• Ajen@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Okay, but why is terminology so important here? If you could achieve your other goals easier by compromising on terminology, why wouldn’t you?

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      What would you suggest as alternative terminology? The problem is if you create a new term they media will just demonize that too. Now you got to explain two different concepts to people that mean the same thing.

      • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Why not focus on policies instead of labels? If you must apply a label, I’m sure you can find something that’s understood by the person you’re talking to. Someone who’s right-leaning might prefer the term “America first” (as in, American citizens before big business). Know your audience.

        • Donkter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          I have only ever had to defend socialism when I present a policy and get told “that’s socialism”.

          Other than that, labels are necessary for political movements. Don’t get me wrong, I would love to have the “affordable housing, healthcare, and food as well as cutting back military spending, increasing education funding, taxing the wealthy and making sure it’s enforced, replacing police with social workers and support systems etc etc etc… party.” But it just doesn’t roll off the tongue.

          • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            43 minutes ago

            I’m sorry that’s been your experience, but my comments have been in the context of the OOP, which is very different from what you just described.