I Have A Problem With Labels. Thesis, Analysis And Conclusion To Follow.
My friends sometimes refer to me as a liberalcommiepinko. You have to say it fast, hence, no spaces. Beyond the problem that the three words mean different things, none of them, or all of them put together, describe me.
Those three words, or any other combination of words don’t describe you either.
Here’s the problem. Our senses take in too much. We have to pare down what is before our eyes, ears, nose and skin. To do that we filter. Scientists call it perception.
There’s danger ahead. Hair rises on the body. Nostrils flair. Muscles twitch. All these reactions are necessary to survival of people and lesser animals. Humans take it a step or a hundred farther.
Since I’m not qualified to describe the steps, I’ll skip to the result. We label. Threats, attractions, wants, desires. Biology becomes social prejudice. Yes, the same process allows us to think, talk, read. But as we do this we label what we perceive.
I’m a social liberal, unless being so costs more than “we,” the Country, the Americas, the world, can afford. So, does that make me a fiscal conservative? Not unless being one takes care of spending enough, public and/or private money to take care of the truly needy. So, I can’t be a libertarian because I want us all to put something in the pot beyond the minimum necessary to build roads, hire a few cops and defend our borders?
Liberal, conservative, libertarian, socialist, communist, fascist. All six words are, words. We can add more. Baptist, Southern Baptist, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, Buddhist, Moslem. Adjectives all, to describe, what?
Some more. Black, white, yellow. Caucasian, Asian. Nigger, Chink, Wop. Asshole.
Somewhere between necessary perception and resultant labeling, we took a step or two too far.
Ban adjectives.
Proposed new rule. If we don’t like something, we use full sentences, and paragraphs if necessary, to lay out the thesis, analysis and conclusion. No labeling short-cuts. Following this rule might mean that mid-process, we realize that the something isn’t something we have a reason to dislike and then label.
7 comments:
I agree - labels are too simplistic to describe most people, and are far too often used as an insult or a dismissal.
We are what we are.
" Ban adjectives?" You liberalcommiepinko's are all deconstructionists at heart. You want to undermine our capitalist system and you're going to begin by taking away our language!
I agree Dave.
I'm not sure why, but you explained it well.
Name calling - the final resort of those who can't win an argument with facts and debate.
Labels - sometimes useful shorthand for people to describe themselves, but too often inflammatory shorthand for people to describe others.
I listen to both right wing and left wing radio, and both have strong opinions and use labels. However, Air America has maybe 20% of the name-calling as O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Savage and the rest for whom debate is a forgotten art.
Oh,and by the way, I consider myself a white Christian fiscal conservative with a liberal bent who really appreciates the libertarian concept of people holding up their own end to the extent possible.
The most insidious are the labels people put on themselves.
I think somewhere along the way people quit thinking and just joined a team: "I am a 'liberal,' therefore I believe this, he is a 'conservative,' therefore he believes that."
Labels have become an impediment to free thought. For the people who use them, they are a cage.
Monkeys need labels because it's a clan thing.
Ron Davison, our language is a piece of shit and getting worse all the time because of the so called word smiths.
Our capitalistic system is set up to keep you working for the richer monkeys so they can have fancier toys than you do.
You must be pretty young, and you are pretty brain washed, you still have a lot to learn my friend.
The problem with labels is that they can only cover so much territory.
Example:
"Liberal"
I consider myself a political liberal, but I know I'm a fiscal conservative, and I'm a radical right-ist regarding immigration.
So that "liberal" label only covers so much territory on me. If you only heard me sound forth on immigration (trust me, you don't want to), you'd think I was a Bush backing 29%er in full support of the war - if you were of the school (The one Annie Banannie Coulter and Rush "The Druggie" Limpbaugh teach) that believes that you can only belong to one label or the other.
The school that believes that "All" liberals believe in general amnesty for illegals.
See... That "All" Liberal that they like to knock down so much? That's a strawman. Doesn't exist in reality. It's just a convenient non-entity that they can ruthlessly bash incessantly because nobody can really HURT a strawman.
And he fits onto the label just perfectly.
Nobody else does.
Post a Comment