DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus The Problem Pertaining to Political Labeling

I have long been a huge opponent of labeling. We all use labels to help us categorize things, but all too often we place labels on people and issues that we either don't understand or disagree with. That is when problems occur. This is a political forum, so I will concentrate on political labels, but believe me...........I despised the labels we used in education.

I don't know all of them, but there is liberal, conservative, left-wing, right-wing, libtards, Cons, Nazis, Fascists, Racists, Socialists, Nationalists, Deplorables, Bleeding-Hearts, etc, etc.

I became disenfranchised from the political scene for quite awhile during the time when folks like Rush Limbaugh dominated the political narrative. Those folks used the word "liberal" as if it were a dirty word. It confused me at first, because the true meaning of the word liberal is positive. Who can forget "Give me liberty, or give me death?" I soon came to find out that the term was intended to insult an entire group of people. This is important, so please read this.........those disparaging takes from Conservatives did nothing but strengthen my resolve that they were in the wrong and that liberal thinking people were more just. I have never, ever been a fan of name-calling and labeling and it was the Conservatives who engaged in most of those types of personal attacks.

Times have changed and it seems to me that a lot of folks on the other side are the ones doing most of the labeling and name-calling. I despise labels like Nazis and Fascists just because someone doesn't totally agree w/one's take on the political climate.

Now, for the important part. In my mind and the mind of many who are fairly intelligent, labels are just excuses for people to stop thinking and instead, to simply pigeonhole others in a fashion that may be quick and convenient but is usually superficial and misleading.[1]

The second point I want to make is that when we assign these labels, we are simply justifying our own biases and dehumanizing those we are railing against. Consider this statement: "When they dehumanize the people they oppose, they begin the process of objectification, that is, turning people into objects. Once they paint a group of people as objects, they can do virtually anything they want to the group because objects have no moral standing." [2]

I think that we often try and make ourselves look better than others by assigning a degrading label to another group. Consider this quote: "The problem with categorizing or labeling people is that it is too simple and usually unfair. Labeling allows us to put ourselves in a different category, artificially separating us from that which we believe we are not. The human inclination to categorize enables others to be put in a box, and gives some justification for not having to deal with them, believing that we are different and superior." [3]

I think it's great that we have such a wide range of ideas, beliefs, and behaviors in our country. I think that we combine together nicely and that diversity is actually a strength. I think opposing ideas are a good thing. I do not believe that we should all think alike. Cultural diversity is wonderful. So are political beliefs and while we may disagree w/the ideologies of others, we should at least respect such diversities. Consider this quote: "Sometimes it's best to learn to let go of our thoughts of how people should be and learn to enjoy them as they are - idiosyncrasies included." [4]

I have supplied links to the quotes I used to highlight my opinions. They are numbered below.



[1] https://www.mackinac.org/3606

[2] https://www.budtoboss.com/management/problem-labeling-people/

[3] https://bahaiteachings.org/danger-putting-labels-people

[4] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/stress-remedy/200810/the-utility-and-problems-labels

So, what do you think? Are you going to assign a negative label on me? Are you going to at least consider the problems of labeling? Or, will you simply ignore it?

*Note: I did not proofread this post at all, so I apologize for poor grammar, spelling, punctuation, word choice, etc.

I am 100% in agreement.. everything is framed as "good vs bad" or "righteous vs evil" because it makes it easier to fight things when you view them in absolute terms and you view people of similar points of view as a monolith rather than a group of individuals..... then you don't have to consider that 100% of humanity lives somewhere in the gray area in between absolute good and absolute evil...

Yes, we've seen countless examples of this throughout history. Native Americans were "savages." African Americans were [I got reprimanded for using this word in a similar context, so I won't use it.] Mexican were "Wet backs."

To compound matters, we are now assigning these labels to anyone who does not agree w/our own personal political preferences.

I have never liked such labeling and I still don't. It's a huge turnoff for me when people throw these labels around in an effort to somehow champion their particular positions.

