario of Indian elections, any random person with enough power and money can contest the elections. They just need to be a citizen of the country and be at least 25 years old. There are a few clauses too which are very easy.

The strangest thing is that contesting for elections does not require any minimum education qualification. Thus, we see how so many uneducated and non-deserving candidates get into power and then misuse it endlessly. A country with uneducated ministers cannot develop or even be on the right path.

We need educated ministers badly in the government. They are the ones who can make the country progress as they will handle things better than the illiterate ones. The candidates must be well-qualified in order to take on a big responsibility as running an entire nation. In short, we need to save our country from corrupt and uneducated politicians who are no less than parasites eating away the development growth of the country and its resources. All of us must unite to break the wheel and work for the prosperous future of our country.

FAQs on Politics

Q.1 Why is the political system corrupt?

A.1 Political system is corrupt because the ministers in power exercise their authority to get away with all their crimes. They bribe everyone into working for their selfish motives making the whole system corrupt.

Q.2 Why does India need educated ministers?

A.2 India does not have a minimum educational qualification requirement for ministers. This is why the uneducated lot is corrupting the system and pushing the country to doom. We need educated ministers so they can help the country develop with their progressive thinking.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Comparison Between Power and Politics Essay

Power and politics.

Power and politics is international relations where sovereigns try to protect interests of their own through use of political and military aggression to threaten each other. Power and politics help to understand helps to understand relationship between international nations as they compete for resources and each nation feel advantaged if it is capable of harming the others. Power and politics use techniques such as development of nuclear, blackmail, bloodletting and economic sanctions. (Thornton, 1999)

Comparing power and politics in organizations

Power and politics is used in organizations where working environment has set many goals and objectives to be met. In the process of meeting the goals, conflict arises and competition between the workers. The competitions affect the way power and politics is used and every individual should understand positive and negative effects of use of politics together with power because; both of them contribute to success of organization if they are applied appropriately. Politics in social relations involves use of power or authority by interlocking politics together with power in daily structure and business functions. Size of organization determines the complexity of politics because; larger companies has politics that are more complex and the manager needs to be more powerful in dealing with politics that might arise.

Comparison between power and politics arise where structure of management is both horizontal and vertical because; politics become successful in vertical structure where a successful leader becomes the manger and is able to lead the rest of staff member by influencing and motivating them. Another comparison is that every politic uses power to act as control mechanism. For example, Marcus who is an employee of BMW has a firm dealing with automobiles and has the idea of creating his own electric car capable of being modified by anyone. By doing this, everyone will have the right to contribute in improving its quality without any risk or payment of royalty fees but Markus beliefs that, technological innovation would be stifled by corporate politics. (Thornton, 1999)

Contrasting power and politics in organizations

Power involves possessing and controlling the influence and being able to tell someone that he should do something that you want him/her to do. Power acts as a force with political influence of the events which may be affected. Politics on the other hand is found everywhere and influence affairs of people and their life. Management understands response of people and how they are influenced by power and politics but difference between power and politics arise in management that is structured vertically in comparison with horizontal management. If the management is structure vertically, formal authority is involved with the manager having power and the authority in him is influenced vertically from above but not from below him.

Analysis of organizational management and leadership practices that impact organizations

Reengineering as a theory of managing change concentrates on how the organization is able to get its things done. Implementation of better processes helps organization to be efficient by ensuring use people to do things in the right manner. People should have positive attitude towards the work they do and work hard all the time to make organization more productive. When new technology arise, people should adjust to the accordingly so that the quality of products are improved to satisfy the needs of consumers. Total quality management emphasizes on people and their importance to organization and processes by focusing on planned process and process that are already in existence.

