Alcoholism as poor English (metaphor)
Early in the essay Orwell draws an analogy between a drunk and poor English, stating that the drunk "may take a drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks" (251). The cycle of drunkenness is a metaphor for the degeneration of the English language--the alcoholism itself standing in for the process by which poor thinking leads to poor language, and so on. The important implication is that like alcoholism, the process is not inherent or "natural," but can be broken.
The political partisan as religious acolyte (simile)
Orwell draws comparisons between those who reiterate political lines and religious devotees who recite scripture. He says, "If the speech [the partisan] is making is one that he is accustomed to make over and over again, he may be almost unconscious of what he is saying, as one is when one utters the responses in church. And this reduced state of consciousness, if not indispensable, is at any rate favourable to political conformity" (256). The implication of the comparison is that the political partisan is both obedient and unthinking. They also belong to a flock, or collective to which conformity might be expected on other levels.
Political speech as pantomime (metaphor)
Not unlike the above metaphor is the implicit one of political speech as pantomime. The political partisan who reiterates familiar or stock turns of phrase that conform to the given political party, acts as a participant in a pantomime, playing a part, fulfilling a role, again without independent thought or agency. Puppet imagery easily comes to mind in relation to pantomime. While Orwell doesn't refer to political partisan's as puppets, the idea becomes available by the way he describes their minds being controlled by their very use of language.
Defences of Soviet totalitarianism as coverup for violence (simile)
Orwell gives an example a statement in defense of Russian totalitarianism. It's full of abstract and euphemistic language that describes as, "A mass of Latin words [that] falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outlines and covering up all the details" (256). The implication of the simile is that the language that one uses in defense of genocide or specific acts of violence works to blind the audience from the reality and also to soften that reality, to make it almost gentle (like softly falling snow) and therefore acceptable. It's in this way that all political partisans involve themselves in permitting the violence of their party.
Poor language as weakness (metaphor)
"A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation, even among people who should and do know better. The debased language that I have been discussing is in some ways very convenient. Phrases like a 'not unjustifiable assumption,' 'leaves much to be desired,' 'would serve no good purpose,' 'a consideration which we should do well to bear in mind,' are a continuous temptation, a packet of aspirins always at one’s elbow" (256).
The quoted metaphor makes an outright comparison between the use of poor language and a form of vice that even decent or thoughtful writers give in to. Comparing the convenient phrase to a packet of aspirins, Orwell suggests that the familiar or prefabricated phrase soothes a literal pain of thinking and the strain of developing prose independently.
