Nayellin Francisco 1

The Three Languages of Politics: Talking Across the Political Divides

Political Divides

The Three Languages of Politics, written by Arnold Kling, proposes a framework with the

help of which our community can get a clear understanding of its various political structures

and communications. Kling has discussed three main political divides i.e. progressives,

conservatives and libertarians. Progressive or liberal are the ones who look for equality and

want to make use of political force to correct the society and make it a just place to live.

Progressives are known to follow or communicate along the oppressor-oppressed axis.

According to Kling, progressives who take a stand against the injustice and underprivileged

are known to be on the good side of the community as compared to those who have less or no

emotions towards disadvantaged people. Conservatives belong to such a group of political

activists who won’t leave the traditional foundations of their society. Instead of progressing

forward, they prefer a rather stabilized government. In his book, Kling states that

conservatives use the axis or scale of civilization-barbarism for their communication. As

clear from the title, conservatives believe that people following traditions and conventional

ideas are considered to be on the positive side of the community and those who are ignorant

to or not following such time-tested traditions, are considered to bear the negative impact.

The third type of political division considered by Kling is of libertarians. These are the people

having political beliefs of prioritizing liberty. Libertarians do not welcome the interference of

government rather they prefer the individuals of the community to shape their society. Kling

says that Libertarians always communicate using the axis of liberty-coercion. Which means

they would like to do their own things instead of being ordered or instructed to do some other

deed. Kling believes that all the political views in our society can be categorized based on
Nayellin Francisco 2

these political divides and the languages used by the respective political divides always

follow on the three aforementioned axes of communication.

Examples Stated by Kling

The first example stated by the author was of “Interpreting the Holocaust, in which Nazis

murdered millions of Jews”. In this particular example, all the three political tribes can be

found to agree upon the right side of history. Progressives see the Holocaust as a form of

danger from racists groups towards the minorities, based on the oppressor-oppressed axis.

Conservatives believe that a holocaust is a form of a bad or evil omen which struck the

society after they broke the traditional values and morals. Libertarians view it as a sort of a

harm or danger to the society which followed due to the presence of unlimited power to the

state. The thing to note in this example is that all the three political tribes converge on the

“right” side of the history which is actually in coherence with what happened in actual.

The second example is of “Soda taxes”. Conservatives hold people responsible for excessive

consumption of calories rather than the soda itself hence they consider people as barbaric. On

the other hand, progressives believe that the markets are oppressor since soda was introduced

to people (oppressed) by the markets. But libertarians take government’s step towards

increasing soda taxes as coercion since this is the right of consumers instead of the

government, to do so. Here, although all the three languages of the political divide can be

applied it can be clearly observed that not all the political tribes have ideas converging to the

same side or point.

Why use language for the political division?

Kling has explained in the book that why we use the language to politically divide ourselves.

One of the reasons is the framing system which people develop when they chose a single

political tribe. People belonging to a certain political group tend to see all the other political
Nayellin Francisco 3

tribes as evil and irrational having a negative impact on their tribe. They consider such tribes

as useless and manipulating the beliefs or views of their tribes. But it does not end here. In

the three political tribes, each tribe thinks the same of the other tribes.

The above-discussed reason was based on political groups. People also use language to divide

themselves politically based on some personal requirements. Status, prestige, and self-regard

are some of the main reasons behind such doings. People of one political tribe will do

anything to increase their status in the tribe by degrading the values or beliefs of other tribes.

It would get them fame and a high status within the tribe. Prestige is another factor

controlling this phenomenon of political division. Member of a particular tribe will try to get

as much prestigious position within the tribe, as possible. Just like being admirable regarding

high status, human beings are power hungry for getting high prestige as well. High prestige

too is achievable with the help of the tribe’s parent political language. Last but not least, self-

regard is one of the leading characteristics which forces a member of the political tribe to

follow the norm of the society and get high admiration. In the end, the quest for high

admiration in society leads the person towards distinct political views hence separating the

community based on political language.

Kling has used the word “coalitions” for the political tribes since when the competition for

status, prestige and self-regard in high within the tribe, just like apes, the small groups of

people will combine to defeat the alpha-ape whereas when there is a high threat from another

political tribe from outside, all the members of political tribe i.e. having identical political

views, will gather to defend their own tribe and get ready to attack the other one.

General Views on Book

Kling’s main idea behind writing this book is that if we really want to understand our

political opponents then we need to change the way we see disagreements of our political
Nayellin Francisco 4

opponents. Kling has mentioned three political divides in the book; liberals, conservatives,

and libertarians. He mentions three political languages or axes so that the readers can first

classify themselves into a certain group and after that, they may recognize the attributes or

views of the other remaining political groups such as nuances and assumptions of each

language etc., so that the mutual understating with the respective political groups can be

made possible without open disagreements and enraged behaviors. With the help of this

book, Kling wants the readers to understand the nature of political discussions. Kling wants

the readers of the book to identify that among the pool of various political languages, to

which on do they belong. The ultimate goal of the book is that once the reader is aware of its

own political axis or language and that of others then there are very fewer chances that the

same reader would be dismissive of those having disagreements with reader’s political views.

Earth’s political society would be a much better place in that way.

Regarding the three languages of the political divide, since almost every incident or

happening can be completely applied to one of the three axes so it can be said that Kling is

right in identifying three languages of the political divide. Another justification for this is that

the concept of three languages of the political divide has been in books for years.

Explanation of Oppressor and Oppressed

Kling says “Note that the progressive is not using the phenomenon of oppression per se as a

means of expressing a political viewpoint. Rather, the progressive believes that certain groups

or classes of people intrinsically fall into categories of the oppressor or oppressed.” His

words can be explained with the help of an example. In third world countries or remote areas

of such countries, it is a common understanding and a fact that women living there are

oppressed. Regardless of what is the situation of the women in other third world countries, a

progressive, based on the known fact or optics, believe that the women are oppressed in that
Nayellin Francisco 5

country as well. In political terms, he will use the idea of oppressor-oppressed, not for the

political viewpoint, but for his own perception to categorize things, ideas or people in

categories of the oppressor or oppressed.