Glorified name calling intended to get under the skin of someone you don’t agree with...

If someone does not agree with me, I get called a liberal... Not really true.

To some degree I agree with you. To a certain degree I don't.

I've said many times that people use the term racist and racism far too frequently. As a result, when something is racist, people seem to turn a deaf ear to it because the term is used too often. It's much like "The Boy Who Cried Wolf".

On the other hand, when someone does something blatantly racist, or uses fascist type tactics, I have no problem seeing them called out on it.

Let's look at checks and balances, shall we?

When he was being sued over "Trump University", he claimed a judge of Mexican descent couldn't possibly be fair to him. If that isn't playing the race card, what is?

He has said that the Democrats are treasonous.

He has called the press the enemy of the people.

He has attacked every check and balance in place of the presidency.

If that doesn't appear to be an authoritarian message, what does?

Those who stand behind those type of remarks get what they deserve. Those making excuses for those type of remarks get what they deserve.

In the past, "pre-Trump" I have disagreed with some Republican policies. However, I didn't question their patriotism. I didn't question that they believed and felt sincere in those beliefs. Now?

I question all of that and more. I question if there is any length they won't go to in order to get what they want. If they're willing to sell their souls for power. If they're willing to support a racist, someone who helps embolden white supremacists, a wanna be authoritarian who undermines all of the checks and balances that exist to control his power.

The answer I come up with to all of those questions is yes.

There comes a time in our nations history where people have stood up. Where they have seen the ills and have fought to call it out and change it.

The last one that comes to mind was senator Joseph McCarthy and McCarthyism. We are at that crossroads yet again and the fight is not for the meek nor the faint of heart.

This thread was not about Trump. But, you probably just turned it into one. Thanks, old buddy.

I think I led w/the term liberals and how people tried to act like that is a dirty word. I tried to paint w/a broad brush and I don't get how you thought I was talking about Trump.

I provided quotes from four separate articles to accent my points on the problems associated w/labeling. Check them out again w/out this being a pro-Trump or anti-Trump thread. It was supposed to be a "human" thread, Pit.

But that's a lot of where the terms you mentioned like, "racist, fascist, and authoritarian" became far more common place in political discussions.

I mean if you wish to discuss how Democrats have started using terms like that so heavily, don't you think it would be sort of silly not to show why that's happening as part of the discussion?

I guess not. But as you know with everything there is a cause and effect. You just wish to seem to want to avoid the cause.

I'm not like that. Thanks for pointing out how I'm supposed to post in a thread again.

Mussolini made the trains run on time.

Now, instead of shrieking like demented harpies, try actually examining HOW that was done, WHY it was important, and WHAT were the reasons nobody else had been able to get that done. Over 50 years after almost every other modern nation had solved the problem.

That will not happen, because the label is more important, to many, than the reality. It removes the need for complicated thought processes.

Or ... maybe the statement is factually incorrect or disproportionately praising a dictator in an effort to try and show how smart one is with a contentious example?

Google is your friend:

https://www.thoughtco.com/did-mussolini-get-the-trains-running-on-time-1221609

People uttering the phrase about trains and Mussolini have fallen for the pro-Fascist propaganda the Italian dictator used to bolster his power in 1920s and 1930s Italy.

While the Italian rail service did improve during the early portion of Mussolini’s rule (World War II rather interrupted the latter part), the improvements had more to do with people who pre-dated Mussolini than anything changed by his government. Even then, the trains didn’t always run on time.

With that said .... I have no doubt that there are examples of things bad people have done that have been beyond the (then) ability or capacity of other 'good' people or societies.

To extend that to politics and the labels people fall into - and to use Trump as en example - because I write about all the moronic and bad things Trump has done and is doing ... it doesn't mean that I don't recognize his achievements. Not everything 'Trump' is bad.... the bad merely outweighs the good by such an extent that it's not what get's focused on.

