NationStates Jolt Archive

or "conservative" or "liberal?"

I don't think it is. It's one of my biggest pet peeves. Know where I first learned about the terms at all? AOL Chat Rooms. Yeah. People would say "blah blah blah the left" or "blah blah blah evil conservatives" and pat themselves on the back for being so politically wise. Meanwhile, they've said absolutely nothing.

I've been pigeonholed on this forum as a "leftist," primarily when I argue against the kinds of people who rant about how evil Islam is. So, what does that mean, in the US anyway?

That I'm pro-welfare? Oops, I'm not. Pro free healthcare? No. Democrat? No. Whiny? Limp-wristed? Effete? Loves Michael Moore? Thinks Bush is evil personified? Is that all that "left" is?

I don't think it is. In fact, for the most part, the only kinds of people who make generalizations about "the left" or "the right" are people who really want to make insults. I suggest to those people you be more honest and stop trying to look political. You don't mean "the left." You mean "those big meanie poopie-heads who I don't like." Same for the right.

Kierkegaard once said, "If you label me, you negate me." I think this applies very well here. Liberal, conservative, left, right - they may have some limited use as neutral terms. But no one uses them neutrally. People who identify themselves as one talk shit about the other. The sole purpose seems to be an extension of high school football cheerleading. Ra ra ra, go team.

Well, I meant to open this up for discussion but instead I seem to be just ranting. (I suppose some wiseass will talk about me as an example of "the leftist mentality" or "the psychology of liberalism" or some idiotic shit like that now...) Anyway, your turn. What do you think. Should we ditch these stupid terms forever and be real, or should we continue leaning on political crutches that serve to justify and reinforce our own mindless need to have an "us versus them" even if we have to do nothing but pound strawmen every day?

I agree, pigeonholing rarely has any benefit.

But then, labels are a tool we use to dismiss others, to put them down and feel superior. To feel justified.

Labels are easier than ideas. Than actually thinking.

I wonder if you could fit a pidegeon into a hole. suppose it depends on the size.

When you get down to it, making decisions is difficult, regardless if the decision made is important or not. If a job interview involves lunch and the interviewer asks the interviewee if they would like beef or chicken, many people will become paralysed trying to figure out the implications of such a decision. A reasonable person would realize it is a simple question and will answer based on either their personal preference or some other arbitrary means.

Pigeonholing is an expedient means to narrowing one's audience and building the confidence necessary to take action. It's much easier to relate to half of everybody as opposed to everybody.

I agree, 'left' and 'right' aren't terribly descriptive, and I'm sure if you asked most people they wouldn't identify as one or the other - both terms encompass so many different attitudes and ideas that when given more than a cursory glance, they're almost meaningless.

Then again, it's probably easier for my conservative friends/colleagues/enemies to insult me by calling me a 'bloody leftie', rather than calling me a 'bloody pro-civil-rights-except-for-criminals-who-need-harsher-penalties pro-family and pro-heavy-regulation-of-business-and discouragement-of-monopolies person'.

Ahem.

When you get down to it, making decisions is difficult, regardless if the decision made is important or not. If a job interview involves lunch and the interviewer asks the interviewee if they would like beef or chicken, many people will become paralysed trying to figure out the implications of such a decision. A reasonable person would realize it is a simple question and will answer based on either their personal preference or some other arbitrary means.

Pigeonholing is an expedient means to narrowing one's audience and building the confidence necessary to take action. It's much easier to relate to half of everybody as opposed to everybody.

In other words, it's a good way to pander to an audience that can't be bothered with little things like thinking?

And since when is peoples idiotic notions of "left" or "right" applicable to even "half of everybody?" The way I've seen them used the past 10 years, they apply to perhaps 1% of real people.

Humans have a tendency to form in groups and outgroups. People take this to ridiculous extremes. I've seen a young man scream at an old lady because she supported an oposing football team. To put it bluntly, human survival depends to large extent on overcoming this tendency and seeing all of humanity as your "group."

