I have been following some discussions on another site about majority vs. minority opinions and the difference between discussing issues and policies vs. the habit of some to just name-call.
I thought I might share some of my own thoughts on this idea of name-calling with regard to politics…
One writer recently wrote this:
It’s typical Bush xenophobia. Maybe he thinks if he rejects these
agreements he won’t have to read them and then ask Uncle Dick to explain
what they mean.
Here is the context: the statement is referring to US refusal to participate in certain “global” efforts to cooperate on things such as the Kyoto treaty and other similar projects. In particular there is at issue a 1998 Rome Statute that has something to do with an international criminal court. Clinton signed it but Bush doesn’t want to let it go to Congress and is pushing for other stuff instead.
Anyhow, the summary of that is for my own reference. I honestly don’t know much detail about this particular matter, but I’m pretty sure that the guy who write the above statement doesn’t either. Nor does he have to…
Steve made an observation the other day that I feel is accurate and it is upsetting to me. He pointed out that in a lot of discussions within the media, on the internet (and to some extent in person), if someone wishes to express conservative views he or she must carefully explain the context, offer both sides of the issue, and clearly defend why he or she has opted to take on the conservative view. While the liberal left side can just say, “well, Bush is a moron and Ashcroft is like Hitler” without having to backup or justify their statements and all arguments to the contrary are moot. (I’m exaggerating a bit here, but only slightly imo.)
Name-calling - I’d like to delve into this one just a bit more because it has gotten to the point where I have started to take offense. First off, aside from being banal and childish, calling someone a moron ad nauseam does not in fact make them a moron. Furthermore, when the someone is a political figure that citizens have cast their votes for, you are in essence stating (or at least implying) that those who voted for him/her are equal or greater morons for having placed their faith in that someone. This is where I am just tired of listening. And I’m tired of the double-standard. When conservatives called Clinton or those who worked in his administration names - or even just criticized them, they were shoved against a wall and told to quit engaging in the “partisan politics of name-calling.”
But the liberal left can spew forth all kinds of garbage while the conservative camp is just supposed to stick to arguing the issues… I’m really sick of it.
Final point and then I’ll shut up. It may be inferred from this essay that the person who wrote the comment I quoted above is a member of the “liberal left”. I do not know if this is the case and do not intend to “label” him in that way. I just felt that particular comment he made stirred up the same feelings I get when those who are members of the liberal left start spewing forth their garbage (er, I mean, their totally valid opinions which amount to defenseless name-calling.)
