# Name-calling By:: [[Ross Jackson]] 2022-10-01 It’s election season, and that can only mean one thing; it is time for name-calling. From the right, it is not uncommon to hear Democrats referred to as _communists_. From the left, it is not uncommon to hear Republicans referred to as _fascists_. Sometimes these labels might fit a particular individual’s political perspective. Often, the terms are used to marginalize a perspective and disparage those who hold it. As early as kindergarten we learn that we shouldn’t engage in name-calling, yet it persists throughout our society. It seems silly to try to instruct children to avoid the behavior which adults seemingly relish. Wouldn’t it be more constructive to help them learn the skills required to navigate our society? The problem with applying the labels of _communist_ and _fascist_ to those engaged in American politics is that they are too off the mark. Perhaps a better description might be that Democrats are _radicals_ and Republicans are _reactionaries_. These labels provide insight into the social-political reality being debated and are linked conceptually to the parties’ respective trajectories. A radical wants to pursue comprehensive social-political change. They want something new and different from the _status quo_. Because the focus is on creating something new in the future, radicals are often called _progressives_. In response to these changes, reactionaries oppose social-political liberalization and reform. Because the focus is on returning to an idealized past, reactionaries are often called _conservatives_. Already, each group has at least four names they could be called. One could use _Republican_, _Conservative_, _Fascist,_ or _Reactionary_ to describe those on the political right, or _Democrat_, _Progressive_, _Communist_, or _Radical_ for those on the political left.  If name-calling persists despite our earliest instruction to avoid it, it must provide something of benefit. Name-calling does provide some perspective on the battlelines being discussed. As indicated, political debates in America occur largely between those envisioning making things progressively _better_ and those striving to reestablish envisioned glories from the past. But this perspective could be established more thoroughly and accurately through research and reflection. Additionally, name calling provides one with the ability to blow off [[fear]] and frustration, and likely contributes to a sense of moral superiority. So, it likely feels good, at least momentarily. These are remarkably shallow benefits, and they come at a great cost to our society. The danger of name-calling is that it objectifies and marginalizes our fellow citizens. Viewing half of the population as a danger or threat to America is problematic. Democrats and Republicans, Progressives and Conservatives, and Radicals and Reactionaries are all equally American. They differ in terms of social-political policies, but those differences do not require hatred. If name calling is unavoidable, let’s at least make them accurate and discuss the deeply philosophical, psychological, and political divides existing between American radicals and reactionaries. #### Related Items [[Politics]] [[Progressive]] [[Conservative]] [[Communism]] [[Fascism]] [[Radicals]] [[Reactionaries]] [[American]]