Too many people regard politics as a sport be be won or lost and not a chance for cooperation where all groups can win.

While some competition is healthy, most good in this world comes from people working together.

Useful to whom? Usefullness is context-driven ;)

In other words, it's a good way to pander to an audience that can't be bothered with little things like thinking?

And since when is peoples idiotic notions of "left" or "right" applicable to even "half of everybody?" The way I've seen them used the past 10 years, they apply to perhaps 1% of real people.

They don't. The point I was trying to make is that people need ways to have the confidence to act and making such distinctions facilitates that. Some people can walk down the street and strike up a conversation with the person standing next to them as if it was nothing at all. Others will only talk to a stranger if they fit into any number of racial, sexual, age-related, and socio-economic categories. The latter category does have limits on the number of people that they can interact with, but both groups do communicate with others.

It works destuctively as well. There are many people that are just angry at the world, but know if they attack just anyone, they will face consequences. It's much easier to attack someone if you are convinced that nobody else likes them either. Not that it makes such an attack any more justifiable, but it makes it possible.

It's not accurate. Most people are a mix of "left" and "right" ideals. Labels are handy for tagging your enemies with to ridicule and harass with.

Because once you've fit some one in a box, they're easier to bury.

Liasia']I wonder if you could fit a pidegeon into a hole. suppose it depends on the size.

Is a pidgeonhole a hole FOR a pidgeon, or a hole IN a pidgeon? :confused:

Is a pidgeonhole a hole FOR a pidgeon, or a hole IN a pidgeon? :confused:
As in putting one pidgeon into another? That'd be wierd at least.

Liasia']As in putting one pidgeon into another? That'd be wierd at least.

A hole for a pidgeon in a pidgeon? That's kinda hot. :)

A hole for a pidgeon in a pidgeon? That's kinda hot. :)
Be kinda messy methinks. Not talking from experience (well, except that one time:p ).

or "conservative" or "liberal?"

I don't think it is. It's one of my biggest pet peeves. Know where I first learned about the terms at all? AOL Chat Rooms. Yeah. People would say "blah blah blah the left" or "blah blah blah evil conservatives" and pat themselves on the back for being so politically wise. Meanwhile, they've said absolutely nothing.

I've been pigeonholed on this forum as a "leftist," primarily when I argue against the kinds of people who rant about how evil Islam is. So, what does that mean, in the US anyway?

That I'm pro-welfare? Oops, I'm not. Pro free healthcare? No. Democrat? No. Whiny? Limp-wristed? Effete? Loves Michael Moore? Thinks Bush is evil personified? Is that all that "left" is?

I don't think it is. In fact, for the most part, the only kinds of people who make generalizations about "the left" or "the right" are people who really want to make insults. I suggest to those people you be more honest and stop trying to look political. You don't mean "the left." You mean "those big meanie poopie-heads who I don't like." Same for the right.

Kierkegaard once said, "If you label me, you negate me." I think this applies very well here. Liberal, conservative, left, right - they may have some limited use as neutral terms. But no one uses them neutrally. People who identify themselves as one talk shit about the other. The sole purpose seems to be an extension of high school football cheerleading. Ra ra ra, go team.

Well, I meant to open this up for discussion but instead I seem to be just ranting. (I suppose some wiseass will talk about me as an example of "the leftist mentality" or "the psychology of liberalism" or some idiotic shit like that now...) Anyway, your turn. What do you think. Should we ditch these stupid terms forever and be real, or should we continue leaning on political crutches that serve to justify and reinforce our own mindless need to have an "us versus them" even if we have to do nothing but pound strawmen every day?

It's useful if you're trying to get votes.

It's a definite damper on conversation. I love it when people think I'm a fascist or a super-conservative or a Bush apologist. It lets me know how far wrong they really are, and how quickly they want to pigeonhole me.

