it's interesting when you think about the language. What vocabularies, what phrases, what idioms, what slangs, what lingos, what proverbs are there in a set of linguistic system. Like words for revolution. Will anyone says "we marched in lockstep" in Chinese? Yet here this can bewritten: "...With no coordination, no grant dictating our steps or signs, no leader, we marched in lockstep with hundreds of thousands of protestors across the United States and then the globe..." in one of the paragraph depicting black's protesting and boycotting the traffic. However, we may be lack of some words in Chinese to describe the kind of protest like this. Samely, something you can never explain to the point you want it to be in English, like the sense of family Chinese people value. It's hard to explain the word "孝顺", for it is not in the English vocabs. It's not in the language. Languages are shaped by society, social values, cultures and traditions. This truth you can feel byputting your mindset under different linguistic systems and you'll find the differences in your organization of words, in your sentence structure, in the crux of your speaking. The way one thinks about politics may be slightly or even sometimes extremely distinctive based on the languages one uses. The interpolation between language and the surroundings is profound. Language leads us to some conclusion through the twists and terms that are built in its systemic structure, andwe can't help but have to be influenced by the flexible sneakiness. It is possible to avoid the "trap" but the layer of tone of color is inevitable. Maybe one should try to utilize this characteristic of language to the greatest extent, making the best use of it to manipulate and to provoke, to appease and to agitate, then one could learn the subtleties and the details and therefore keep one's mind and thought as independent as it is allowed.