Opinion In a snap
Of inches, miles and all things said in pursuit of a catchy phrase
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s noted penchant for snappy acronyms and phrases is on display as we “inch towards miles” of cooperation with visiting Chinese President Xi Jinping. Since he began campaigning in earnest for the job of PM, Modi has deployed slogan after political slogan to, variously, put down opponents (“BJP is for mission, Congress is for commission”), promise a change in the governor-governed relationship (“shasak nahi sevak”) and argue for old-fashioned conservatism (“minimum government, maximum governance”). In his almost-four months as PM, he has offered Japan a “red carpet, not red tape” while pledging to the Indian people, in no particular order, 5Ts, 4Ps, 3Ss and 3Ds.
Of course, as a prolific dispenser of political jargon, Modi is not alone. The United States Congress specialises in catchy names for assorted pieces of legislation: a serendipitous encounter with a Rolling Stones hit led to a bill to make pet-care expenses tax deductible being christened HAPPY (Humanity and Pets Partnered through the Years), and though the Democrats’ DREAM of immigration reform was shot down, it agreed to DISCLOSE sources of campaign finance. These acts of creative expression also saw PATRIOTs in Congress pass the Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism bill post-9/11; ironically, George W. Bush, who was president, implies it was unpatriotic in his memoirs. The impulse to use acronyms is so embedded that a 2011 White House memo calling on federal workers to stop using “confusing, technical and acronym-filled language” created the Plain Language Action and Information Network, PLAIN.
Even the sometimes-starchy grandee of political language, George Orwell, acknowledged that “political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness”. For those in a creative jam, one website has a three-word slogan generator that yields gems such as “solid on banks” and “upfront on votes”. Evidence suggests it could be worse.
Share