In fact, it seems to be one of the standard forms of "argument" here.

DK: <posits something>

Annoyed Poster: DK, you're just a <fill in label here> who sucked the scum off of <insert infamous dictator here>'s boots. You just love <insert name of hated personality here> and everything he/she stands for. I hope you rot in <insert place of eternal punishment for your religion here> forever, and I hope they <torture, sodomize, you name it> with a <hawthorn bush, pineapple, belt sander>.

A hole for a pidgeon in a pidgeon? That's kinda hot. :)

It's not like stuffing birds into other birds hasn't been tried before. Why else would they have turducken?

It's useful if you're trying to get votes.

It's a definite damper on conversation. I love it when people think I'm a fascist or a super-conservative or a Bush apologist. It lets me know how far wrong they really are, and how quickly they want to pigeonhole me.

In fact, it seems to be one of the standard forms of "argument" here.

DK: <posits something>

Annoyed Poster: DK, you're just a <fill in label here> who sucked the scum off of <insert infamous dictator here>'s boots. You just love <insert name of hated personality here> and everything he/she stands for. I hope you rot in <insert place of eternal punishment for your religion here> forever, and I hope they <torture, sodomize, you name it> with a <hawthorn bush, pineapple, belt sander>.

Wow. You're good. That's exactly what I was going to say.

Firstly, there is no 'd' in pigeon people!

Secondly, I agree with this thread entirely (aside from the discussion about fitting actual pigeons in holes). What I tend to dislike even more than generalisation, however, is partisanism. Those people who blindly follow a certain ideology, for whatever reason. Government should be about making life better for us all, not picking a side and endlessly bickering with and mocking the opposing side. It is these people who pigeonhole, and it is these people who are making governments around the world into one big childish farce.

Anyhoo, back on topic:

I defy labels. One of the few things that annoy me is attempts to label me. Especially politically. When it comes to most issues, I believe in a happy medium. I think the effort spent on extreme points of view in order to balance somewhere in the middle is a waste of energy.

Let me give you an example:

I'm pro-choice. I'm not pro-choice because I WANT to be. I abhor the idea of abortion. I consider every lost child the loss of a potential Einstein or Mozart or Dave Thomas. But it's a matter of individual rights. A woman has an absolute right of contol over her body. HOWEVER, I think that if the energy and effort that Pro-life people put into fighting abortion were put into revamping the adoption and foster care system, promoting contraception and improving sex education, they could all but eliminate abortions. And that'd be a wonderful thing.

I believe that hurting people and taking away their rights is wrong, and this seems to make me left wing. but i believe if anyone does those things we should hurt them and take away their rights.

Anyhoo, back on topic:

I defy labels. One of the few things that annoy me is attempts to label me. Especially politically. When it comes to most issues, I believe in a happy medium. I think the effort spent o extreme points of view in order to balance somewhere in the middle is a waste of energy.

Let me give you an example:

I'm pro-choice. I'm not pro-choice because I WANT to be. I abhr the idea of abortion. I consider every lost child he loss of a potential Einstein of Mozart or Dave Thomas. But it's a matter if individual rights. A woman has an absolute right of contol over her body. HOWEVER, I think that if the energy and effort that Pro-life people put into fighting abortion were put into revamping the adoption and foster care system, promoting contraception and improving sex education, they could all but eliminate abortions. And that'd be a wonderful thing.

Dave Thomas? Isn't he the WEndy's guy?

DK: <posits something>

Annoyed Poster: DK, you're just a <fill in label here> who sucked the scum off of <insert infamous dictator here>'s boots. You just love <insert name of hated personality here> and everything he/she stands for. I hope you rot in <insert place of eternal punishment for your religion here> forever, and I hope they <torture, sodomize, you name it> with a <hawthorn bush, pineapple, belt sander>.

It's like a Mad Lib! :D

Dave Thomas? Isn't he the WEndy's guy?

