4. If you are not planning to teach, how do issues of language and power apply in the field you plan to enter? Does Delpit offer relevant insight?

I am a Political Science major and, while I haven’t ruled out teaching, the career I am most interested in pursuing is in politics. As to the actual position I would like to have, there is a minimum of seven years until I can even try for the position (the U.S. Constitution requires U.S. Senators to be at least thirty years old). The intricacies of lingual and cultural norms take on a significant role for a diplomat and statesman: as I am not writing as a senator this would not directly impact my role. My first job in national politics will likely be as a congressional or senatorial staffer. I think, as a junior staffer (or intern), my contact with foreign dignitaries and heads of state will be minimal, but the other attribute of language discussed by Dr. Delpit, the “culture of power”, may play a large role in my interactions with both opposition party members and even members of the Democratic Party.

Not all public officials and political operatives at the various branches of government possess top-tier lingual skills. Those involved in state and local governments often vary greatly in terms of their level of education. In the interest of brevity I am skipping a few stepping-stones and will consider only the national government. At the national level, assuming anyone with a policymaking role possesses a fluency in the norms of “formal English” is not presumptuous. The implicit arguments Delpit addresses in “The Silenced Dialog” dominate political discussion when in the public eye. A conversation between political operatives may seem respectful at first glance, but an old, and unsurprisingly, unattributed description of politics explains, “statesmanship is the art of saying ‘go to hell’ in such a manner that the person actually packs for the trip.” Senators and their staff use respectful, polished language when speaking, lest an unseen camera catch an unprofessional comment: terse replies or snide remarks convey implied messages too crass for a direct delivery, despite the eloquent language of the statement.

If during a meeting a remark is missed or misinterpreted the parties might leave the negotiating table with distinctly different impressions of how the meeting went. The attribute of parliamentary procedure responsible for the deference between members of Congress is more distinct in the Senate than the House of Representatives – reflecting the difference between the House of Lords and House of Commons – so the higher the level of government one is involved in, greater significance the “culture of power” becomes. Failing to pick up on subtle messages, or an inability to express a nuanced message may only lead to a short, undistinguished career in politics, but the worst-case scenario creates a political backlash not only on you, but back on the party as well. A recent case was former Senator Trent Lott’s comment that the U.S. would have been better off if former Senator Strom Thurmond won the 1948 Presidential Election, in which he ran for the Segregationist party: the backlash painted every Republican standing too close to Senator Lott as racist and forced him to resign his post as Senate Majority Leader.