Anyway, back to what GL actually said .
He made a reference to the use of language and by implication, the effect of certain words deliberately used to shape attitudes and behaviour.
Governments and businesses big and small spend fortunes every day on advertising and PR people and focus groups to find out which words best suit their intentions and aims, and to portray certain attitudes, whether they are accurate or not, the damage is done, and that works successfully.
Words and slogans have an effect on people. They can be persuaded of the righteousness of anything if the words chime with their own views and legitimises them, or they can be persuaded. Attitudes and views can be engendered or reinforced by repetition.
Why do fat bald blokes with tattoos, draped, in union flags stand outside hotels full of immigrants, hurl abuse and hold up banners saying things like ‘no more immigrants’ , ‘this country is full‘ and ‘send them back’, when, with a different use of language by the influential powers that be, and those to whom they give credence, they could be holding banners saying ‘we want a fair and sensible system for processing these people in an efficient and quick way, through safe passage based on legitimate claims so that they do not have to risk their lives in small boats, and we don‘t have to stand out here in the cold shouting at them?