We have all seen the terms for years; crook, idiot, rubes, money-grubber, tree-hugger, bleeding-heart and those are the older terms. Has anyone asked lately if phrases, often devoid of meaning, aid any cause at all. Isn’t it more likely that they simply make the other guy look bad.
All sides are guilty of the practice as a form of dismissal. In the last few years these phrases have taken new shapes, with the same intention. The newer phrases, with our instant gratification society, can take hold in a matter of hours. Phrases, or terms, like neo-con, liberal-progressive (which is either redundant or purely meaningless), tea-bagger (which is actually indecent), anti-American, statist, -obviously those favorites like- socialist, racist, mercantilist, redistributionist, progressive and -one we all miss- pinko.They are fun to say but what good do they do? It’s more likely that these superlatives take the place of actual dialogue and debate. They marginalize either the giver, or the receiver. The turn the middle off completely from civic involvement and push all sides to the extreme. They are used regularly, especially more recently, by powerful leaders and executive to the social networking posting.
All sides are guilty, if they have the self honesty to admit it. The most enlightened observer, or commentator can’t claim the saintliness of “being above such things” (which again is a matter of self honesty). The funny thing about it is that while some resort to this tactic, they often complain about “polarization.”
What these poor rhetorical tools likely do is take the place of substance. They often serve as substitutions for a strong positions. All of us would be better served if these tool were left in the bag more often and were replaced by actual dialogue.
Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
