User:Woozle/Nextdoor/2021/10/02/1

"Conservoid" and name-calling

So, let's talk about this.

There have been repeated claims that my use of the term "conservoid" is somehow problematic. I'll get to the objections, but first I'll recap and explain what I mean by the term.

what it means

"Conservoid" is short for "conservative-identified" (conserv[o]-ID), as distinctly separate from a philosophy of truly being conservative. The "-void" affix indicates its lack of compassion, critical thought, and honesty, while "-oid" in general suggests robotic or zombie-like behavior (in this case, mindless devotion to received beliefs and stances).

"Conservoid" doesn't refer so much to any particular position as it does to the general attitude of refusing to think critically about one's positions.

Any given political position can be either conservoid or rational.

For example: the overwhelmingly-dominant conservoid position on abortion is that it is bad and wrong and should never happen.

I agree that it should never happen, in an ideal world -- but my approach to that goal is to support policies and laws which actually reduce the number of abortions, preserve the safety and lives of those who seek them, and alternatives easier (e.g. by providing better social supports for families, better public education) -- while the conservoid approach is to support policies and laws that merely punish abortion-seekers while depriving them of the education which could have helped them prevent unwanted pregnancy in the first place.

why not just "conservative"?

The obvious question is: Since "conservative" is how folks of this mindset tend to identify, why don't I just respect that and call them "conservative"?

I cannot truthfully use that wordto describe this ideology because that word implies something that is careful, cautiously moderate, and presumably interested in *conserving* -- when in reality it is the exact opposite: wasteful, careless, destructive. The only thing it "conserves" is the power of the powerful, which it works to enhance at every step.

I consider *myself* to be conservative, in the literal sense; people who identify as "conservative" -- and most policies similarly labeled, these days -- are anything but.

The Objections

1) Jeff Doscher: "every time you use the term ‘Conservoids’…. Should someone else say something like ‘Libtards’ to keep the balance?" https://nextdoor.com/p/d7Xwd-DHztHx/c/663639752?utm_source=share

2) Tish Nowack: "How about we all stop calling people names like that? I might be conservative in some things but progressive in others. I don't want a label except my own name." https://nextdoor.com/p/d7Xwd-DHztHx/c/663640833?utm_source=share

3) Joanne Beckman: "I try to counter faulty attempts to label or misconstrue my own "conservative thoughts or words" as being inappropriate "mind-reading"." https://nextdoor.com/p/d7Xwd-DHztHx/c/663969386?utm_source=share

My Responses

R1: If you feel that there is a political philosophy which exhibits a similar lack of compassion and understanding, then by all means use a disparaging label for it. I often refer to a certain brand of hardline liberal as a "sensible centrist", for example -- someone who thinks that only doing *some* of something horrible is a good compromise between doing something horrible and, you know, *not* doing something horrible at all.

You could call those people "libtards" if you wanted -- except the way I've seen that phrase used, it generally just means "anyone Left of Fox News", and totally disregards the question of whether the views make any sense or not.

R2 & R3: Why do you assume I'm talking about you?

If I say "x is really a terrible idea", why get upset about me using the term "x" because it doesn't fit your beliefs, INSTEAD OF saying "I agree with you, x is really a terrible idea" or at least "I don't support x either"?

In general, there seems to be a strong sentiment against using a derogatory word to describe a really bad set of ideas -- but only among those who seem to be unwilling to criticize those ideas.

This is kind of like saying "don't call me a fascist, I don't agree with everything that fascists do" -- to which I'd say, I'm only talking about aspects of fascism that you do seem to agree with. If I say "fascist", I'm only talking about you *to the extent* that you support fascism.

For example:

• If you support arbitrarily increasing requirements to present "your papers, please" in order to access basic, vital services -- be that transportation, government assistance, or voting -- then you are supporting fascism, and yes, I'm talking about you.
• If you support a charismatic "strong man" dictator who casually flouts the rule of law (not to mention common decency), even after he is plainly shown to be doing so -- then yes, you are being a fascist, and I am calling you out.

If you don't like the word being applied to you, then why defend the thing that the label is about? If the shoe doesn't fit, why do you keep trying to put it on? Methinks thou dost protest too much.

Or, more simply: if you don't like the label, don't be it.