Newspeak language police reminiscent of age-old tyranny.

Sometimes when I drive to work, I like to listen to CBC radio. While I have my misgivings about state-funded radio, it does do a good job on keeping me updated on what's going on. Something I heard this week quickly reminded me of George Orwell's classic 1984 and the whole concept of Newspeak. For those of you who haven't read 1984, check out what Newspeak is here Apparently at Queens University, certain words and phrases are becoming Verboten.

Queens University in Kingston Ontario must not have read this timeless piece of literature.
Queens has announced that they will be hiring a handful of students who will act as what they call "Conversation Facilitators." The job of these euphemistically-named students is to monitor the discussion taking place in the halls of Queens University. These "facilitators" will be keeping their ears open for anything the institution regards as a racial slur or discriminatory comment. Upon hearing an unacceptable comment the linguistic KGB are authorized to step in and confront the offending students. Phrases like "That's so gay" are target phrases.

"If people are having a conversation with offensive content and they're doing it loud enough for a third person to hear it ... it's not private," said one of the officials from Queens.

Now think about this for a moment. On the surface it could appear to be a just a well-meant program to stop students from making hurtful comments about certain groups. However, I think this program should be called for what it is: an Orwellian surveillance program reminiscent of fascist and communist regimes. This reminds me of governments that threaten or bribe average citizens to spy and report on their friends and neighbors.

First of all, the whole concept of discriminatory comments and slurs is ambiguous and highly subjective. The basis for what is acceptable and what isn't is most likely decided by the Queens establishment. This means it is subjective to the whims of THEIR value systems. This means that simply commenting that homosexuality it a sinful and dangerous lifestyle could potentially be construed as a derogatory remark if that is wrong in their eyes.

Secondly, as someone else pointed out, what kind of an environment does this foster. Doesn't this only discourage dialog and debate when people are afraid to speak their minds? Imagine living in a society that adopted this system and listened in to your conversations. Whether by wiretap, surveillance technology, or simply patrolling the streets and fishing for careless remarks. It would be frightening.

Lastly, this is a very dangerous trend to start setting. We have had far too many examples of totalitarian societies who have resorted to spying on their citizens and squelching free speech. We might not like what others have to say. However, part of preserving OUR right to say what our conscience demands is to allow others to speak their mind. This doesn't mean friends cannot correct and challenge friends but to set up an eavesdropping program like this is frightening.
It's both sad and frustrating that an institution of learning in one of the finest countries in the entire world would be taking us down the footpath of totalitarianism.