Labels, yea or nay?

brianlux
brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
in A Moving Train
We had a thread closed recently (thank you very much!) based on a label.  My own thinking more and more is that many labels today are inaccurate, misunderstood, outdated and definitely non-productive. If you were to ask me if I am liberal, conservative or moderate, I would say, "Non of the above".  I take issues one at a time and look for sensible, logical approaches to dealing with them.  I don't see people calling themselves either "liberal" or "conservative" making all the much difference in the world and the way conflicts are carried out between them has often gotten embarrassing.  The same problems we had when I became politically and environmentally concerned almost 50 years ago are the same damn ones we have today and some are worse.  I don't know about the rest of the world, but in America, the divisions are simultaneously widening and becoming absurd.  I'm probably seen as left leaning but I don't find that kind of terminology useful. 

So that's my take.  What about you:  Labels- useful, accurate, inaccurate, a waste of time? 
"It's a sad and beautiful world"
-Roberto Benigni

«134

Comments

  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    edited May 2017
    I think they are accurate.
    Example -  President Trump supporter or Non-President Trump supporter.
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,682
    Well vague-ass labels are basically useless. The more specific you get with the label, the more accurate it's going to be.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    PJ_Soul said:
    Well vague-ass labels are basically useless. The more specific you get with the label, the more accurate it's going to be.
    My ass is not vague. In fact, it's fairly well defined. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,682
    oftenreading said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    Well vague-ass labels are basically useless. The more specific you get with the label, the more accurate it's going to be.
    My ass is not vague. In fact, it's fairly well defined. 
    Lol, congrats on that ass! :lol:
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • rgambs
    rgambs Posts: 13,576
    I'm actually in the pro-label camp.
    I'm a language guy and the way I see it, labels make conversation much easier.
    No, they don't always fit, but usually there is something pretty close, especially if you combine a few.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • jnimhaoileoin
    jnimhaoileoin Baile Átha Cliath Posts: 2,682
    Labels are pretty damn essential when having any discussion about politics. I don't know how it works in your country but parties are identified by labels and it just makes everything a lot easier. In Denmark, the statsminister is from the Venstre party, which literally means Left (though in English they're called the Liberal Party). Nearly every country in Europe has a Socialist party. It's just how things work. 
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
    I think they are accurate.
    Example -  President Trump supporter or Non-President Trump supporter.
    Is that a label or a description?
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    edited May 2017
    PJ_Soul said:
    Well vague-ass labels are basically useless. The more specific you get with the label, the more accurate it's going to be.
    "vague-ass"   Like!  Will add that to my dictionary!  :wink:
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,682
    rgambs said:
    I'm actually in the pro-label camp.
    I'm a language guy and the way I see it, labels make conversation much easier.
    No, they don't always fit, but usually there is something pretty close, especially if you combine a few.
    That is a good point. Some folks seem to really have an issue with "generalizing"... But in real life we all generalize on a regular basis out of necessity. If we didn't generalize, we'd all be spending our entire lives trying to qualify everything we say. Nobody has the time and energy for that.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    rgambs said:
    I'm actually in the pro-label camp.
    I'm a language guy and the way I see it, labels make conversation much easier.
    No, they don't always fit, but usually there is something pretty close, especially if you combine a few.
    I too am big on language but that includes being accurate in its usage and that is that main problem I have with (at least here in the U.S.) the use of labels.  For example, most people see meas a "liberal" or even a bit "radical" but in all honesty, I see myself as being as much conservative as either of those.  But conservative with respect to what?  Well, the true meaning of the word, of course, as well as toward being pro conservation.   See what I mean?
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,682
    jnimhaoileoin said:
    Labels are pretty damn essential when having any discussion about politics. I don't know how it works in your country but parties are identified by labels and it just makes everything a lot easier. In Denmark, the statsminister is from the Venstre party, which literally means Left (though in English they're called the Liberal Party). Nearly every country in Europe has a Socialist party. It's just how things work. 
    That is kind of what I meant about specific labels vs vague ones. "Liberal" is vague. "Socialist" is not.
    I agree that labels are unavoidable at the end of the day, if you want to have conversations with people.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • dudeman
    dudeman Posts: 3,160
    Some people have a desire, maybe even a need, to place others in a particular box. I assume that is so they know how to approach talking to them. I do it too but I see it as problematic. 
    If hope can grow from dirt like me, it can be done. - EV
  • Go Beavers
    Go Beavers Posts: 9,564
    Brian: The questioning subversive. 
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    jnimhaoileoin said:
    Labels are pretty damn essential when having any discussion about politics. I don't know how it works in your country but parties are identified by labels and it just makes everything a lot easier. In Denmark, the statsminister is from the Venstre party, which literally means Left (though in English they're called the Liberal Party). Nearly every country in Europe has a Socialist party. It's just how things work. 
    If we could agree that labels are vague or inaccurate (and I don't know you you do agree with that), then I would ask, what makes labels essential?  Should not something essential and important be precise and thoroughly understood as well?  Do people- or anybody for that matter- fir into a neat and tidy little description? 

    And what is the "everything" you mention that labels make easy and why  is it this everything needs to be easy? 

    I'm not trying to be belligerent with you, honestly, but I don't understand your argument.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    Go Beavers said:
    Brian: The questioning subversive. 
    :smile:
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    brianlux said:
    jnimhaoileoin said:
    Labels are pretty damn essential when having any discussion about politics. I don't know how it works in your country but parties are identified by labels and it just makes everything a lot easier. In Denmark, the statsminister is from the Venstre party, which literally means Left (though in English they're called the Liberal Party). Nearly every country in Europe has a Socialist party. It's just how things work. 
    If we could agree that labels are vague or inaccurate (and I don't know you you do agree with that), then I would ask, what makes labels essential?  Should not something essential and important be precise and thoroughly understood as well?  Do people- or anybody for that matter- fir into a neat and tidy little description? 

