Feb. 4th, 2023

Long ago, I had a thought that lawyers have too much influence with the jury due to their charisma, appearance and/or oratory skills. One way I thought of erasing that unfair advantage was to require lawyers (and all who address the court and the jury) to be hidden from jury's eyes and that their voices should be disguised (e.g., speech-to-text-to-standard-speech translator). It dawned on me that this masking would be very useful in everyday interactions to create a level playing field where racism, classism, charisma, etc have undue influence. Of course, suppressing oratory skills would be the hardest (especially for those that the lingua franca is not their native tongue or for those that did not benefit from any formal training in oratory), and some would say even unacceptable (e.g., there are good causes that require orators).

Related to the above are a few recent reads: Racism rebranded: how far-right ideology feeds off identity politics (K Malik), A history of “wokeness” -- Stay woke: How a Black activist watchword got co-opted in the culture war (Aja Romano). The Romano article evoked some thoughts on how the right usually highjacks positive words and jiu-jitsu's them into negative/derogatory words (e.g. woke, liberal). It is also not surprising that some popular media wordsmiths were conservatives (e.g. WF Buckley Jr, George Will, Rush Limbaugh, Will Safire). To be fair there are some eloquent contemporary progressives as well (e.g. Noam Chomsky, James Baldwin, MLK, Malcolm X).

LE: What white people can do for racial justice.

Profile

JMA-PSOS

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1 2 34 567
8 910 11 121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 13th, 2025 06:42 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios