Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
Thu Mar 28, 2013, 09:06 AM Mar 2013

"I don't think there is a Radical Right. There is a Right."

-Kathy Sarachild in roundtable discussion with Ti-Grace Atkinson yesterday

I'll paraphrase her arguments:

The word radical is taken from Latin radicalis meaning root; to get to the root of the problem. Radicals are those who wish to transcend the distractions of common politicking and find the source of issues; it is in fact a science of finding the source. As the term became popular during the civil rights movement, it was intentionally misappropriated by opponents to cast out undesirables and provocateurs. So was born the stigma of the word "radical" as a person of action before thought; of extremism.




What follows from this is the truth that there is no true radicalism in the right-wing movement. At least, not in the sense of getting to the root of any problems. They have in fact built a franchise intent on doing just the opposite. When we call them radicals, we continue the misappropriation of the word and give them undue strength.

They are not radicals. They are fools. The most extreme from the Right are simply a greater realization of the right-wing philosophy. So is the case that those on the Right are all essentially the same; harboring the same ignorance. Individual members are simply at different stages of actualization.
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"I don't think there is a Radical Right. There is a Right." (Original Post) Gravitycollapse Mar 2013 OP
Many (if not all) chervilant Mar 2013 #1
There is no need to try to wrest the word back Trajan Mar 2013 #2
Are you saying that we should do nothing as language is bastardized? Gravitycollapse Mar 2013 #3
I am saying the phrase serves our purposes Trajan Mar 2013 #4
English in particular is subject to change in the way it's spoken Fumesucker Mar 2013 #5
But what they propose is radical, eg getting rid of social security muriel_volestrangler Mar 2013 #6

chervilant

(8,267 posts)
1. Many (if not all)
Thu Mar 28, 2013, 09:17 AM
Mar 2013

of the right are fear-based, and in react mode -- which explains their blind allegiance to "fools" like Boehner and O'Reilly. Cognitive dissonance is a fine deterrent to embracing the truth about the corporate megalomaniacs who've usurped our media, our politics and our global economy ...

(It doesn't help that there are quite a few dems among those corporate megs ...)

 

Trajan

(19,089 posts)
2. There is no need to try to wrest the word back
Thu Mar 28, 2013, 09:18 AM
Mar 2013

The words 'radical right' convey a meaning that we all understand ... even those on the radical right ...

There is no need to discard the term .. it communicates well enough ...

 

Trajan

(19,089 posts)
4. I am saying the phrase serves our purposes
Thu Mar 28, 2013, 09:24 AM
Mar 2013

as it stands, and there is no problem with how it it's used to communicate a greater adherence to extreme right wing principles ...

Radical = extremist .... there is nothing to fix

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)
5. English in particular is subject to change in the way it's spoken
Thu Mar 28, 2013, 09:53 AM
Mar 2013

Words often change meanings to the opposite of what they once meant, often having more than one meaning at the same time.

Gay once meant happy and carefree, now it has a different meaning.

We'll have a gay old time with the Flintstones.

Bad is another word that has opposite meanings, bad can be good or bad depending on context.

Capiche?

muriel_volestrangler

(101,154 posts)
6. But what they propose is radical, eg getting rid of social security
Thu Mar 28, 2013, 10:06 AM
Mar 2013

Flat taxes, abolishing income tax, that kind of thing. Very stupid, but certainly a change at the 'roots' of government.

FWIW, the first significant use of 'radical' in US politics was for some Republicans. From the Oxford English Dictionary:

Polit. Advocating thorough or far-reaching political or social reform; representing or supporting an extreme section of a party; spec. (also with capital initial) (a) Brit. belonging to, supporting, or associated with the extreme wing of the Liberal Party which called for a reform of the social and parliamentary system in the late 18th and early 19th cent. (cf. radical reform n. at Special uses 2); (b) U.S. belonging to a faction of the Republican Party seeking extreme action against the South during the Civil War and Reconstruction. Now more generally: revolutionary, esp. left-wing. On the continent of Europe in the 20th cent., parties bearing the title of ‘Radical’ have in fact frequently tended towards a centrist or even conservative standpoint.

1865 Atlanta Daily Intelligencer 1 Oct. 3/1 The radical Republicans are now proposing a compromise on the negro-suffrage question.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"I don't think there is a...