I try to be careful and precise with my written words, especially when I'm saying something that I know will be controversial about politics. I am highly cognizant of George Orwell's famous essay about "Politics and the English Language." I want to say what I'm really thinking, and to do so with flavor and some personal style- but I also want to be appropriate in my use of the language.
People sometimes object to any personal descriptions or criticisms as "ad hominem" or "to the person" attacks. Criticisms of someone's character do not answer how you would propose to pay for Social Security benefits, say.
To some extent, personal criticisms in politics are unavoidable, however. Math or physics operate on mechanical criteria. Either the formula is correct, or not- regardless of what you may think about the professor espousing it. Politics, however, to a significant extent is about people and personalities. You can't really talk about public affairs without sometimes talking about the people involved.
This leads me to considering the words I choose to describe political opponents, which is somewhat tricky. There are numerous considerations, depending on the circumstances. I don't want to just routinely villify anyone with whom I have any disagreement, and opposition comes from all sides and flavors.
I don't particularly mind if I speak harshly of Bill Clinton, for example. He already has made himself fairly demonic in a thousand ways, so there's not much danger of unfairly demonizing him with anything I might write about him. I wouldn't feel bad about describing him as an evil demagogue. The nasty bastard deserves worse language than that.
On the other hand, Barney Frank rates with me as a pretty decent fellow. Now, he holds a lot of socialistic and left-wing views with which I heartily disagree. Oh yes, sometimes watching him on the news I want to slap him- though I'm not sure that would discourage him. Anyway, I generally would consider him a smart and honest, if misguided, figure. I might call him a damned fool, but anything suggesting wickedness or dishonesty would not be right.
Sometimes you need generalized words, shorthand for groups of people or ways of thinking. The negative way to describe this would be to accuse one of "stereotyping." I try to be mindful of this, but the need for generalized terms is sometimes unavoidable. Analysis consists of picking out patterns and abstract associations, recognizing that this thing and that thing go together. Grouping is to some extent totally appropriate and unavoidable, particular when you're talking about self-selected groups, such as PETA or the NRA.
Article comments
1 - Michael Croft
It has potential, like calling conservative loons "Birchers". I prefer to make it a bit more discordian. "Tinfoil Helmet Brigade, John Birch Company", "Pinko Company", and "Ayn Rand Company" generally cover the similarities beween the left, right, and libertarian lunatic fringes.
The big concern about something like this can be summed up by the success and subsequent crash of the term "anti-idiotarian", which was originally coined to refer to "a person of differing political opinions than mine who nevertheless opposes the idiocy of their ideological compatriots." As it became more popular, it began to be used more broadly and less usefully for "a person who agrees with me and who has attacked someone I think is an idiot" and eventually became a self-applied label.
Unfortunately, "I am not an idiot" is about the same as saying "I am not a crook." It begs the question "Oh, really?"
So, even if you find a word that clearly implies what you mean, you may find your term doesn't mean what you'd like it to mean. Consider the two definitions of Anti-idiotarian codified by The Devil's Dictionary 2.0 and ESR's Jargon File.
But hey, good luck with your linguistic experiments.
2 - Al Barger
"Anti-idiotarian" doesn't really have much inherent meaning, it doesn't really say anything about a range of ideology that is intended. "Pinko" has some clear implication of left-wing thinking, of being commie-light (pink rather than red).
Variations on "Bircher" would strike a similar humorously archaic tone to "pinko" as a right-wing descriptive. And again, that's giving a somewhat negative inference, without going into overdrive about LYING NAZIS.
If someone were conversant enough in Rand to do it, variations on the Randroid theme would probably be the best broad shorthand for criticizing my end of the spectrum.
3 - Michael Croft
Right, I'm not suggesting that you (or anyone who wants to be taken seriously) use "anti-idiotarian". I'm suggesting that even if you do succeed in finding just the right term, it might not mean what you'd like to everyone involved.
I am reminded, by way of another example, of variations on the "my opponent is a card-carrying member of the ACLU!"
I might well use the description "Neo-Bircher" as a shortcut for rightwing loons who brand their opponents as commies (really. TCAN thinks they're fighting Commies). However, it's quite possible that only a few Chad Mitchell Trio fans will get my point and that TCAN might like the designation.
The only other thought I have on this (for now:) is that while "Bircher" was something of a self-selected label back when it was in common use, "Pinko" was a more serious charge.
Finally, a lawyer friend of mine reminded me that Texas legally defines "communist" and effectively outlaws the Communist Party. This law was passed in 1993, before we put George Bush in the Statehouse.
4 - Al Barger
Now this is just stupid on the part of the legislature. It's giving an arbitrary re-definition of the word. That's bogus.
"Communist" means a person who commits an act reasonably calculated to further the overthrow of the government
Choosing words for writing opinion columns is significantly different than making laws, and it is desirable to use the words in some manner related to their commonly understood meanings. "Nazi" doesn't just mean "anyone who disagrees with me."
As to what the word "pinko" will mean, there is also the context. For example, I was well pleased with my turn of phrase when I was talking about Brian Flemming's "flaming pinko claptrap." Now, someone could absolutely refuse to see any humor in that whole column. At some point however, as Mick Jagger said of Jesse Jackson, "Fuck him if he can't take a joke."
I can't imagine even the most asinine southern reactionaries even trying to pass a law against "pinkos."
5 - Jim Carruthers
Or do some of you pinko fags got something to say about it?
You can say it all you want when we're yelling: "Up against the wall motherfucker" as part of our three part plan of dope, guns and fucking in the streets.
6 - Eric Olsen
Yeay AmRep! I miss them.
Al, there is a fine line we all must walk between expression and acknowledgment that words are also symbols and have in some cases very powerful conotations that override their actual meaning. it's neve reasy.
7 - BRICKLAYER
Remember Hammerhead, Arcwelder, and Surgery?
8 - Eric Olsen
Yes, and HELMET, Melvins, Dwarves, Jesus Lizard, Halo of Flies, etc: vicious, filthy noise.
9 - BRICKLAYER
Oh man, I gotta pull out all the old cassettes tonight. Your list makes my ears water.
10 - Al Barger
Mr. Carruthers- While we're dusting off the old slogans, Howard Dean has me thinking of George McGovern, and the facetious but not entirely inaccurate "Three A" platform some clever Bircher types espoused for him: Acid, Abortion, and Amnesty.
Yes, Eric, words have meanings- but also sometimes people will take significantly different shades of meaning than what you might intend. Thus, I find myself wanting to be a bit extra careful in my choice of words to describe opponents.
Even long haired hippy type pinko fags like our Brian. :)