    And what is the "everything" you mention that labels make easy and why  is it this everything needs to be easy? 

    I'm not trying to be belligerent with you, honestly, but I don't understand your argument.

    I fit into a neat and tidy little description that is precise and understood thoroughly by some around here. You need labels to carry the concept in a conversation.
  • jnimhaoileoin
    jnimhaoileoin Baile Átha Cliath Posts: 2,682
    edited May 2017
    brianlux said:
    jnimhaoileoin said:
    Labels are pretty damn essential when having any discussion about politics. I don't know how it works in your country but parties are identified by labels and it just makes everything a lot easier. In Denmark, the statsminister is from the Venstre party, which literally means Left (though in English they're called the Liberal Party). Nearly every country in Europe has a Socialist party. It's just how things work. 
    If we could agree that labels are vague or inaccurate (and I don't know you you do agree with that), then I would ask, what makes labels essential?  Should not something essential and important be precise and thoroughly understood as well?  Do people- or anybody for that matter- fir into a neat and tidy little description? 

    And what is the "everything" you mention that labels make easy and why  is it this everything needs to be easy? 

    I'm not trying to be belligerent with you, honestly, but I don't understand your argument.
    I would have thought it was pretty clear from my answer that I don't think labels are vague or innaccurate. Maybe they are in America but over here things are pretty clear. Firstly, we don't even use the term liberal so have no issues with that. We have left-wing, right-wing and centrist. We have socialists and conservatives. I actually don't understand your argument. Maybe it's a cultural thing. We're big talkers and debaters here in Ireland and people are on average quite knowledgeable about politics and the historical identity of all our parties. We're also pretty good with language so we just don't have a problem using or understanding labels. They make things easier as they allow us to identify with a particular platform and align ourselves to the corresponding politicians or parties. This is how politics has worked for a long time and it works pretty well in Europe. America is weird as socialism is like a dirty word so both parties seem to be conservative and it's often bloody hard to know what either of them stand for
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
    brianlux said:
    jnimhaoileoin said:
    Labels are pretty damn essential when having any discussion about politics. I don't know how it works in your country but parties are identified by labels and it just makes everything a lot easier. In Denmark, the statsminister is from the Venstre party, which literally means Left (though in English they're called the Liberal Party). Nearly every country in Europe has a Socialist party. It's just how things work. 
    If we could agree that labels are vague or inaccurate (and I don't know you you do agree with that), then I would ask, what makes labels essential?  Should not something essential and important be precise and thoroughly understood as well?  Do people- or anybody for that matter- fir into a neat and tidy little description? 

    And what is the "everything" you mention that labels make easy and why  is it this everything needs to be easy? 

    I'm not trying to be belligerent with you, honestly, but I don't understand your argument.

    I fit into a neat and tidy little description that is precise and understood thoroughly by some around here. You need labels to carry the concept in a conversation.
    I'm not sure I understand how or why I need them, PJF.  Personally, I would prefer an accurate description.   For example:  instead of "liberal", "a democratic socialist with a biocentic viewpoint who questions the wisdom of open borders".  Wordier and not so "easy"?  Yes.  More precise?  Vastly.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    jnimhaoileoin said:
    brianlux said:
    jnimhaoileoin said:
    Labels are pretty damn essential when having any discussion about politics. I don't know how it works in your country but parties are identified by labels and it just makes everything a lot easier. In Denmark, the statsminister is from the Venstre party, which literally means Left (though in English they're called the Liberal Party). Nearly every country in Europe has a Socialist party. It's just how things work. 
    If we could agree that labels are vague or inaccurate (and I don't know you you do agree with that), then I would ask, what makes labels essential?  Should not something essential and important be precise and thoroughly understood as well?  Do people- or anybody for that matter- fir into a neat and tidy little description? 

    And what is the "everything" you mention that labels make easy and why  is it this everything needs to be easy? 

    I'm not trying to be belligerent with you, honestly, but I don't understand your argument.
    I would have thought it was pretty clear from my answer that I don't think labels are vague or innaccurate. Maybe they are in America but over here things are pretty clear. Firstly, we don't even use the term liberal so have no issues with that. We have left-wing, right-wing and centrist. We have socialists and conservatives. I actually don't understand your argument. Maybe it's a cultural thing. We're big talkers and debaters here in Ireland and people are on average quite knowledgeable about politics and the historical identity of all our parties. We're also pretty good with language so we just don't have a problem using or understanding labels. They make things easier as they allow us to identify with a particular platform and align ourselves to the corresponding politicians or parties. This is how politics has worked for a long time and it works pretty well in Europe. America is weird as socialism is like a dirty word so both parties seem to be conservative and it's often bloody hard to know what either of them stand for
    It sounds as though people in Ireland  fit more neatly into a more specifically defined outlook than here in the U.S.  That may be helpful, I don't know, though it sounds a bit unlikely.  Are people really that specifically aligned there... or here for that matter?  I don't think so- at least I hope not.  That would indicate to me a lack of critical thinking. Why accept a narrowly defined view of life, politics, culture, etc?  That seems stifling to me.

    "America is weird as socialism is like a dirty word so both parties seem to be conservative and it's often bloody hard to know what either of them stand for."  This, in my opinion, is absolutely true.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    You gotta read the labels.... Tommy ain't my motherfu...

    https://youtu.be/GP7MBdw-14E


Categories