Politics
Why Does Everything Seem Political?
George Orwell reminds us that truth matters more than political meaning.
Updated January 13, 2025 Reviewed by Monica Vilhauer Ph.D.
Key points
- Political meaning comes from how communities interpret the world.
- Debates about facts often turn into fights over group identities.
- Literal or semantic meaning is about facts, but political meaning is about perception and associations.
- To find truth, we need to look beyond politics and focus on what’s real.

George Orwell once observed, “There is no such thing as keeping out of politics… all issues are political issues.”
Today, this sentiment feels more relevant than ever. From the clothes we wear to the shows we watch, almost everything seems to carry political meaning, whether we intend it to or not.
This omnipresence of politics can make people cynical about whether truth still matters. Politics, unlike objective truth, depends on perception, so when everything is political, truth can seem unreachable.
However, this cynicism isn't inevitable. To resist it, we must distinguish between political meaning and literal meaning (or what philosophers call “semantic meaning").
What Is Political Meaning?
Political meaning is a kind of social meaning. Social meanings are the symbolic associations communities attach to things, actions, or words.
As philosopher Sally Haslanger points out, things such as food, money, and jewelry carry social meanings: “Pink means girl and blue means boy, right?” These meanings guide our interactions by assigning value, positive or negative, to our environment (Haslanger, 2015).
Political meaning, in particular, emerges from the associations communities attach to things. Politics is an activity aimed at resolving collective problems among communities. It reflects the perceived contributions of actions, objects, or ideas to political debates. In this sense, political meaning is all about perception.
Take the feminist slogan "The personal is political.” That slogan notes the ways in which personal aspects of a woman’s life—her body, her job, her status as a mother (or not as one)—are all politicized. This idea extends to other areas: anything we do, say, or think can acquire political meaning. What we post online, for instance, carries not just personal significance but also the weight of political meaning.
This ubiquity of political meaning explains why politics can feel overwhelming. Everyday objects, from cars to coffee brands, can send political signals. Social media, in particular, acts as a machine for generating and amplifying political meaning, often at lightning speed.
What Makes Politics Frustrating?
Politics can feel frustrating because debates over “facts” often turn into battles over political interpretations. Words like “immigration,” “climate change,” and “critical race theory” spark fierce disagreements, not just over their literal meanings but over the political associations attached to them.
The differing associations people make with these terms affect how they frame the facts. And of course, such conflicts also generate new political meanings.
For example, the phrase “climate change” might be associated with scientific consensus for some, while for others, it’s tied to conspiracies about government control. These differing associations can make it feel like people are talking past one another—one side focusing on factual content while the other emphasizes group identity or political allegiance.
Social media intensifies this problem. What starts as a debate about facts quickly becomes a competition over whose political interpretation dominates.
How Political Meaning Differs From Literal Meaning
It’s important to distinguish political meaning from literal or semantic meaning. Literal or semantic meaning (or what philosophers call propositional content), refers to the actual content of a claim, determined by the conditions under which it is true. For instance, the literal meaning of "climate change is real" is simply that climate change exists and is happening due to carbon emissions.
In contrast, the political meaning of that same claim depends on the community interpreting it. For some, it signals respect for science and environmental responsibility. For others, it represents a perceived threat to personal freedom or an endorsement of government overreach.
This distinction tells us why political debates often feel unproductive. When one side is focused on facts while the other is defending political identities, citing evidence can seem irrelevant. The discussion becomes less about reality and more about affirming group loyalties.
How to Navigate Political Meaning
Recognizing the difference between political and literal meaning can help us navigate these challenges. While political meanings are important for understanding how people perceive the world, they don’t determine what is true or what should be done.
For example, a political consultant might assess how a policy will be received in different communities, but a climate scientist evaluates whether the policy effectively addresses environmental issues. Both perspectives matter, but they serve different purposes.
When engaging in debates, it’s helpful to identify whether you’re discussing facts or their political interpretations. This can reduce frustration and promote more productive conversations.
Final Thoughts
Orwell was right that everything can become political—anything can take on political meaning—even statements about truth itself. But he also warned against letting politics obscure the realities of the world. His classic novel 1984 remains a powerful reminder that truth is essential to democracy.
If we want to recognize that there is truth and meaning in politics, we ironically have to remember that there is truth and meaning outside of politics. While political meaning will always shape perceptions, it's our responsibility to look beyond it.
References
Orwell, G. (2009). All art is propaganda: Critical essays. G. Packer (Ed.), & K. Gessen (Intro.). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Haslanger, S. (2015). Distinguished Lecture: Social structure, narrative and explanation. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 45(1), 1–15. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26444360
Orwell, G. (1949). 1984. Secker & Warburg.