The other day, in his interview with Chuck Todd, President Obama said:
I want everybody to understand that we've not seen any immediate intelligence about threats to the homeland from ISIL. That's not what this is about. What it's about is an organization that, if allowed to control significant amounts of territory, to amass more resources, more arms to attract more foreign fighters, including from areas like Europe, who have Europeans who have visas and then can travel to the United States unimpeded, that over time, that can be a serious threat to the homeland.
Homeland.
Why is that word so grating, and so disturbing to hear from the lips of a supposedly progressive Democrat like Barack Obama?
Well, for one thing, it's a word associated with George W. Bush and the neoconservatives who played puppet-master with him.
From the time Bush was running for president, he was already using the term homeland:
The protection of America itself will assume a high priority in a new century. Once a strategic afterthought, homeland defense has become an urgent duty.
For most of our history, America felt safe behind two great oceans. But with the spread of technology, distance no longer means security....
We will defend the American homeland by strengthening our intelligence community – focusing on human intelligence and the early detection of terrorist operations both here and abroad....
-- September 23, 1999
And the way Bush and his advisors used it, it was a term of empire.
Homeland is something that can only be defined by its difference with that which is not the homeland. You can only think of your country as your homeland if you're away from it. Otherwise it's simply your country, your home. Homeland is a term that is to do with diasporas, with fond (or otherwise) memories of a homeland left behind. It's also a term used by empires, when they need to distinguish between the place they've come from as opposed to the lands they've expanded into and occupied.
Obama may believe he has to take up the role of leadership to organize opposition around the world to a group of dangerous terrorists. But he shouldn't be doing it by using the arrogant words of empire and normalizing them.
How different this sounds:
I want everybody to understand that we've not seen any immediate intelligence about threats to America from ISIL. That's not what this is about. What it's about is an organization that, if allowed to control significant amounts of territory, to amass more resources, more arms to attract more foreign fighters, including from areas like Europe, who have Europeans who have visas and then can travel to the United States unimpeded, that over time, that can be a serious threat to America.
What's wrong with saying
America, or
our country? Why on earth would he be saying
the homeland instead?
It's only a word, but as George Orwell said, the purpose of using words in particular ways and shaping their meaning is to shape and control thought. And pushing Newspeak terms of empire into everyday public discourse is not something our Democratic president, who talks the talk of partners and multi-lateralism, should be doing.