"Soft" Linguistic Terrorism: A Theory (Mena, 2023)

Summary

In this video, Mike explores the concept of 'soft linguistic terrorism,' an updated take on Gloria Anzaldúa's 1980s theory of linguistic terrorism. The discussion delves into the subtle yet pervasive forms of linguistic discrimination faced by Latinos in the U.S., moving from physical punishment to more covert methods like ideological recruitment and incentivization. Mike's personal narrative illustrates how these practices have spanned generations, from his mother's experiences to his own role as a teacher, perpetuating a cycle of racial and linguistic trauma. The video challenges viewers to consider the insidious nature of soft power in language and its impact on cultural identity.

Takeaways

• 📚 The video discusses an updated version of 'linguistic terrorism', a concept originally developed by Gloria Anzaldúa in the 1980s to describe racist attacks on Latino linguistic practices.
• 🏫 Historically, Latino students were physically punished for speaking Spanish in schools, a practice that has evolved into more subtle forms of linguistic discrimination.
• 🌐 The term 'soft linguistic terrorism' is used to describe contemporary, less overt methods of discrimination that still aim to suppress non-dominant languages and cultures.
• 🔄 The video draws parallels between 'soft power' in international relations and the softer, yet still impactful, forms of linguistic terrorism.
• 👥 The script highlights the insidious nature of 'soft Terror', which operates through ideological recruitment and incentivization rather than direct punishment.
• 👩‍🏫 The speaker shares a personal narrative involving three generations affected by linguistic terrorism, illustrating how its effects can span decades and generations.
• 🏛️ The video critiques the enforcement of 'standard language' as a colonial and white supremacist fantasy, arguing that it's an unrealistic and unattainable ideal.
• 🎓 The speaker's experience as a teacher reflects how soft linguistic terrorism can be perpetuated unintentionally through well-meaning but misguided actions.
• 🌟 The script challenges the notion that valuing a language while devaluing its speakers represents progress, suggesting it may be a form of soft linguistic terrorism.
• 🔗 The video connects the dots between individual experiences, institutional policies, and broader societal attitudes to show how linguistic terrorism is a systemic issue.

Q & A

What is the main topic of the video script?

The main topic of the video script is 'soft linguistic terrorism,' an updated concept based on Gloria Anzaldúa's theory of linguistic terrorism from the 1980s, which discusses the subtle and indirect forms of linguistic discrimination against Latinos in the United States.

What is the difference between 'old school linguistic terrorism' and 'soft linguistic terrorism'?

Old school linguistic terrorism involved direct punishment or the threat of punishment for non-standard language use, such as hitting students for speaking Spanish. Soft linguistic terrorism, on the other hand, operates through ideological recruitment and incentivization, where individuals are subtly encouraged or rewarded to adopt the dominant language norms without overt punishment.

How does the concept of 'soft power' relate to 'soft linguistic terrorism'?

The concept of 'soft power' is used as an analogy to explain 'soft linguistic terrorism.' While 'soft power' refers to indirect means of influencing others (like economic leverage or intelligence sharing), 'soft linguistic terrorism' refers to the subtle, non-violent methods used to enforce linguistic norms, which can be just as effective as the direct methods of old school linguistic terrorism.

What is the role of 'ideological recruitment' in soft linguistic terrorism?

Ideological recruitment in soft linguistic terrorism involves the process where individuals are subtly encouraged to adopt the dominant linguistic norms without direct coercion. This can happen through socialization within a family, education system, or society, where the dominant norms are presented as the standard, leading individuals to accept and internalize these norms.

Can you explain the 'incentivization' process mentioned in the script?

Incentivization in the context of soft linguistic terrorism is the process of offering rewards or benefits to individuals who conform to the dominant linguistic norms. This could include academic recognition, job opportunities, or social acceptance, which motivates individuals to adopt the preferred language practices.

What is the significance of the multigenerational effects discussed in the script?

The multigenerational effects discussed in the script highlight how experiences of linguistic terrorism can span across generations, influencing the linguistic practices and identities of families and communities. It shows how past experiences of linguistic terrorism can lead to long-lasting effects, even when the direct forms of punishment are no longer present.

How does the script connect the personal experiences of the speaker to the broader concept of linguistic terrorism?

The script connects the personal experiences of the speaker to the broader concept of linguistic terrorism by illustrating how the speaker's mother's experiences with old school linguistic terrorism influenced the speaker's upbringing and language practices. This personal narrative is then used to explore how soft linguistic terrorism operates and perpetuates racial and linguistic trauma across generations.

What is the role of education in perpetuating soft linguistic terrorism according to the script?

According to the script, education plays a significant role in perpetuating soft linguistic terrorism by reinforcing the value of dominant linguistic norms and often incentivizing students to adopt these norms for academic and social success. Educators may unintentionally contribute to this process by promoting the idea that proficiency in the dominant language is necessary for success.

How does the script challenge the notion of 'standard language'?

The script challenges the notion of 'standard language' by arguing that the idea of a perfect or standard language is a colonial, white supremacist fantasy. It suggests that the enforcement of such an ideal is a key element of linguistic terrorism, as it perpetuates the idea that non-dominant linguistic practices are inferior or deficient.

What is the significance of the shift from old school linguistic terrorism to soft linguistic terrorism in the context of the University mentioned in the script?

The shift from old school linguistic terrorism to soft linguistic terrorism at the University mentioned in the script signifies an evolution in the methods used to enforce linguistic norms. While the old methods were more overtly violent and punitive, the newer methods are more subtle and may involve ideological recruitment and incentivization. This shift also reflects a change in societal attitudes towards language and discrimination.