Fighting Words 

click to enlarge

After years of America's hyperactive cancel culture, we are all acutely aware of how a few badly chosen, inflammatory, politically incorrect or insensitive words can dismantle careers and wreak havoc, disappointment and even despair in people's lives.

Though some of those who have been dethroned by their own words have deserved exactly what they got, society overall has gone too far when it comes to punishing verbal accidents. Today, we live in a world that is oh-so-ready to pounce. As Rowan Atkinson, the "Mr. Bean" actor has put it, cancel culture is like a "medieval mob looking for someone to burn."

Let's face it, human beings are complex creatures, and the spontaneity of our words is much akin to our most basic, physical instincts—not so far from the essential "fight or flight" reflexes. Much of our speech is just a reaction to the thoughts and feelings running through the synapses of our brains, so it's easy to understand how things we say may seem offensive to some individual or group. The bottom line is that, in an over-sensitized society, there will always be something that sounds like an afront.

Being censured or canceled is a hazard of our times. At the Oscars this past weekend, we observed Will Smith slapping comedian Chris Rock for telling an insensitive joke. Talk—and particularly public speech—has always been a minefield, but the internet and modern communications have ensured that any candid, critical or frank words will spread instantaneously. In the past, news just slowly trickled in, if at all. But today, public disgust becomes a concentrated mass so quickly that there can be a catastrophic effect and no escape.

It's certainly worth considering that the truth, itself, can be considered a gaffe. And that's exactly what happened last week in President Joseph Biden's address in Poland. Biden passionately stated, in a reference to Putin, "For God's sake, this man cannot remain in power." The reactionary flak followed immediately, and his words will not be soon forgotten.

Biden's detractors seized upon the moment, crying that his choice of wording could cause further destabilization of the world. France's President Emmanuel Macron chimed in almost immediately, suggesting that Biden's speech constituted an escalation of a tenuous situation. Moscow, of course, was furious and made it clear that the American president was not the one to affect regime change. The quick retort was that only the Russian people can change their president—through the free-elections process.

Biden's exact words weren't really so very different from other statements he's made about—and directly to—Putin. He has previously said that Putin is a "pure thug," a "murderous dictator," a "war criminal" and a "butcher."

As Biden's advisers scramble to put a more acceptable spin on his words, there's a general understanding that no matter how much Biden meant what he said, the president's speech created a very uncomfortable feeling across the globe. His staff tried to cast a different meaning for his words, suggesting that Biden only meant that Putin should not be allowed to wield power against Ukraine and other free nations. That's what apologists do—window-dressing a president's words to make them more politically palatable.

As a nation known for its meddling in international affairs, the U.S. president's statement could be seen as a plea for regime change. Biden's gaffe, a spontaneous departure from his speechwriters' carefully drafted text, seemed a bit ominous, and some world leaders were gobsmacked at his choice of words.

But it wasn't that anyone disagreed. It's probably safe to say that the free world wants to see the "back" of the Russian president. Julianne Smith, the U.S. ambassador to NATO, acknowledged that Biden was simply saying what the situation required, "a principled human reaction." It was a conscientious and honest faux pas.

Unfortunately, Biden's so-called gaffe has been fodder for the Russians, the rest of the world and his political opponents. Even many of his supporters believe that he was out of line in using those words. But my guess is that nobody thinks he was wrong.

Should Putin be allowed to continue to lead the Russian people in this ongoing decimation of a sovereign country? Of course not. But the tacit threat of regime change shook a lot of people. Sadly, it seemed to convey the likely reality that the Ukraine problem will not be fixed as long as Putin's ego is solidly seated on the Russian throne.

After more than a month of a military invasion of Ukraine, the understanding that Putin is a monster, a terrorist and a serial killer is almost universally accepted by those who have access to accurate information. Certainly, Biden has used numerous highly judgmental descriptions of the Russian leader and—considering the level of destruction, suffering and death in Ukraine—no one has faulted him for those previous allegations.

So why the outcry on Biden's latest words? What he said is certainly no reason for cancellation. I think all Americans—and most of the world—stand solidly behind his exclamatory words. "For God's sake, this man cannot remain in power."

The only thing he left out was "bastard!" (Obviously, it's a good thing that I'm not the president.)

The author is a retired businessman, novelist, columnist, and former Vietnam-era Army assistant public information officer. He lives in Riverton, Utah with his wife, Carol, and the beloved ashes of their mongrel dog..