Ummm....have you ever been to Italy and taken the train or bus? Patience in waiting and arriving late becomes an art form over there.

I think labeling is VERY common place in our society. Not saying it is good, but I also don't think what is happening or what we are seeing is anything new.

Think about the labels and cliques in school: "jock", "nerd", "preppy", "goth", "metalhead", "punk", "stoner" etc. Think about the labels we place on other countries: "Limeys", "Frogs", "Krauts"...and those horrible names/labels we place on our allies! We put even more disgustingly xenophobic and racist labels on those we deem to be our adversary.

All of this labeling is now showing up more aggressively in the divisive political field we currently live in. But, it isn't anything new.

Scheduling is very important when you are using single-track railroads.

Hundreds were being killed.

The Italian government was so disorganized, ineffective, corrupt, etc., that it was an extreme level of incompetence.

Mussolini was not all that much better, but slightly better than total crap is a noticeable improvement. Industrial and agricultural output increased.

Also, in case you failed to notice, he has been dead for almost 75 years. Does not have much effect on train schedules today.

The Italian people tolerated a level of stupid government that most Americans just will not put up with. Some will, because they see personal advantage in it. Many others do not. Mussolini gained power because the people recognized that a change was necessary.

In America, we instituted accurate clocks and strict schedule-keeping back in the 1870's. That is the type of ability to act which needs to be restored. Label it whatever you want, but things are going to change.

do we really have a guy defending mussolini because he made the railroads run on time?

lol man what the hell....

jc

I dont have a problem with labeling when it applies to people of a self described tribe. Example: If you claim to be a liberal then be prepared to be painted with a liberal paintbrush. If you claim to be a liberal then dont get mad when you are called out for unsavory liberal policies or behaviors.

You cant claim to be something then not take responsibility for it.

I only have a problem with labeling when you just make up random stupid insults because someone disagrees with you.

Example: "What? You dont want medicare for all? You must be a trumpian white nazi supremist."

Thats just dumb.

i agree with this.

im liberal, so even if i dont like the squad, everyone is aware by my self-described liberal label that policy wise, they mostly line up.

but i hope you're aware the same goes for self described trump supporters, and/or conservatives.

I know, right?

The Italian trains are hardly German/Dutch/Swiss precision these days! I bet they never were!

j/c:

Has not one person other than DC and perhaps Charger not read and understood the part about how people assign labels to categorize entire groups of people w/out really trying to understand the situation?

Of course, we all label things. It helps us maintain order. We can even label people w/terms like sociopath when it is apparent that they have no conscience/guilt about their actions against other members of society.

I'm trying to discuss labels that are weak. They are thrown out there to demean others who do not agree w/us. The word "liberal" should not be used as an insult. I think it is a positive character trait to be a liberal thinker. Likewise, not everyone who is a GOP is a racist, Nazi, or Fascist.

I can't believe that I even have to explain this. It's so freaking obvious.

The only conclusion I can come to is that there are folks that want to continue to spread hate and feel the need to demean the beliefs of others in order to justify their own beliefs.

That is a problem!!!

Diversity is a good thing. It's good that we have different ideologies. Our differences should be accepted because it acts as a natural check-and-balance system to ensure that the rights and beliefs of all are upheld.

I'm kinda confused...I get the gist of your point, but at the same time in the first paragraph you say "we all label things...it helps us maintain order" and then in the 2nd paragraph you say "I'm trying to discuss labels that are weak that thrown out to demean others who don't agree w/us".

So...who determines what is a weak label and what isn't? Who is to say someone can't argue that whatever label one assigns is there to maintain order or that it is weak and meant to demean?

Labels are just that....a label. I think the truth is found within and beyond the "label". But, too often many don't look past whatever label they assign.

I kinda doubt you are confused. I could be wrong, but I think you just are trying to diminish what I'm saying.

If you are really confused, how about you read the articles that I linked. That might help clarify my position.