Most organizations have the problem of becoming organized for them to succeed in competition. For an organization to be efficient and productive, good organization is not enough because; social change is necessary and adapting to new and rapidly changing technology. This will enable managers get new ideas and meet the challenges involved in daily activities within the organization. Organization problems are solved by reducing discrepancy existing between desired state and actual state of organization affairs. Self identified person in the organization works hard for the benefit of organization as whole. There are practices of leadership that relates to identification of organization of members to make sure the organization is strong and productive. (Walford, 2003)

Two Real-World Examples of the Relationship between Power and Politics Given the Current Economy, and How This Relates To Management and Leadership Practices

According to (Walford, 2003) Data was provided to show that cancer was caused by tobacco. This made the public influence politicians through development of power against industry that manufactures tobacco. Act that prevented smoking of tobacco was introduced and data was made available by Laura to show that death as a result of smoking tobacco is the most preventable in America and children smoke cigarette everyday. The influence gave three congressmen power to ensure that the bill against smoking tobacco was passed into law.

In businesses, management structure is informal especially if business is owned by the family. The growth in these businesses is faster although the founder is not able to offer professional management. This is acceptable if business continue remain small but if business include people who are not part of family members, there is pressure for management structure to be reviewed so that successors of the business can be known to make sure the business has a secure future. (Walford, 2003)

Thornton P. (1999): Logics and the Historical Contingency of Power in Organizations: Chicago Press pp26-30

Walford G. (2003): politics and power in the management of change: Routledge Kegan & Paul pp45-40

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, December 5). Comparison Between Power and Politics. https://ivypanda.com/essays/comparison-between-power-and-politics/

"Comparison Between Power and Politics." IvyPanda , 5 Dec. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/comparison-between-power-and-politics/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'Comparison Between Power and Politics'. 5 December.

IvyPanda . 2021. "Comparison Between Power and Politics." December 5, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/comparison-between-power-and-politics/.

1. IvyPanda . "Comparison Between Power and Politics." December 5, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/comparison-between-power-and-politics/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Comparison Between Power and Politics." December 5, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/comparison-between-power-and-politics/.

• Exxon Mobile Corporation's Vertically-Integrated Structure
• Vertically Integrated Approach: Intermountain Healthcare
• Vertical Integrated Firms: Transaction Cost Economies
• McDonald's: Business Recommendation
• Vertical and Horizontal Integration Comparison
• Vertical vs. Horizontal Integration for Competition
• Vertical Integration in Business Organisations
• Horizontal and Vertical Integration in Companies
• Vertical and Horizontal Integration
• Curriculum Development: Horizontal and Vertical Alignment
• Argentina and Chile: Socio Political Discrepancies
• African Americans Conspiracy Theory Among About Not Trusting the Government
• Functionalism in the Marxist Venezuelan State
• Comparative Politics in Compulsory Politics
• How Demographic Changes Will Affect Economic Activity over the Next Decade or Two?

Liberal Democracy in Crisis pp 125–161 Cite as

Politics and Resistance As Power

• Alen Toplišek 4  
• First Online: 13 September 2018

792 Accesses

Part of the book series: The Theories, Concepts and Practices of Democracy ((PSTCD))

This chapter seeks to reconceptualise our understanding of resistance in radical politics through the notion of power. Rejecting a romanticised view of resistance in radical politics, the author argues that resistant practices cannot operate outside of the network of power relations since they form a structural part of it. Through a critical juxtaposition of Michel Foucault’s and Hannah Arendt’s conceptions of politics and power, the author problematises the conventional understanding of power as something that is necessarily repressive and negative. Using Foucault’s concept of counter-conduct, the chapter further elucidates the circularity of power between extra-institutional resistance and institutional politics. It concludes that ruling and governing is an inescapable component of radicalising democracy against neoliberal governmentality.

• Social movementsSocial Movements
• violenceViolence
• Michel Concept
• governmentGovernment

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

More recently, notable overtures have been made in the sociological study of social movements with calls to pay greater attention to the relationship between social movements and political parties (see, e.g., Goldstone 2003 ; Kriesi 2015 ). I will address this more concrete aspect of the relationship between resistance and institutional politics in Chap. 6 .

