I'm writing an essay on Bakhtin's view on power and language. In simplifies terms, centripetality is the driving force in the language of power and monologism whereas centrifugality is the driving force in the language of liberation and dialogism. However, does it not seem plausible that one way for the dominant ideology to stay in power is to promote fragmentization, i.e centrifugality as a way to divide and conquer much in the same way that God did in the myth of the tower of Babel.
Meaning is the lower limit of linguistic significance.
A common unitary language is a system of linguistic norms. We are taking languages not as system of abstract grammatical categories, but rather languages as ideologically saturated, language as a world view, even as a concrete opinion, insuring a maximum of mutual understanding in all spheres of ideological life. I would appreciate Your comments on this.