After you read them, please feel free to ask me to clarify anything that still confuses you.

I will offer one clarification that might not be addressed in the articles. Wait.........I already did when I brought up the sociopath example.

Look man, if you are really confused and are being honest....I apologize for my tone. But, I don't think you are ignorant. Thus, I have a feeling you are simply trying to tear apart my thoughts because you think it is okay to assign labels w/out substance.

I am NOT arguing along party lines. I am saying that BOTH SIDES are guilty of unfairly labeling one another. How much more clear can I be????

For the rest of you - Single-track railroads means that long stretches have to be used by trains going in both directions. "On time" is actually less important than "AFTER the oncoming train has passed this point. Not BEFORE.".

Mussolini was an incompetent, corrupt, womanizing boob. He was, however, far more effective than the total morons who were running things before he took power.

Is someone "bad" if they are much better than what was there before? Hundreds were killed in head-on train collisions.

The expression is a metaphor for the concept that "this is not a simple scenario. It is layered and complex."

Now, if you just can't think beyond Fascist-evil, and cannot comprehend the lack of effect of a man who has been dead for 75 years, well... you folks can just wait for the sock-puppet show.

I'm simply adding to the debate, but if it makes you mad, upset or you feel challenged by me doing so or think I am somehow "diminishing" what you are saying...well, then...ok.

In the end, I think I asked a fairly decent and critical question regarding the point you are trying to make. Also, you can't lay out some big thread and not expect people to debate, discuss and challenge what you are saying. Afterall, isn't that healthy dialogue? Otherwise it just becomes one way and people will switch off and walk away from those doing all the talking and who don't listen.

j/c..............Kinda/Sorta

Hey guys.......is there any way we can just ignore Nelson on this thread? This topic is important to me.

It all started because of how I felt so sorry for Native Americans, African Americans [they were not called that back then,] and Jews.

I evolved and I got how women and homosexuals were labeled.

I tried to address how I felt about being called a liberal and libtard. I tried to address that I don't think everyone who voted for Trump is a racist, a Nazi, or a Fascist.

Are there unsavory members in all groups? Of course.

But, I am trying to say that we should take the time to get to know people before we assign such derogatory labels on them. I am NOT asking that we all agree on things. Differences are good in my opinion. I'm just saying we would be better off if we approach things w/intelligence, tolerance, and understanding rather than hate, prejudice, and bias.

Would y'all help me in talking about those issues and ignoring Nelson's obvious attempt to hijack the thread?

PDX, I made a ton of points and you ignored them all and isolated on one small segment of what I said. Taken in isolation, you would have a valid point. However, if you look at everything else to provide context to that quote, your confusion seems unwarranted.

I am NOT asking you to agree w/me. I am asking that you not misconstrue my intent. Is that too much to ask? Btw---you did not read the articles, did you?

......

There are 4 articles there attached to your long thread. It's 5:30 over here, I was out much of the day and I now need to walk 2 dogs and cook dinner for my wife & I. However, before you go off on me for not reading them RIGHT NOW and posting on your thread...remember when I asked you if you had watched Elizabeth Warren's 10min Q&A at the NEA Conference I had posted and you asked me instead to "break her points down for you"? I won't ask you to do that with these articles you attached...I WILL give them some time and actually read them. However, in the meantime, I still think my questions regarding your actual words you wrote in the above thread is still valid and still remains unanswered.

PDX................the difference is that I never once challenged your position on the Education thread. You challenged mine by taking one small paragraph and isolating it from everything else I said. That is not cool.

But, f..... it. There really are never any reasonable discussions on this forum. It's all about mocking those who support one side or another. And for some, it's like playing King Kong and beating their chests to show how dominant they are.

It's never about "progress."

Not only did I post an article that debunked this theory of yours ... I am still trying to figure out how you think it in any way shape or form applies to Vers thread ... It's like you're trying so dang hard to be contentious and smarter than everyone ... that or your a college kid who just read up on this and need to crow bar it into a conversation somehow ... smh ...