The debate on the relationship between vertical and horizontal forms of radical politics can also be framed in terms of the opposition between the politics of hegemony on one side and horizontal multitude on the other. Kioupkiolis and Katsambekis ( 2014 ) see the first camp as represented by political theorists, such as Chantal Mouffe, Ernesto Laclau and Slavoj Žižek, and the latter by Antonio Negri, Michael Hardt, Richard Day, John Holloway, Saul Newman, and Manuel Castels.

Arendt, Hannah. 1958. The Human Condition . Republished. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998.

Google Scholar  

———. 1969. Crises of the Republic, on Violence . Republished, London: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1972.

———. 2005. The Promise of Politics . New York: Schocken Books.

Bachrach, Peter, and Morton S. Baratz. 1962. Two Faces of Power. The American Political Science Review 56 (4): 947–952.

Article   Google Scholar  

Badiou, Alain. 2005. Metapolitics . London: Verso.

Benjamin, Walter. 1996. Walter Benjamin: Selected Writings, Volume 1, 1913–1926 . Ed. Marcus Bullock and Michael W. Jennings. Reprinted, London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Berman, Sheri. 2006. The Primacy of Politics: Social Democracy and the Making of Europe’s Twentieth Century . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Brown, Wendy. 2008. Power After Foucault. In The Oxford Handbook of Political Theory , ed. John S. Dryzek, Bonnie Honig, and Anne Phillips, 65–84. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Burchell, Graham. 1996. Liberal Government and Techniques of the Self. In Foucault and Political Reason: Liberalism, Neo-liberalism and Rationalities of Government , ed. Andrew Barry, Thomas Osborne, and Nikolas Rose, 19–36. London: UCL Press.

Caygill, Howard. 2013. On Resistance: A Philosophy of Defiance . London: Bloomsbury.

Chambers, Samuel A. 2013. The Lessons of Rancière . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dahl, Robert A. 2005. Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City . 2nd ed. London: Yale University Press.

Dean, Jodi. 2012. The Communist Horizon . London: Verso.

Derrida, Jacques. 1992. Force of Law: The “Mystical Foundation of Authority”. In Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice , ed. Drucilla Cornell, Michel Rosenfeld, and David Gray Carlson, 3–67. London: Routledge.

Digeser, Peter. 1992. The Fourth Face of Power. The Journal of Politics 54 (4): 977–1007.

Foucault, Michel. 1978. The Will to Knowledge: The History of Sexuality . Vol. 1. London: Penguin Books.

———. 1982. Afterword: The Subject and Power. In Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics , ed. Hubert L. Dreyfus and Paul Rabinow, 208–226. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

———. 2008. The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978–1979 . Ed. Michel Senellart. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

———. 2009. Security, Territory, Population , Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978 . Ed. Michel Senellart. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Goldstone, Jack A., ed. 2003. States, Parties, and Social Movements . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gramsci, Antonio. 1971. S elections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci . Ed. and Trans. Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith. Oxford: University Printing House.

Hardt, Michael, and Antonio Negri. 2004. Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire . London: Penguin Books.

Haugaard, Mark. 2002. Power: A Reader . Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Hobbes, Thomas. 1651. Leviathan or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Common Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil . Available at: http://socserv2.socsci.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/hobbes/Leviathan.pdf . 30 Sept 2014.

Holler, Manfred J. 2009. Niccolò Machiavelli on Power. RMM 0: 335–354. Available at: http://www.rmm-journal.de/downloads/025_holler.pdf . 30 Sept 2014.

Jessop, Bob. 2007. State Power: A Strategic-Relational Approach . Cambridge: Polity Press.

Kioupkiolis, Alexandros, and Giorgos Katsambekis, eds. 2014. Radical Democracy and Collective Movements Today: The Biopolitics of the Multitude Versus the Hegemony of the People . Farnham: Ashgate.

Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2015. Party Systems, Electoral Systems, and Social Movements. In The Oxford Handbook of Social Movements , ed. Donatella della Porta and Mario Diani, 667–680. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lukes, Steven. 2005. Power: A Radical View . 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Machiavelli, Niccolò. 1903. The Prince. Trans. Luigi Ricci. Reprinted, London: Oxford University Press. Available at: https://archive.org/details/princemac00machuoft . 14 July 2015.

