As my first year at Wellesley comes to an end, I think back not just to the people and places, but also the sounds. The waves by the lake, music in the Quint, and the clatter of plates in the dining hall play through my mind. Outside of Wellesley, a shift is happening. The ways in which language can be used and weaponized are becoming increasingly apparent in the current political climate. Noticing this, I found myself connecting the noises around me to the echoes of that language. Every aspect of language influences how we perceive the world and understand one another.
In politics, language not only expresses opinions but actively shapes them. Politicians use repetition and pointed framing to present certain ideas as inevitable and inescapable. This appears, for instance, in Donald Trump’s recent profanity-laden and aggressive language on Truth Social regarding Iran. His dehumanizing immigration targeting and how he speaks of enemies of the state influence the ways people think about and want to talk about those issues. His language normalizes violence and suppresses typical American political discourse.
The shift is most noticeable after the 2016 presidential election, when Trump first ran for office. Before then, American political discourse was characterized by its formal language and emphasis on policy details, even though polarization was rising. In the 1960s, political parties were noticeably distinct, allowing less overlap and an easy way to confront opposing views. Political discourse remained steady, but in spite of that formal discourse, the distrust of candidates existed all the same.
Trump is not the only one to blame for this change in rhetoric, but the extreme urgency with which it became a concern is thanks to him. The blatant extremism and attacks splattered across headlines and social media platforms can be seen for miles. There are critics, like myself, who see this as a threat to democratic norms and a plague for political parties. Then there are the supporters, who see it as the necessary disruption society is long overdue for.
These concerns, however, are constantly overlooked. The MAGA camp claims they are simply responding to voters and blames the media for their obsession with rhetoric. This does more than communicate his views; these slogans simplify the complex issues that lead to disagreement. Such rhetorical choices elevate the stakes, leading supporters to perceive compromise as defeat rather than negotiation.
Similar rhetorical strategies are evident globally. In Europe, some leaders describe increasing migration as a “wave” or “flood,” conveying a sense of overwhelming magnitude. Such terminology shifts attention away from individual experiences and fosters a perception of threat, making strict policies appear more justified or urgent.
These rhetorical patterns are not limited to national or global politics; they also emerge right here at Wellesley. On Sidechat, for example, anonymous posts often exaggerate or generalize experiences rather than create meaningful conversation. Just as political slogans do, some posts reduce situations to pure black-and-white issues. Removing the nuance and encouraging us to accept judgments about what we might not fully understand. Although the scale is smaller, the effect shows how prominent these issues are daily. Language shapes a community’s ability to create either division or connection.
This year, I saw how topics can permeate a variety of campus conversations. The effects of spreading powerful rhetoric can unite individuals and promote mutual understanding. Still, on another level, it can generate hostility and confusion. We must therefore remain increasingly aware and attentive to how we employ language.
As citizens, we bear the responsibility not only to recognize rhetoric but also to engage with it thoughtfully. We should critically examine the repeated phrases and framing that influence our beliefs before accepting them as truth. It is equally important to reflect on the language we use in any space, as our words shape our environment. Rhetoric can be used to incite fear and division, but it can also strengthen connection. Wellesley has underscored the importance of attentive listening and thoughtful speech, not only in the academic setting but also as a foundation for active participation in democracy and for cultivating stronger communities.
On campus, in our communities and in the wider world, the political consequences of language are too serious to ignore. What we practice now — how we speak, listen and respond — will shape not only the kind of summer we have, but the kind of citizens and communities we become.
Contact the editors responsible for this article: Caitlin Donovan, Avery Finley