Vers - as to your points (and I have not read any articles) ... yes, people do put labels on groups and segments that threaten or challenge their beliefs or perspectives, and it's easier than trying to understand or discuss or self evaluate. Again - like another thread somewhere, I am reminded of MLK and his belief that love (and understating) is needed to overcome hate and bigotry. I'm also reminded in an abstract way of of another idiom - "Mob rule" - it's human nature (instinct is probably a better word) to somewhat seek others of similar persuasion and attack/ostracize those that are different ... which is why self reflection, analysis, communication and understanding of others is hard and requires a commitment/effort. jmo

Dude...like relax. Honestly. I challenged and questioned some points you made. Do you want me to bow to your royal highness? I'm sorry man, but I'm not.

To me education is about dialogue. Good dialogue. That mean critically evaluating, questioning, listening and hopefully broadening one's horizon. I believe that is what you want with your thread. I submitted a question that I felt was a critical point. If you feel defensive about people doing that then this isn't really a two way discussion. Which , I am happy to have once I have the time to read the 4 articles, but I'm not going to get into lame arm wrestling competitions with you over it.

ok, ill give real thoughts.

im going to try and take a step back with the political labeling for a second and look at the bigger picture, before zooming back in.

labeling, in general, isn't a bad thing. i mean we practice basic 'labeling' everyday, and have since recorded history.

labeling also doesn't have to be verbal, either. just think back to ancient civilizations. did the royal egyptians not mark themselves with tattoos and makeup to separate themselves from the peasants and slaves?

do witch doctors not wear special ceremonial clothing and markings on a regular basis to distinguish themselves from others?

the wealthy use to brand their gladiators to make sure nobody confused them with another house. in greece, the birthplace of democracy, government officials would wear different clothing to visually show their separation from everyday civilians.

i mean we practice labeling simply by identifying which country we belong to, and with that label comes the sense of pride and/or shame, depending on time and place.

we not only label each other, but willingly and knowingly label OURSELVES on a regular basis, in order to be unique, or for reasons such as fear and safety.

or in the more destructive cases, in order to show superiority.

i mean damn. if i called some of you steeler fans, there's a good chance some of you would be more offended at that label than calling you a bigot.

if someone is wearing black eyeliner, dyed their hair black, piercings, and keep sounding like a suicide case, and then hang around others like that, its pretty hard not to label them emo/goth.

if somebody has their pants damn near around their knees, speaks like their at a Rick Ross concert, hangs out with others like that, and then tries to hand you their mixtape, i get why its hard not to label them thugs, or atleast wannabe's.

if somebody goes out of their way to lift their truck, blast country music, have the confederate flag waving on the back of their truck, and dress like they're constantly on a farm or factory, its gonna be hard not to label them rednecks, especially when thats the energy they are trying to convey.

its no different when it comes to political labels.

yes, there are subgroups that try to be different. but lets be honest here, Vers. someone who identifies with the tea party is most likely to identify with what?

conservatism.

somebody who wont shut up about bernie sanders and hating the wealthy will most likely identify with what? liberalism.

its unavoidable, its that right there is the reason why we have so many labels amongst labels in politics specifically.

the issue i see is the people who seem to be in denial as to what they are. people get mad that they get labeled as <insert whatever> yet that same person doesn't seem to what to ask a very personal question:

what energy am i putting out there?

i mean if im on here ranting against the man, dissing law enforcement every chance i get, trash religion as a system, want regulations on the wealthy/corporations, amongst other things.. THEN get upset with someone calling me a leftist and/or liberal, then the reality is that i probably have an identity crisis.

nobody can tell someone to go back to <insert country> and NOT expect them to be labeled at best, a xenophobe, and at worst a racist. thats the energy that said person is putting out there.

its as i said in the other thread. a lot of time, people think they are sending a certain message, when its an entirely different one being received.

