Name-calling and conservatives

I have a few beliefs about name-calling.

Firstly, it seems to me that the more socially conservative you are, the more you will resort to name-calling – whether rude, racist or reactionary – when dealing with people in general but especially with people you don’t happen to like.

I also happen to believe that racist white males (Ah, the spectre of the RWM) far surpass any other group of conservatives you’d care to name, and that racist beliefs and name-calling are inextricably intertwined.

Furthermore – namecalling seems to be a shared trait among virtually all European cultures, possibly a by-product of, say, flawed understanding of taxonomy and anthropology and other genuine scientific efforts to classify groups – and a leftover anachronism of neocolonialism, where they tended to dehumanize native peoples to justify expansion and oppression.

I am aware all cultures and races tend to be ethnocentric, but not to the scope and depth I see in white cultures. It is possible I believe this only because I happen to live in America and have far more intimate knowledge about name-calling here than, say, name-calling in India, or among the Chinese.

While I believe my perceptions to be accurate… I would appreciate the opportunity to read other points of view and for restrained debate.

If you don’t see the irony in your OP, then you deserve all the attacks agianst you that your OP is likely to generate. I’ll give you a hint: words 7-9 in the first sentence of your 3rd paragraph.

Are you going to present any actual data that “conservatives” do more name calling than “liberals”, or are we supposed to just accept your opinion as fact?:rolleyes:

I also live in America, and it’s been my observation that racism exists among all races and all segments of society. I don’t think racism is exclusive to white people, nor do I think name-calling is exclusive to conservatives.

I agree completely with blowero.

Perhaps we see what we choose to see?

Pick a random thread at Pick a random thread at

You are likely to see outright name-calling, cutting down, or punny and supposedly funny bastardizations of the name of a person or group.

Nobody has the moral high ground when it comes to name calling, childish reasoning, or petty squabbling so cram the holier than thou attitude when it comes to 3rd grade debating style.


What does the bolded part mean? Really, this makes absolutely zero sense to me.

It seems to me that you think white people and conservatives are more prone to name calling than other groups. If that’s the case, the OP is a prime example of people seeing/hearing only what they want to see/hear.

I think sometimes people who don’t discuss whether or not they’re more conservative or more liberal are assumed to be more liberal, or perhaps a Democrat, if they tend to use more “tolerant language” (as in they don’t use racial or ethnic slurs).

I’d consider myself a conservative when it comes to government: small, unobtrusive government and taxation as little as is feasible, but I don’t ‘fit the profile’ of what people would consider as a conservative because I’m very libertarian (in the live and let live sense) socially. Because there are often many races where I live decided in the primaries (it’s a very high concentration of Democrats and few Republicans, and often no Republican candidates for a particular office) I even felt it was necessary to register to vote as a Democrat so that I can actively participate in primaries.

Sorry. I have never noticed that name-calling is limited to (or concentratd among) any particular group, whether it be defined politically, philosophically, culturally, or ethnically.

Louis Farrakhan is no less liable to use name-calling than is David Duke. This board has featured many threads devoted to deploring (or cheering) the name-calling perpetrated by Ann Coulter and Roger Moore. There are several posters, here, from outside the U.S. (and who could not be classified as “white, male, conservatives” (although any of those terms might apply) who have engaged in name-calling).

Nope. I suspect a filtered perception. (Not a deliberate filter, probably, but filtered nevertheless.)


Yeah, you tell all those brainwashed Rummy-fellating 'Pubbie zombie morons to stop calling us highly enlightened, educated, witty, open-minded decent folks those horrible names!!!
…wow, so that’s what it’s like to be Reeder
[sub]mmmm… Rummy-fellating…[/sub]




You have won the award for the most hypocritical post of the Day!

So, What are you going to do now!?!


Nobody? There’s not a single human being on the planet who engages in name calling less frequently than the likes of Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or Tom Delay?

Once again, what makes people think that they can neutralize any criticism of conservatives by making counter-accusations against “liberals” as if two wrongs make a right? Especially given the fact that these days conservatives are a moe distinctly identifiable group than “liberals”. Also, given that fact that conservatives control both the Congress and the Presidency these days, criticism of conservatives is more germane.

(I agree that the OP is pretty worthless and the irony up there is duly noted. Then again Askia was reffering to those while males who happen to be racist, not calling all white males racist. I question the relevance, tho.)

Personally, I’m disgusted by both right-wingers and politically correct race-baiters, so what does that make me? And does it–just maybe–give me the right to criticize either group, conservatives included?

While I feel that some of the name calling is a product of displaced racism (“nigger-loving democrats,” to quote my wife’s grandfather), I worry that a majority of it is nothing more than propaganda. Perhaps herd-mentality induced propaganda, but propaganda never the less. In searching for any sort of data regarding who’s more proficient at name-calling, I was discourged by the large number of web sites of either Democratic or Republican leaning that decry the other side’s name calling while simultaneously using the standard derisive labels in identifing the other side.

On preview I see I should have called you names and left feeling superior.

It has been my experience that liberals are far more likely to resort to name-calling and ad hominem attacks than are conservatives. It’s usually on the order of “you are stupid” or “you believe that because you are stupid”.

Well, for the benefit of mankind, I suppose I should complete implementation of my Subtitled Humor Impaired Translator[sup]TM[/sup]

Oh, and by the way, it’s “rolleyes”… didn’t you get the superiority starter set?


Why do those maggot-infested conservatives call liberals names?

But calling your foes “traitors”, “anti-American”, or “feminazis” is okay, eh, Dogface?

no, both sides do this because there are idiots on both sides.

This OP is a joke, and i hope the OP writer was in on it.

Bwahahahahaha! Best Irony Evar!!!1!!!1!

[sub]Raven, dude, **stickmonkey was talking about the OP, not about you[/sub]

As a representative of the board’s Pinko faction, I gotta say that Askia, your post is way light on evidence. I think liberals can claim real virtues over conservatives in politics, but an avoidance of namecalling ain’t one of them.


Well, could you please give specific quotations (within full context) of my use of such terms?

Is there really anybody who is so incapable of reason as to believe that those who realize the idiocy in which liberals indulge are automatically “conservative”?

Am I the only person alive who realizes that both “extremes” are ultimately a false distinction between one form of totalitarianism and another?

Rush Limbuagh makes a career out of giving denigrative names to his targets. So does Reeder. The difference is that Rush is funny. The right in general is far far more organized as far as it’s name calling: the rhetoric makes the rounds pretty fast, and is repeated far and wide within days of someone thinking it up. The left seems to lack both the creativity or the cohesion to make much stick or spread in this fashion.

Currently, nothing beats the Bush administration: the “play-it-nice-change-the-tone” camp which, nevertheless, managed to leak out to the press that John Kerry “looks French.” A pretty much nonsensical idea right-wing pundits were happy to pick up on anyway.