Political bias
This is one of the main themes in Orwell’s essay. Though it's a familiar topic, Orwell addresses it from a new angle. Rather than discussing the ways that political bias is formed in an ideological, emotional or conceptual sense, he reveals how it manifests linguistically. Political bias, as he demonstrates, may be something that accrues by way of repetitions of certain terms. It is by using language without agency, by repeating familiar turns of phrase without thinking of their meaning, that political bias is formed. A critique of a “party line”—or orthodox political speech—runs through the essay, without Orwell attacking it in a direct or heavy-handed way. This indirect critique may seem like a tactic of subtlety, but it may actually be the effect of an unfamiliar approach to criticism. As Orwell argues in the essay, unfamiliar or “new” language is the result of original thinking. No doubt he would be making every effort to think independently himself. A successful critique of "political bias" might not appear at first to be a critique at all. We might only recognize his critique after stepping back and considering the broader implications of the essay.
Honesty
According to Orwell, honesty takes effort. In political writing, it involves a rigorous practice of self-critique and an assertion of agency on the part of the writer. Most importantly it entails an effort to represent a given subject as closely as possible by avoiding abstractions that distance language from its meaning. The best examples of this in his essay are his analyses of the material meaning of common political terms such as pacification (of colonial populations), transfer of populations, elimination of unreliable elements. Each of these terms stands in for an ugly, violent, physical reality that Orwell describes in detail. In order to honestly promote a political concept or policy, a writer must be willing to use concrete, rather than abstract, language to describe it. While Orwell acknowledges that representation will never be exact, and that in his essay he too commits the faults that he’s describing, he describes honesty as a process of rigorous attention and sustained effort.
Deception
In “Politics and the English Language,” Orwell presents a broad critique of the ways that language is rendered meaningless and the ways that writers lose agency on account of poor uses of language. Repeating familiar turns of phrase or using “dead,” unoriginal metaphors will create a gap between what the writer or speaker says and what they mean (if they in fact know what they mean). Writing can become deceptive in this way. But active deception, according to Orwell, happens through the use of abstract language. A political writer or speaker who promotes imperialism and justifies colonial projects deceives their audience when they use abstract terms, such as pacification, to describe colonial violence. To avoid deception, Orwell argues, someone who advocates pacification should say that they favor the bombing and burning of villages, and the torture and imprisonment of indigenous resistance for the sake of the colonial project.
Uses of Language
An obvious theme in “Politics and the English Language” is the use of language itself. In the essay, Orwell critiques the different ways that language is manipulated and presents a rudimentary breakdown of poor uses of language. He sets up different categories of poor uses and analyzes the effects of different uses. He draws a link between degenerate language and foolish thinking. While his general discussion may seem as though it might inhibit political writing and discussion, his intention is rather to point out a list of bad habits and present guidelines for different ways of using language so that a writer/speaker can represent their meaning honestly and with independent agency. The point is not to aim for perfection in political speech and writing; rather, it is to offer guidelines for breaking habits of poor uses of language, and to provide a toolkit for regenerative language.
Politics
Distinct from the theme of political bias, the concept of politics as a whole is a central theme in “Politics and the English Language.” As Orwell states, “In our age there is no such thing as 'keeping out of politics'. All issues are political issues…” (256). On this view, one cannot exempt oneself from politics. In this way, an effort toward honest, independent, original thinking is essential to everyone.
The essay is also an indirect critique of the politics of Orwell’s “age,” from the apologies for Soviet violence, to conservative justifications for colonial violence. But the critique does not stop in Orwell’s age. It might easily be argued that in any age, there’s no keeping out of politics. While Orwell’s essay analyzes the political climate of his time, it can also shed light on politics in the present.