Yeah, and that is what the intelligent and fair-minded people have to fight. Let's not get drawn into a war of insults and labels. Let's make it known that we are intelligent, open-minded folks who judge individuals as individuals and do not place derogatory labels on entire groups of people.

I could be wrong, but I think that there are more fair-minded and intelligent folks in our country than there are narrow-minded, ignorant folks. We just aren't as vocal.

I say that because it's pretty obvious that the "loud" folks are garnering all the attention. I think we should speak up. Not in a hostile manner, but let it be known that we don't accept biased, hateful labels for entire groups of our population.

I'm a dreamer... Always have been.

.

edit reason, refs seem to be deleting post left and right

I have absolutely no idea where you got that from other than you are simply trying to negate my points. I said that it was okay to disagree w/me. I just asked you to not misrepresent my points.

I see what you are doing, PDX. This will be my last reply to you.

I appreciate your post. I do think you misunderstand my position, but that's okay. You bared your heart and that is a good thing.

Man oh, man. sometimes you are very easy to talk to and other times you are VERY sensitive and take everything as insult or being "diminished". It happens in the music threads a lot too. If anybody chimes in with possibly a bit more knowledge on art or music you think we are being "elitist" (you have mentioned that multiple times in those threads). Same with the Football threads. Thus my "royal highness" comment. Other times, however, you seem fine with free flowing discourse. Guess it depends on the mood you are in at the time of posting. IDK....

Anyway, if you are no longer going to reply to me then there really is no point in me taking the time to properly read the 4 articles and then sitting down to disseminate them to further make my points.

Future reference...If you post a question you need to prepare for people to answer and make topics of conversations. EVEN if it sometimes goes off tangent here or there or becomes challenging and even uncomfortable. It's not about being "cool" or "elitist" (see...labels!) with how one answers or questions. In the end, it's all about dialogue and maybe getting to some resolve and conclusion to better understand the topic.

Here's the thing, I have 'got' what you are saying for a long time now BUT I disagree with your line of thinking. I'm going to do my best to not make you feel like I'm putting you down because this IS an important conversation to have and the biggest reason we are going to have it is because people are uncomfortable with being labeled as fascist, racist, nazis; therein lies the flaw in your logic.

If you were to witness a group on individuals graffiti tagging the school in an act of vandalism, wouldn't you feel comfortable calling them vandals? Well when I look at the incendiary words and actions coming from the right these days I see racists, fascists, and Nazis. I think we should not only call that out but do everything in our power to end it before it escalates and history repeats itself. There is no need for sugar coating and the time to try and talk it out ended when they (the right) started condoning, accepting, and making excuses for things like the kidnapping and killing of children at the border, the obvious racism of the POTUS, the rise of white supremacy as some sort of victimized forgotten man syndrome suffered by the white people who feel entitled to oppress other races, or the ridiculously religious zealots who want to heave their beliefs onto everyone else by making laws based on those beliefs. This stopped being about how can we work this out and get along when the tea party came onto the scene. Liberals tried to stay at or around historic 'norms' in their political discourse for 8 years while bigots shamefully attacked our first NON-WHITE POTUS again and again and again...

Trump is a disgrace to America, plain and simple. He has openly lied 12,000+ times, routinely said racist things, supported White Supremacist and Nazis with a wink and a nod from the highest platform in the land! At first we tried to point this out with normal discourse only to be called libtards, socialists, crying libs, TDS, or 40's sissy half men... All the while we watched in utter disbelief as these things were supported, excused, and ignored by the majority of Trump acolites with little to no concern about the effects on the human beings, environment, socio economic and strategic political concerns of the United States.

As stated by others, not every single thing Trump or his admin have done is this vile and reprehensible but the percentage that is by far outweighs any good they have done. So when you have a group acting like racists, fascists, and Nazis OR showing solidarity and/or unyielding support for the same; then they deserve to be branded with those shocking labels and called out wherever they show up! History has proven how these beliefs must be defeated and it is certainly not with some sort of hugging it out...

