I think this is a dumbing down of the English language.
I don’t think using “liberal” and “conservative” is dumbing down the language any more than using “neo-con”. The term “neo-con” is a very vague description as well, and in practice it is being applied to all conservatives. So, what’s the difference?
To what end? To avoid the possible misunderstanding or injury which occurs as a result of someone misapplying or misinterpreting terminology? It appears so.
It is the misunderstanding or injury which must be addressed, not the word itself.
The posts which have to be made to clarify or address assumed or real injurious remarks waste time and add to the contentiousness of some of the threads. If a term is generally taken as offensive, it’s better not to use it. IMHO
Snideness is easily assessed. Snideness is not necessarily intrinsic to certain words. It disturbs me to think that no distinction is being made between a word’s denotative meaning and a word’s connotative meaning and a word’s contextual meaning.
No argument here…not sure why you are disburbed by my opinion. Our culture is constantly changing descriptive terms…consider “homeless” versus “vagabond” or “bum”; “Black” or “African American” versus “Negro”; or the latest, “undocumented worker” versus “illegal alien”. This is nothing new. The primary reason for these changes is not the meaning of the words.
I have not encountered that on this board yet. I have encountered people assessing certain philosophies or worldviews as communist or socialist. Whether or not the promoters of those philosophies or worldviews self-identify as communists or socialists is a whole other thing and an irrelevant thing. It is not about the person. It is about what the person says.
My comments were to be applied to the general populace not specific to this board.
If a person promotes ideas which jibe with communist or socialist writing, then that person’s ideas can legitimately be called communist or socialist. The person herself can self-identify as a liberal til the cows come home – but her ideas may not in themselves be liberal.
Be as specific as you want. I’m talking about normal usage. Generally, the public refers to “the left” or “liberals” and “the right” or “conservatives”. If people want to qualify those labels with something which clarifies, that’s fine by me. It’s just that most of the “clarifications” I encounter come from the opposing viewpoint and are presented in a manner meant to marginalize.
Language is power. To dumb down what someone is trying to contribute to a discussion is to diminish that person’s participation. If a person is using language to harm another person, then it is legitimate for a mod to diminish that person’s participation. But if a person is merely disagreeing with another person, then let’s leave well enough alone.
IMHO…use whatever words you want. I’m not as easily offended as some. If I’m called a neo-con by mistake, I right it off to their ignorance of the real meaning of the term. I was responding to the OP’s request on opinions about the word “neo-con”, so I gave it. I will continue to use “liberal” and “conservative”. I hope that doesn’t offend you linguistic sensibilities.