Yes. He was also one of the biggest proponents of adoption and fostercare being adopted himself. *nod*

But imagine if he had been aborted. No Spicy chicken sandwiches. :(

Yes. He was also one of the biggest proponents of adoption and fostercare being adopted himself. *nod*

But imagine if he had been aborted. No Spicy chicken sandwiches. :(

Exactly. Adoption, foster care, that's all fine and dandy, but my god, no spicy chicken sandwiches? I just don't know what I'd do.

Soheran will call me right-wing, Eutrusca will call me a Leftie.

So no, it's not particularly useful.

It's useful if you're trying to get votes.

It's a definite damper on conversation. I love it when people think I'm a fascist or a super-conservative or a Bush apologist. It lets me know how far wrong they really are, and how quickly they want to pigeonhole me.

In fact, it seems to be one of the standard forms of "argument" here.

DK: <posits something>

Annoyed Poster: DK, you're just a <fill in label here> who sucked the scum off of <insert infamous dictator here>'s boots. You just love <insert name of hated personality here> and everything he/she stands for. I hope you rot in <insert place of eternal punishment for your religion here> forever, and I hope they <torture, sodomize, you name it> with a <hawthorn bush, pineapple, belt sander>.

Pot. Meet Kettle. You do it as well DK. And I've seen you use it as a pre-emptive strike. Example.

Op: News about some political scene.

DK: Them liberal poopy heads will jump in and go blah, blah, blah, evil, blah, blah.

Don't deny it. You're tracks are all over the place.

Anyhoo, back on topic:

I defy labels. One of the few things that annoy me is attempts to label me.


I'll label you. You're a clown. A clown with apparently indestructible balls. And I bet you like that :p

And in not quite unrelated news.

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mba/lowres/mban445l.jpg

It's not like stuffing birds into other birds hasn't been tried before. Why else would they have turducken?

Why have I never heard of Turducken before now?!? :mad:

Whoever is in charge of keeping me informed of such things is obviously slacking and will be dealt with most harshly.

Sound yummy, by the way. *nod*

Labels are wrong, especially when you use them to make any ideas that contradict your own seem evil, stupid, and fork, people. Ooops, I labeled you all people. Sorry. Is it okay if I label you people? Some of you might be aliens, monkeys, computors, opinionless robots, or knives. I'll just label this a site where I can type in English. Is that okay?

or "conservative" or "liberal?"

I don't think it is. It's one of my biggest pet peeves. Know where I first learned about the terms at all? AOL Chat Rooms. Yeah. People would say "blah blah blah the left" or "blah blah blah evil conservatives" and pat themselves on the back for being so politically wise. Meanwhile, they've said absolutely nothing.

I've been pigeonholed on this forum as a "leftist," primarily when I argue against the kinds of people who rant about how evil Islam is. So, what does that mean, in the US anyway?

That I'm pro-welfare? Oops, I'm not. Pro free healthcare? No. Democrat? No. Whiny? Limp-wristed? Effete? Loves Michael Moore? Thinks Bush is evil personified? Is that all that "left" is?

I don't think it is. In fact, for the most part, the only kinds of people who make generalizations about "the left" or "the right" are people who really want to make insults. I suggest to those people you be more honest and stop trying to look political. You don't mean "the left." You mean "those big meanie poopie-heads who I don't like." Same for the right.

Kierkegaard once said, "If you label me, you negate me." I think this applies very well here. Liberal, conservative, left, right - they may have some limited use as neutral terms. But no one uses them neutrally. People who identify themselves as one talk shit about the other. The sole purpose seems to be an extension of high school football cheerleading. Ra ra ra, go team.

Well, I meant to open this up for discussion but instead I seem to be just ranting. (I suppose some wiseass will talk about me as an example of "the leftist mentality" or "the psychology of liberalism" or some idiotic shit like that now...) Anyway, your turn. What do you think. Should we ditch these stupid terms forever and be real, or should we continue leaning on political crutches that serve to justify and reinforce our own mindless need to have an "us versus them" even if we have to do nothing but pound strawmen every day?

