The word ‘manifesto’ implies logic and consistency

There are many words to describe an angry discourse. What's the best term for the words published by the Christchurch, New Zealand shooter?

Vincent Thian/AP
Flowers are laid down at a memorial wall honoring those who passed at the mosque shootings in Christchurch, New Zealand on March 17. Prior to the shooting, the news used different words to describe what the shooter published – and each had a different meaning.

Before the Christchurch shooter killed 50 people at a mosque in New Zealand last month, he wrote a document that detailed his beliefs and motivations. It is a strange and disturbing piece – 87 pages in which he interviews himself, asking and answering questions such as “Were/are you a Socialist?” interlaced with anti-Islamic, anti-immigrant, racist, and misogynistic assertions.  

News outlets were divided about what to call it. The New York Times referred to it as a “white nationalist manifesto,” while NPR described it as a “hate-filled screed.” What is the difference?

A manifesto, according to Oxford Dictionaries, is “a public declaration of policy and aims.” The word implies a certain logical consistency. You may disagree with the content of a manifesto, but it is coherent and well argued. The most famous example is the “Communist Manifesto” of 1848, which inspired communist revolutions around the world. The word itself comes from the Latin manifestus, meaning “evident, unmistakable.”  

A screed, in contrast, is a long and tedious piece of writing. In the 18th century, it was possible for a screed to be dull and inoffensive – you could have “a screed on poetry,” for example. These days, the word suggests something that is full of anger and ranting. Screed is related to shred and originally referred to a scrap of cloth or paper. It probably acquired its negative connotations because it sounds like “screech” or “scream.” 

English has a surprising number of words for angry discourse, some of which might also fit. A rant is a wild speech expressing “outrage or dissatisfaction.” A tirade is similar, a long speech “marked by intemperate, vituperative, or harshly censorious language,” according to Merriam-Webster. Both are used more often in reference to spoken language than to written, however. A polemic is an attack on a person or doctrine, with an argument intended to cause controversy. While rants and tirades are emotional, polemics have a certain degree of sophistication and internal logic. Jeremiads are tirades in which the dominant tone is mournful. This word can apply to everything from a list of complaints to bitter laments about the declining morals of society. The word comes from the prophet Jeremiah, who bewailed the sinfulness of Jerusalem in the book of Lamentations.

What’s the best word, then, for statements like that of the Christchurch shooter? Manifesto implies a desire to build something, a positive plan; polemic implies careful argument. Jeremiad might work, except that such airing of complaints is a long-standing American tradition, having been used to make people aware of social problems. It seems that screed or rant best captures the violence, hatred, and incoherence of such writing. ρ

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.