Elon Musk knows more than anybody about the cost of free speech. He paid a hefty price to find out. Little did he know that faceless agents of censorship would sabotage Twitter’s advertising revenue once he bought the company. To his dismay he discovered the extent of the government’s interference in content moderation. The release of the Twitter files by all accounts provoked Musk’s legitimate concern about the state of free speech. Regardless, government’s misinformation campaign in social media is ongoing until the U.S. Supreme Court finally decides on the merits of Murthy v. Missouri.
Musk is now faced with making X profitable. To that effect, he picked Linda Yaccarino as the CEO to increase advertising revenue while upholding free speech. As part of her marketing plan she proposed the slogan lawful but not awful. Linda’s catchword gives me the opportunity to show how a simple etymological search reveals an unexpected ambiguity of some words.
Awful: 1. extremely disagreeable or objectionable; awful food; awful behavior; an awful experience – 2. informal : exceedingly great –> used as an intensive an awful lot of money 3 : inspiring awe: inspiring awe … the presence of Nature in all her awful loveliness.— George Eliot 4 : filled with awe: such as a : deeply respectful or reverential b : obsolete : afraid, terrified – Miriam-Webster
Note the inconsistency of the word. The first sense is “extremely disagreeable and objectionable”, whereas the second meaning is “exceedingly great” and the third is; “filled with awe”. According to the Oxford Dictionary On Historical Principles, the ominous and spiritual sense of the word is prioritized.
1. Causing dread; terrible, appalling. 2. Worthy of, or commanding, profound respect or reverential fear. 3. Solemnly impressive; sublimely majestic. 4. slang. Frightful, very ugly, monstrous; and hence as a more intensive = Exceedingly great, bad, etc. 5. Terror-stricken; timorous. 6. Profoundly respectful or reverential. Oxford Dictionary On Historical Principles
How can a word like awful encompass seemingly contradictory meanings? Especially the discrepancy between its original meaning of awe-full as a spiritual experience that implies an inexplicable and dreadful source of “awe” to a more derogatory “disagreeable” ‒A sense that is attributed to slang; a “special vocabulary of tramps or thieves” or “jargon of a particular profession”.
One explanation regarding the layered sense of awful can be attributed to the secularization of language.
Secularization is commonly understood as a decline in church attendance and a decrease in religious institutions’ role in society. Whereas the ecclesiastical definition of the word is the confiscation of churches’ property by a secular power, like a king or ruler, for monetary gain. In other words, the original sense of secularization is the annexation of property and by extent, the conversion of language by a conquering power. A conversion that is aptly reflected by the Latin saying, cujus regio, ejus religio, translated as: A ruler imposes his religion on his territory. A dictum that underlines the change in the use of words favored by a predominant ruling power.
The secularization of language, including names and icons, has transformed culture and politics throughout history. A good example in this respect is the change in meaning of the word economy.
The term economics was introduced by the Greek philosopher Xenophon in his book Oikonomikos he wrote ~400 BC, about a treatise on how to manage a family estate. Greek culture was greatly influential in western cultures. It was especially influential among the Romans who propagated Greek thought throughout the empire, including terms like economy.
Following Emperor Constantine’s Christian conversion, the Church in Rome redefined the word economy as the divine government of the world. The meaning retained its dominant ecclesiastic connotation until the advent of the Enlightenment.
In the eighteenth century, philosophers like Voltaire ‒who was a vocal anti-cleric‒ and Adam Smith ‒who was introduced to the term by his teacher Francis Hutcheson‒ began to use the word economy in a non-religious sense we understand it today. The shift occurred slowly and progressed hand in hand with a slow decline of the Church’s dominion over its faithful.
Today, a good example of secularization is the historical transformation of Saint-Nicholas into Santa Claus. The process illustrates the transition of a religious figure into a commercial symbol representing corporate personhood. The process exemplifies the conversion of a religious name/icon by an emerging secular economic power.
Another example is Nike. The goddess of victory who stood at the highest level of the Greek Pantheon. In 1964, the name was used to represent a global corporation whose brand inspires a similar notoriety that was once conferred to the goddess. Including a veneration that is provided by advertising and by legal trademark protection backed by an unlimited amount of money
An additional example is the word logo(s) popularly understood as a corporate symbol or trademark. Whereas the original meaning of the Greek logos means “word” and by extension, language.
Coming back to Linda Yaccarino; everybody understands what she means by her slogan. To rid the platform of objectionable comments and promote civilized debate. And make X a profitable enterprise. Unbeknownst to her that awful also overshadows a secular conversion of awe-full.
The overshadowed meaning of the word also reveals some answers about the spat between Elon Musk and the dark forces that are sabotaging X’s advertising business.
The dispute began when Twitter files revealed that government agencies hired private companies to do content moderation to bypass the First Amendment in order to control political discourse and debate. And seemingly to encroach on the sovereignty of the individual as the sole source of human speech.
Elon Musk is a father, a creator, an engineer, an American entrepreneur and a self-made billionaire. He has a quirky demeanor and occasionally acts like a clown. And when cornered he can also be a rebel. Musk basically behaves like a genuine human being. Above all, he stands out as a prominent media figure and an online American hero.
Foremost, Musk asserted his individual control over X and voiced his rejection of governments’ efforts to bypass the First Amendment. More so, the conflict underscored his affirmation of being a human individual who is born with a soul and a moral capacity to decide between good and evil.
To conclude, the above critique allowed me to reemphasize the spiritual sense of awe-full. And restore the essential role spirituality plays in our lives. Even though spirituality is in itself ambiguous as it relates to personal feelings that are difficult to express with words. Like the experience of standing at the edge of the Grand Canyon and being mesmerized by its unspeakable beauty, yet feel the dread of being to close to its immense abyss. To be in awe of the birth of a child, yet feel the dreadful responsibility for the child’s security, growth and future. For some people, including myself, these examples are best described in terms of God’s inscrutable mystery which at times is awesome and at other times dreadful.
But mostly to emphasize that human speech is at the origin of creativity and innovation. And language is humanity’s cultural heritage not a product to be encroached upon by any government or taken over by any alien economic powers.
