“See to it that no-one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world and not according to Christ.” Colossians 2:8.
Language is one of the marks of being human. It sets us apart from the rest of creation. It is what elevates us as image bearers of the Divine, to share our creator’s communicative ability and his powers of reason. Jesus is after all, the Word made flesh.
Language is the means by which we communicate reality and by which we understand reality. It is the chief medium whereby we transmit knowledge and culture, the way we communicate collective experience, values and traditions to following generations. Importantly it is the way we dignify other human beings. Dr Grams has observed[i] the rapid degradation of the language used in popular culture of America and the West. Language is used not to elevate other people but to revile, to denigrate; he notes how rancorous and untruthful speech has become mainstream.
Language is also increasingly being used to mislead and deceive – especially by ruling elites who use propagandistic methods to exercise control and maintain power. In part one [ii], I examined the process whereby people are manipulated and controlled by mass formation and by the misuse of language, mainly in the form of propaganda.
The use of language in the exercise of power: Groupthink or Collectivist Thought, and Newspeak
George Orwell was one of the first to analyse the totalitarian systems of the 20th century. in his two novels Nineteen Eighty-Four and Animal Farm, he categorised the way in which elites used language to gain political control and exert a comprehensive exercise of will over every sector of society, using several terms which he coined; one being Newspeak.
Newspeak was a way of forcing language into describing, not reality but a pseudo-reality. Roger Scruton describes its purpose and effect,
“Newspeak occurs whenever the primary purpose of language—which is to describe reality—is replaced by the rival purpose of asserting power over it. The fundamental speech-act is only superficially represented by the assertoric grammar. Newspeak sentences sound like assertions, but their underlying logic is that of the spell. They conjure the triumph of words over things, the futility of rational argument, and also the danger of resistance.”
Scruton goes on to give examples of Newspeak in contemporary culture which are instantly recognisable,
“Examples of Newspeak are multiplying in our society. On one hand, slogans such as “reproductive rights” or “the right to choose” operate under the logic of the spell, as if the deliberate destruction of innocent human life in the womb can be made agreeable simply by renaming the act. So also, in matters sexual, where even biological reality is suddenly up for grabs, as in transgender ideology, and the nature of marriage itself is said to be open to redefinition.”[iii]
Orwell described the aim of Newspeak as bringing people into a collectivist mindset or what he termed Groupthink, which I have described in part one. Newspeak also by its nature is anti-rational;
“…Newspeak developed its own special syntax, which – while closely related to the syntax deployed in ordinary descriptions – carefully avoids any encounter with reality or any exposure to the logic of rational argument.”[iv]
Before Orwell used the format of a novel to describe the rise of totalitarianism through the manipulation and control of a population, Friedrich Hayek had written on the subject. In The Road to Serfdom, first published in 1944,he described how language could be used to force obedience to the system, but further than that, to unite all the population in a common purpose – the purpose of the state. To do this it was essential to control people’s opinions, so that all could be brought into conformity with what the state believed in terms of goals and policies. He states,
“To make a totalitarian system function efficiently, it is not enough that everybody should be forced to work for the same ends. It is essential that the people should come to regard them as their own ends. Although the beliefs must be chosen for the people and imposed upon them, they must become their beliefs, a generally accepted creed which makes the individuals as far as possible act spontaneously in the way the planner wants.”[v]
Hayek then makes a shattering observation about what happens to people’s conception of ‘truth’ following this subtle co-option of a population into believing the state’s goals are their goals.
“The word “truth” itself ceases to have its old meaning. It describes no longer something to be found, with the individual conscience as the sole arbiter of whether in any particular instance the evidence (or the standing of those proclaiming it) warrants a belief; it becomes something to be laid down by authority, something which has to be believed in the interest of the unity of the organized effort and which may have to be altered as the exigencies of this organized effort require it.”[vi]
The End of Truth
In his word, God in his word forbids any misuse of language – that includes lying and false witness, but also deceptive language[vii] (such as propaganda, deceptive arguments, and false narratives). We have a mandate not just to discern and ignore falsehoods and deception, but to expose it, to call it out. Truth, like the Gospel is an open secret. Jesus himself encouraged us – “What I tell you in the dark, say in the light, and what you hear whispered, proclaim on the housetops. And do not fear those who can kill the body but cannot kill the soul…”[viii]
Essentially, the very nature of what truth is, is being undermined, firstly by the postmodern assertion that all truth is relative, and secondly by the states’ claim to decide what the truth in certain situations is. Both these attacks render the individual powerless to discern what is counter to the truth – i.e. falsehood and lies. When the state polices what is ‘allowed speech’ it is enforcing its own version of the truth, and in essence claiming authority to define the truth. In a theological sense, when a state arrogates to itself the right to define truth it is being idolatrous, for only God has authority to define truth, and the state is usurping that right.