MacLeod, Dag. 2004. Downsizing the State: Privatization and the Limits of Neoliberal Reform in Mexico . University Park: Penn State University Press.

Michels, Robert. 1962. Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy . New York: The Free Press.

Mouffe, Chantal. 2005. On the Political . London: Routledge.

———. 2013. Agonistics: Thinking the World Politically . London: Verso.

Olney, Patricia. 2012. Globalization, Transition, and Insecurity in Mexico. In Latin American Responses to Globalization in the 21st Century , ed. Manuela Nilsson and Jan Gustafsson, 149–170. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Rancière, Jacques. 1999. Disagreement: Politics and Philosophy . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

———. 2010. Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthetics . London: Continuum International Publishing Group.

Sitrin, Marina, and Dario Azzellini. 2014. They Can’t Represent Us! Reinventing Democracy from Greece to Occupy . London: Verso.

Villa, Dana. 1996. Arendt and Heidegger: The Fate of the Political . Chichester: Princeton University Press.

Weber, Max. 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology . Ed. Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich. London: University of California Press.

Žižek, Slavoj. 2009. In Defense of Lost Causes . London: Verso.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Politics and International Studies, SOAS University of London, London, UK

Alen Toplišek

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Toplišek, A. (2019). Politics and Resistance As Power. In: Liberal Democracy in Crisis. The Theories, Concepts and Practices of Democracy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97937-3_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97937-3_5

Published : 13 September 2018

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-97936-6

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-97937-3

eBook Packages : Political Science and International Studies Political Science and International Studies (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

A Summary and Analysis of George Orwell’s ‘Politics and the English Language’

By Dr Oliver Tearle (Loughborough University)

‘Politics and the English Language’ (1946) is one of the best-known essays by George Orwell (1903-50). As its title suggests, Orwell identifies a link between the (degraded) English language of his time and the degraded political situation: Orwell sees modern discourse (especially political discourse) as being less a matter of words chosen for their clear meanings than a series of stock phrases slung together.

You can read ‘Politics and the English Language’ here before proceeding to our summary and analysis of Orwell’s essay below.

‘Politics and the English Language’: summary

Orwell begins by drawing attention to the strong link between the language writers use and the quality of political thought in the current age (i.e. the 1940s). He argues that if we use language that is slovenly and decadent, it makes it easier for us to fall into bad habits of thought, because language and thought are so closely linked.

Orwell then gives five examples of what he considers bad political writing. He draws attention to two faults which all five passages share: staleness of imagery and lack of precision . Either the writers of these passages had a clear meaning to convey but couldn’t express it clearly, or they didn’t care whether they communicated any particular meaning at all, and were simply saying things for the sake of it.

Orwell writes that this is a common problem in current political writing: ‘prose consists less and less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning, and more and more of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated hen-house.’

Next, Orwell elaborates on the key faults of modern English prose, namely:

Dying Metaphors : these are figures of speech which writers lazily reach for, even though such phrases are worn-out and can no longer convey a vivid image. Orwell cites a number of examples, including toe the line , no axe to grind , Achilles’ heel , and swansong . Orwell’s objection to such dying metaphors is that writers use them without even thinking about what the phrases actually mean, such as when people misuse toe the line by writing it as tow the line , or when they mix their metaphors, again, because they’re not interested in what those images evoke.

Operators or Verbal False Limbs : this is when a longer and rather vague phrase is used in place of a single-word (and more direct) verb, e.g. make contact with someone, which essentially means ‘contact’ someone. The passive voice is also common, and writing phrases like by examination of instead of the more direct by examining . Sentences are saved from fizzling out (because the thought or idea being conveyed is not particularly striking) by largely meaningless closing platitudes such as greatly to be desired or brought to a satisfactory conclusion .

