Just as there is no inherently legitimate rationale for choosing the middle, there is no inherently legitimate basis for choosing the left or the right. Every day, thousands of Americans are born to red and blue families. Some stay the same color until the day they die. Is that good or bad? The answer is irrelevant. It doesn’t matter how long someone has been red or blue, because these labels are relative and misunderstood. What matters is what a person believes and why.
Already relative, labels like “conservative” and “liberal” have become even more useless in today’s vocabulary, especially when additional relative descriptors, such as “ultra,” are attached. The effect of such descriptors is to make the relative more relative. Conservative to one is not conservative to another, and “ultra” to one is “tame” to another. Consider that a recent Gallup poll strongly indicated that America is growing increasingly conservative. That trend defies last year’s election results, so how could it be true? It could be true only if more Americans think they are conservative when, philosophically, they are not.
We live in a society that loves labels. And when we define ourselves, we do so positively (e.g., rather than anti-abortion, pro-choice; rather than anti-war, peace-loving or patriotic). Sometimes, however, we define ourselves incorrectly. There are those who advocate a strict government regulation of morals; there are others who support the government intervention and regulation with the economy. And while neither venture is philosophically conservative, plenty from each group call themselves “conservative.” This senseless name game and symbology have ravaged the landscape of religious labels for centuries. A huge percentage of Americans call themselves Christians or Catholics, when remarkably few ascribe to even the most basic fundamentals of the faith, and even fewer attempt to live each day in accordance with biblical mandates.
Except to the blind, there is little consequence in mislabeling someone else’s appearance. There is great consequence, however, in mislabeling one’s own identity — you think you are what you are not. A major theme in Shakespearean drama is to “know thyself” (e.g., Macbeth, Othello). Introspection is lost in today’s frenetic pace, and as a consequence, labels are misused. We don’t know who we are anymore.
In a final analysis, then, I stress the misuse and exploitation of labels much more than the relative nature of labels because it’s the former that’s killing thought. Liberals respond to Ann Coulter by calling her rabid and crazy. Conservatives respond to Obama by calling him socialist and anti-American. A label is not a reason and, when used connotatively as it often is, equates to nothing more than an ad hominem jab.
Label a person ultra conservative or ultra liberal, but if he knows the why backing the what more than the moderate, then he deserves more respect.