In response, the reality of transcendent truth needs to be vigorously proclaimed and asserted at every opportunity by believers. That truth cannot be relative, nor defined by governing classes. Hayek realised how important this was, because if truth is undermined, so is the moral structure of a society:
The moral consequences of totalitarian propaganda which we must now consider are, however, of an even more profound kind. They are destructive of all morals because they undermine one of the foundations of all morals: the sense of and the respect for truth.[ix]
One characteristic way totalitarian systems gain control is the progressive removal of ordinary citizens’ ability to make choices. This can be undertaken in several areas, for example, in the public square they may, like many governments today, restrict freedom of speech. They restrict what we may say or hear or read. This pertains to mass media and social media. In contemporary culture, social media has become a powerful way of spreading information, but also of mobilising people, so this is the more threatening medium for the state. Usually the restrictions are cast as “protection” from ‘hate speech’ and the opinions of ‘dangerous people’.
This is taking place increasingly frequently, and in several democratic countries. It is in fact more than mere censorship, but a decision to control people’s minds – and a claim by governments to have the authority to define what truth is.
- In the United Kingdom the online safety act was framed as a tool to protect children, undoubtedly a noble motive, but it now appears that it will be used as an instrument to police the speech of adults. An open letter[x] from OFCOM reveals that it will use its powers to ensure media platforms respond to spikes in what it deems ‘illegal content’ during what it defines as ‘crisis events’.
- A newly published green paper[xi] proposes new measures requiring media platforms to give prominence to what it terms ‘trusted news providers’ – mostly mainstream outlets such as the BBC and ITV, Channel 4 and national newspapers. YouTube[xii] has already warned of the effects.
- Similarly, in Europe, Germany’s state media regulators are also preparing new rules that could force platforms like X, Facebook, TikTok and Instagram to give greater visibility to “trusted” or “reliable” media outlets in their algorithms. The EU has also faced accusations[xiii] of totalitarian style speech restrictions and has promulgated rules to favour ‘approved’ news and information sources.
- Australians are also seeing an increasing erosion of their freedom of speech through anti-discrimination laws, “hate speech” laws, workplace policies, healthcare mandates, and restrictions surrounding Christian teaching.[xiv]
- Canada has already gone much further down this road by enforcing the use of ‘pronouns’ which are in essence a type of Newspeak as they don’t relate to anything real.
For the believer, it is beholden on us not to submit to an idolatrous state. Scripture teaches that those who submit to idols become like them – they lose the ability to see/discern or hear. Isaiah reminds us,
“Their idols are silver and gold, the work of human hands. They have mouths, but do not speak, eyes, but do not see. They have ears, but do not hear, noses, but do not smell…. Those who make them become like them; so do all who trust in them.”[xv]
Submission to idols will always entail a loss of freedoms. The state on the other hand loses the ability to see its citizens as human beings, of inestimable value and with the right to be free.
The End of Reason
Paradoxically, the age of enlightenment aimed at making human reason supreme, but as we pass through the final stage of this age, it seems that reason will be suffocated. Again, Hayek explains,
“The tragedy of collectivist thought is that, while it starts out to make reason supreme, it ends by destroying reason because it misconceives the process on which the growth of reason depends. It may indeed be said that it is the paradox of all collectivist doctrine and its demand for “conscious” control or “conscious” planning that they necessarily lead to the demand that the mind of some individual should rule supreme — while only the individualist approach to social phenomena makes us recognize the superindividual forces which guide the growth of reason. Individualism is thus an attitude of humility before this social process and of tolerance to other opinions and is the exact opposite of that intellectual hubris which is at the root of the demand for comprehensive direction of the social process.”[xvi]
Intellectual hubris is indeed the font of what we are seeing play out, and as Hayek warns, has regularly led to, and may again lead to the demand that the mind of some individual should reign supreme. The scripture has an apocalyptic term for this type of individual.
___________________________________________________________________________________
[i] https://bibleandmission.blogspot.com/2026/04/the-ethic-of-speech-in-new-testament.html
[ii] https://anglicanmainstream.org/editorial/christians-in-an-age-of-mass-manipulation-what-can-the-church-do-part-1-mass-formation/
[iii] https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2026/03/100558/
[iv] Roger Scruton, Fools, Frauds and Firebrands: Thinkers of the New Left.
[v] Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, ROUTLEDGE, 2001, p153.
[vi] Hayek, op cit. p164.
[vii] Psalm 12:1-4.
[viii] Matthew 10:27,28.
[ix] Hayek, op cit. p155.
[x] https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/open-letter-to-uk-online-service-providers-regarding-civil-unrest-in-belfast
[xi]https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/watch-this-space-a-new-strategic-direction-for-uk-media-green-paper-and-public-consultation and the paper here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6a3958c3e590e5e061c9a43a/E03591532_TV_Green_paper_Accessible.pdf
[xii] https://x.com/GBPolitcs/status/2073714885444206675
[xiii] https://europeanconservative.com/articles/commentary/europe-is-being-gaslit-about-freedom-of-speech/ and https://europeanconservative.com/articles/news/eu-tightens-grip-on-whatsapp-raising-new-free-speech-concerns/
[xiv] https://mychristiandaily.com/new-report-reveals-christian-freedom-eroding-rapidly-in-australia/ and https://europeanconservative.com/articles/news-corner/free-speech-under-fire-as-australia-pushes-tough-new-hate-laws/
[xv] Psalm 115:4-8.
[xvi] Hayek, op cit. p166.