Well I believe in free choice for women .
That Pot should be legal.
That first ammendment rights include making political statement by burning the flag.
That the aclu is a valuable part of protecting everyones rights as an American.
I believe the second ammendment gives the right and the obligation to bear arms.
I believe in government programs to help those who either cant help themselves or need help through a rough patch...like welfare foodstamps and other aid.
I would support a system to make health care more affordable.
I hated the origional patriot act and only grudgingly accepted the revised version.
I want to track down and kill or imprison the radical Islamic factions that declared war on my country and culture.
I am for the Iraq war .

So what type of conservative or liberal or left winger or right winger am I ?

It is a rather limited view. I still think that if you have to gauge someone’s political persausion, that Political Compass’ (http://www.politicalcompass.org/) idea is a much better one; gauge someone on an economic left/right scale as well as a authoritarian/libertarian scale. It shows that economically ‘left’ parties (such as the UK’s BNP) can also exhibit extremelly authoritarian stances, and merely labelling them as ‘right-wing’ is nieve and, IMO, dangerous.

On a side note, I’m pretty damn sure that ‘pidgeonholing’ comes from the nesting boxes in Do’cots (or Dovecots, for those south of the border); small avieries in the grounds of castles designed to hold hundreds of doves or pigeons, ready for eating.

I think its just a way to grab votes..by giving someone an idenity and marketing your particular flavor of bullshit aimed at them you can increase your market share more efficently .

I think its just a way to grab votes..by giving someone an idenity and marketing your particular flavor of bullshit aimed at them you can increase your market share more efficently .

Well, vote pandering is one reason politicians might do it. But what about all those who aren't? In particular, there are many posters on this forum who throw the terms around like they were grenades, who I was hoping would post on this thread to explain themselves.

I don't think it is. In fact, for the most part, the only kinds of people who make generalizations about "the left" or "the right" are people who really want to make insults. I suggest to those people you be more honest and stop trying to look political. You don't mean "the left." You mean "those big meanie poopie-heads who I don't like." Same for the right.

Kierkegaard once said, "If you label me, you negate me." I think this applies very well here. Liberal, conservative, left, right - they may have some limited use as neutral terms. But no one uses them neutrally. People who identify themselves as one talk shit about the other. The sole purpose seems to be an extension of high school football cheerleading. Ra ra ra, go team.

Labels for ideologies are as useful as labels/names for other ideas and objects. Political labels help like-minded people get together to form parties. Yes, Left and Right are generally, neutral descriptive terms.

Mainly Americans use them like hysterical idiots, but that's not the world.

Well, vote pandering is one reason politicians might do it. But what about all those who aren't? In particular, there are many posters on this forum who throw the terms around like they were grenades, who I was hoping would post on this thread to explain themselves.

For the same reason it works for voting, people, often without knowing it, like being part of the left or right. They like having a clear cut good vs. evil world. They hail one and demonize the other. It becomes a lot more difficult to argue with someone when you can't stereotype them. I'll give you a perfect example from my own experience. One time I was at a friend's party shortly before the 2004 U.S. Presidential election. One of the guys there asked me whether I'm liberal or conservative. First of all, it was none of his business, but I told him that I'm neither - I'm independent (In truth, I align myself with the Libertarians but I didn't want to get into a debate with him). Anyway, he says, "No really, what are you?"

That's how much the left/right scale has been cemented in people's heads. For once I agree with you Trostia. By dumping people only in those two categories, in my opinion people ignore the views of some of the more intelligent members of society who are not as prone to party politics.

Soheran will call me right-wing, Eutrusca will call me a Leftie.

So no, it's not particularly useful.
It is useful, but it is also rather subjective!