Pretentious Diction : Orwell draws attention to several areas here. He states that words like objective , basis , and eliminate are used by writers to dress up simple statements, making subjective opinion sound like scientific fact. Adjectives like epic , historic , and inevitable are used about international politics, while writing that glorifies war is full of old-fashioned words like realm , throne , and sword .

Foreign words and phrases like deus ex machina and mutatis mutandis are used to convey an air of culture and elegance. Indeed, many modern English writers are guilty of using Latin or Greek words in the belief that they are ‘grander’ than home-grown Anglo-Saxon ones: Orwell mentions Latinate words like expedite and ameliorate here. All of these examples are further proof of the ‘slovenliness and vagueness’ which Orwell detects in modern political prose.

Meaningless Words : Orwell argues that much art criticism and literary criticism in particular is full of words which don’t really mean anything at all, e.g. human , living , or romantic . ‘Fascism’, too, has lost all meaning in current political writing, effectively meaning ‘something not desirable’ (one wonders what Orwell would make of the word’s misuse in our current time!).

To prove his point, Orwell ‘translates’ a well-known passage from the Biblical Book of Ecclesiastes into modern English, with all its vagueness of language. ‘The whole tendency of modern prose’, he argues, ‘is away from concreteness.’ He draws attention to the concrete and everyday images (e.g. references to bread and riches) in the Bible passage, and the lack of any such images in his own fabricated rewriting of this passage.

The problem, Orwell says, is that it is too easy (and too tempting) to reach for these off-the-peg phrases than to be more direct or more original and precise in one’s speech or writing.

Orwell advises every writer to ask themselves four questions (at least): 1) what am I trying to say? 2) what words will express it? 3) what image or idiom will make it clearer? and 4) is this image fresh enough to have an effect? He proposes two further optional questions: could I put it more shortly? and have I said anything that is avoidably ugly?

Orthodoxy, Orwell goes on to observe, tends to encourage this ‘lifeless, imitative style’, whereas rebels who are not parroting the ‘party line’ will normally write in a more clear and direct style.

But Orwell also argues that such obfuscating language serves a purpose: much political writing is an attempt to defend the indefensible, such as the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan (just one year before Orwell wrote ‘Politics and the English Language’), in such a euphemistic way that the ordinary reader will find it more palatable.

When your aim is to make such atrocities excusable, language which doesn’t evoke any clear mental image (e.g. of burning bodies in Hiroshima) is actually desirable.

Orwell argues that just as thought corrupts language, language can corrupt thought, with these ready-made phrases preventing writers from expressing anything meaningful or original. He believes that we should get rid of any word which has outworn its usefulness and should aim to use ‘the fewest and shortest words that will cover one’s meaning’.

Writers should let the meaning choose the word, rather than vice versa. We should think carefully about what we want to say until we have the right mental pictures to convey that thought in the clearest language.

Orwell concludes ‘Politics and the English Language’ with six rules for the writer to follow:

i) Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

ii) Never use a long word where a short one will do.

iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.

v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

vi) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

‘Politics and the English Language’: analysis

In some respects, ‘Politics and the English Language’ advances an argument about good prose language which is close to what the modernist poet and thinker T. E. Hulme (1883-1917) argued for poetry in his ‘ A Lecture on Modern Poetry ’ and ‘Notes on Language and Style’ almost forty years earlier.

Although Hulme and Orwell came from opposite ends of the political spectrum, their objections to lazy and worn-out language stem are in many ways the same.

Hulme argued that poetry should be a forge where fresh metaphors are made: images which make us see the world in a slightly new way. But poetic language decays into common prose language before dying a lingering death in journalists’ English. The first time a poet described a hill as being ‘clad [i.e. clothed] with trees’, the reader would probably have mentally pictured such an image, but in time it loses its power to make us see anything.

Hulme calls these worn-out expressions ‘counters’, because they are like discs being moved around on a chessboard: an image which is itself not unlike Orwell’s prefabricated hen-house in ‘Politics and the English Language’.