The bewilderment displayed by the right for being called these things, or even for being violently confronted by groups like antifa IS A SMALL PRICE TO PAY versus allowing these beliefs to grow and fester in the greatest democracy on earth. I've said it several times but maybe you only read it as a literal statement rather than a philosophical barb; the only way to confront a Nazi is to punch them in the nose!

When you get called these things for condoning these types of actions ( a list which is too numerous to recount here), maybe there is hope if it makes you uncomfortable enough to take pause and think about what you are supporting. I certainly took pause in 2016 and recently when I started getting labeled a socialist in the use of the word meant to depict evil... That happens all the time in here and in the real world! Smug right wingers and centrist bandy that word around in that context as if it were fact based when talking about liberal ideas! Ideas that attempt to lift people up and give more opportunities to working people are somehow distressing to the right, yet they support the things Trump and company are doing! So they are now getting their wake up call in the form of truthful verbal punches in the nose. You should consider them warning shots, because if things continue like they have been there will be much worse coming very soon.

And before the right wing conservatives get all pouty lipped feeling silenced, they should know that the left doesn't hate conservative philosophy and none of this is about that. The left doesn't hate people who are religious or want to stop them from practicing their religion, we just won't let their religion dictate the laws that all of us have to abide by. But the biggest thing you should realize from all of this is that the true majority in this country is no longer going to stand by and allow this to continue. There is zero chance Trump gets another term without MAJOR trouble in the streets. Zero chance. I hope many like you who prefer the center and getting along will consider those words in the days to come. That is not me making a threat, that is me calling it the way I see it and yes it is that bad.

Labels serve a purpose in that they allow us to talk about a group without 1000 disclaimers.. like "Liberals believe that... " maybe not all self-described liberals believe that exactly but enough do that you can generalize.. without that we would spend 90% of our time disclaiming exactly who we are are talking about.

One of the problems with labels is that the person using the label and the person being assigned the label, might define the label differently.. If you call me a "conservative" in that I believe in low taxes, controlled spending, limited government, states rights, etc.. (all the things conservatives used to stand for) I'll own most of that. If you call me a "conservative" to mean Trump supporter, warmonger, environment killer, racist, bigot.. I will deny that til the day I die and probably get somewhat ticked off. That's why labels in one on one conversations go better than in a group setting like this.. in a face to face, one on one, you can judge a persons tone you can ask for clarification, you can communicate and you can JUST TELL, whether they are using the label as a generalization or as an insult... in this group setting, you throw a label out there and 5 people respond to it differently based on how they interpreted its use.

I know there won't be a reply, but I read them. All of them. I agree, to a certain extent, with the gist of the articles. But, to be honest, I don't think any of them are particularly well written. But, that's just my opinion and it says more about the quality of journalism today.

I did, however, pull this one sentence out, which I think pretty much sums up what I was saying in a couple of my comments above:

Bottom line: Rather than slap a label on someone to justify your refusal to understand where the person is coming from, try some open, honest communication.

I don't think anyone on the left is out to get conservatives in the context of true conservatism; I would actually say that calling Trump and those who blindly support him racists, fascists, and Nazis is as much in defense of conservative values as it is liberal values! Neither group wants to see a Fascist Racist America ruled by an elitist tyrant!

I understand that a lot of people bought into Trump's lies and promises in 2016, a lot of my family did too. But we are not talking about traditional American political views anymore with Trump and company, we all know that especially those denying it. None of us can change what brought us to this moment, but enough of us saying this will not stand CAN change where we go from here.

My bottom line is that takes work that someone may not want to do.

A label distills a person into a single word. There are many assumptions about it some will be more accurate than others.

It is also a deflection tool... someone can find themselves in an uncomfortable position, and drop the label to change the topic, rather than to engage. It happens here all the time.

The Sashiettes agree!