In the dynamic world of modern politics, London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, has stirred a pot of controversy with his latest move to enforce what he calls ‘inclusive language.’ As a bold initiative rooted in his desire to build a more inclusive society, this policy is redefining not just London’s bureaucratic lexicon, but also reorienting the ideological lines within the capital. The contentious “inclusive language” directive has triggered a city-wide debate about language, political correctness, and the true essence of inclusion.

In a twist of events that would make even George Orwell blush, it appears that London’s Mayor, Sadiq Khan, has committed his administration to a campaign of linguistic gymnastics that could very well redefine the concept of language itself. A memo recently leaked to The Sun revealed that the Mayor is pressuring civil servants to adopt an ‘inclusive language’ regime that is as astounding as it is perplexing.

But let’s call this out for what it truly is: a troubling — yet unsurprising — new chapter in the creeping phenomenon of linguistic distortion we’ve been witnessing across the Western world for years. The attempt to control language is not about clarity, precision, or inclusion. It’s an ideological campaign disguised as a semantic one.

According to the document, words and phrases once considered the norm are now deemed inappropriate, with euphemisms and politically correct alternatives provided in their stead. In the brave new world of the Greater London Authority (GLA), ‘illegal migrants’ are to be referred to as ‘undocumented’ or ‘with insecure immigration status’. The term ‘EU nationals’ is out, replaced by ‘European Londoners’ or ‘EEA citizens’. In a move that eradicates centuries of linguistic history, even the seemingly innocent ‘ladies and gentlemen’ has been shunned in favour of non-binary terminology.

All of this is taking place against a stark backdrop of rising knife and gang crime, along with escalating tensions within ethnic communities and an alarming surge in tribal warfare among illegal migrants.

This Orwellian manipulation of language might be laughable if it weren’t so sinister. By distorting the meaning of words, we are undermining the bedrock of communication and shared understanding. This is not about inclusivity, but about pushing a particular ideological agenda. This, at a time when London is grappling with serious societal and security issues that require clear, honest conversation—not jargon and obfuscation.

The GLA spokesperson’s response? “This guide is about encouraging precision, offering recommendations and highlighting things for staff to consider, not banning words.”

But herein lies the heart of the issue: Who is to say what is accurate or representative? By dictating what is acceptable language, we are simultaneously dictating acceptable thought. Rather than focusing on tackling the concrete challenges facing London’s residents, Mayor Khan seems to be prioritizing an ideological war over words.

Traditional inclusion is crucial, but not at the expense of clear communication and not as a guise for ideological coercion. It’s high time we return to a common language, one we’ve all agreed upon, that allows us to face the real issues, rather than getting tangled up in a lexical labyrinth of political correctness.

​