Of course, Orwell’s focus is English prose rather than poetry, and his objections to sloppy writing are not principally literary (although that is undoubtedly a factor) but, above all, political. And he is keen to emphasise that his criticism of bad language, and suggestions for how to improve political writing, are both, to an extent, hopelessly idealistic: as he observes towards the end of ‘Politics and the English Language’, ‘Look back through this essay, and for certain you will find that I have again and again committed the very faults I am protesting against.’

But what Orwell advises is that the writer be on their guard against such phrases, the better to avoid them where possible. This is why he encourages writers to be more self-questioning (‘What am I trying to say? What words will express it? What image or idiom will make it clearer? Is this image fresh enough to have an effect?’) when writing political prose.

Nevertheless, the link between the standard of language and the kind of politics a particular country, regime, or historical era has is an important one. As Orwell writes: ‘I should expect to find – this is a guess which I have not sufficient knowledge to verify – that the German, Russian and Italian languages have all deteriorated in the last ten or fifteen years, as a result of dictatorship.’

Those writing under a dictatorship cannot write or speak freely, of course, but more importantly, those defending totalitarian rule must bend and abuse language in order to make ugly truths sound more attractive to the general populace, and perhaps to other nations.

In more recent times, the phrase ‘collateral damage’ is one of the more objectionable phrases used about war, hiding the often ugly reality (innocent civilians who are unfortunate victims of violence, but who are somehow viewed as a justifiable price to pay for the greater good).

Although Orwell’s essay has been criticised for being too idealistic, in many ways ‘Politics and the English Language’ remains as relevant now as it was in 1946 when it was first published.

Indeed, to return to Orwell’s opening point about decadence, it is unavoidable that the standard of political discourse has further declined since Orwell’s day. Perhaps it’s time a few more influential writers started heeding his argument?

9 thoughts on “A Summary and Analysis of George Orwell’s ‘Politics and the English Language’”

• Pingback: 10 of the Best Works by George Orwell – Interesting Literature
• Pingback: The Best George Orwell Essays Everyone Should Read – Interesting Literature

YES! Thank you!

A great and useful post. As a writer, I have been seriously offended by the politicization of the language in the past 50 years. Much of this is supposedly to sanitize, de-genderize, or diversity-fie language – exactly as it’s done in Orwell’s “1984.” How did a wonderfully useful word like gay – cheerful or lively – come to mean homosexual? And is optics not a branch of physics? Ironically, when the liberal but sensible JK Rowling criticized the replacement of “woman” with “person who menstruates” SHE was the one attacked. Now, God help us, we hope “crude” spaceships will get humans to Mars – which, if you research the poor quality control in Tesla cars, might in fact be a proper term.

And less anyone out there misread, this or me – I was a civil rights marcher, taught in a girls’ high school (where I got in minor trouble for suggesting to the students that they should aim higher than the traditional jobs of nurse or teacher), and – while somewhat of a mugwump – consider myself a liberal.

But I will fight to keep the language and the history from being 1984ed.

My desert island book would be the Everyman Essays of Orwell which is around 1200 pages. I’ve read it all the way through twice without fatigue and read individual essays endlessly. His warmth and affability help, Even better than Montaigne in this heretic’s view.

• Pingback: Q Marks the Spot 149 (March 2021 Treasure Map) – Quaerentia

I’ll go against the flow here and say Orwell was – at least in part – quite wrong here. If I recall correctly, he was wrong about a few things including, I think, the right way to make a cup of tea! In all seriousness, what he fails to acknowledge in this essay is that language is a living thing and belongs to the people, not the theorists, at all time. If a metaphor changes because of homophone mix up or whatever, then so be it. Many of our expressions we have little idea of now – I think of ‘baited breath’ which almost no one, even those who know how it should be spelt, realise should be ‘abated breath’.

Worse than this though, his ‘rules’ have indeed been taken up by many would-be writers to horrifying effect. I recall learning to make up new metaphors and similes rather than use clichés when I first began training ten years ago or more. I saw some ghastly new metaphors over time which swiftly made me realise that there’s a reason we use the same expressions a great deal and that is they are familiar and do the job well. To look at how to use them badly, just try reading Gregory David Roberts ‘Shantaram’. Similarly, the use of active voice has led to unpalatable writing which lacks character. The passive voice may well become longwinded when badly used, but it brings character when used well.

That said, Orwell is rarely completely wrong. Some of his points – essentially, use words you actually understand and don’t be pretentious – are valid. But the idea of the degradation of politics is really quite a bit of nonsense!

Always good to get some critique of Orwell, Ken! And I do wonder how tongue-in-cheek he was when proposing his guidelines – after all, even he admits he’s probably broken several of his own rules in the course of his essay! I think I’m more in the T. E. Hulme camp than the Orwell – poetry can afford to bend language in new ways (indeed, it often should do just this), and create daring new metaphors and ways of viewing the world. But prose, especially political non-fiction, is there to communicate an argument or position, and I agree that ghastly new metaphors would just get in the way. One of the things that is refreshing reading Orwell is how many of the problems he identified are still being discussed today, often as if they are new problems that didn’t exist a few decades ago. Orwell shows that at least one person was already discussing them over half a century ago!

Absolutely true! When you have someone of Orwell’s intelligence and clear thinking, even when you believe him wrong or misguided, he is still relevant and remains so decades later.

Comments are closed.

Discover more from Interesting Literature

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

Home — Essay Samples — Government & Politics — Political Culture — Power, Legitimacy & Authority: Key Concepts in Understanding Politics

Power, Legitimacy & Authority: Key Concepts in Understanding Politics

• Categories: Political Culture Political Participation

About this sample

Words: 2500 |

13 min read

Published: May 17, 2022

Words: 2500 | Pages: 5 | 13 min read

Table of contents

Introduction, bibliography.

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character give him power. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on 'Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned'? Get original essay - Abraham Lincoln

State of nature

Government formation, political issues, personal loyalty, my changing perspective.

• Beethnam, D., 2001. Political Legitmacy. pp. 107-116.
• Farell, L. O., 2019. Thomas Hobbs on the State on Nature , s.l.: s.n.
• Fieser, J. & Dowden, B., 1995. Internet enclyopedia of philophy; a Peer academic resorce. [Online]
• Available at: https://www.iep.utm.edu/
• [Accessed 2019 2019].
• Jacob Weisberg , 2008. Loyalty; It’s the most overrated virtue in politics.. [Online]
• Available at: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2008/11/loyalty-is-the-most-overrated-virtue-in-politics.html
• Miller, D., 2003. Political Philosophy; A short intorduction. oxford : oxford press .
• Politics, 2002. Andrew heywood. 2nd ed. New York : Palgrave Macmillan.
• Robinson, N., 2019. Justifying power: the legitimation of authority, s.l.: s.n.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

• Expert in: Government & Politics

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 572 words

7 pages / 3092 words

2 pages / 989 words

2 pages / 928 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Political Culture

ABC News. (2011). Twitter: The Political Sex Scandal Response Tool of the 21st Century. Retrieved from [...]

Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning that can undermine the validity of an argument. In the context of politics, the use of logical fallacies can have significant implications for public opinion and decision-making. This [...]

In his book, Thank You for Arguing, Jay Heinrichs explores the use of rhetoric in everyday communication. The book is a comprehensive guide to persuasive language and argues that anyone can improve their ability to argue [...]

According to Max Weber (1968), legitimacy is power in which its acquisition and exercise conforms to established law, power which interprets legal rules and is rational. As such it emphasizes rule of law, constitutionalism and [...]

Kenya is a multi-ethnic society with currently forty four tribes, the Makonde people and the Hindu having been recognized as ethnic communities. The most dominant tribes being the Agikuyu, Kalenjin, Abagusii, Akamba, Abaluhya [...]

Political ideology can be defined as a set of rules, regulations, values ​​or beliefs held by an individual or group of individuals in particular that define or establish norms rather than how society behaves and provides [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free