Why don’t liberals everywhere start calling the right what it is?

Introduce words and phrases to the lexicon which are descriptive like pseudo-patriot, anti-democratic and where appropriate anti-American. Whenever one of them advocates a position that is in direct contradiction to democratic principles call them on it with harsh but descriptive terms. Use these words everywhere so people will begin to think about what the whackos on the right really advocate. Nazi doesn’t work because people stop listening.

That's what I call them

but the wrongs.

eom

Or Tories? A handle that is adequately informative tends to have too many syllables to use in speech or fit on a pin or bumper sticker.

I'd like to see words that refer to elitism that disregards the well-being of the general population.

After all, that is one of the psychological weapons conservatives use against the left, namely: anti-intellectualism as class warfare, the idea of resisting 'elitist snobs who think they are better than you.'

'Anti-Constitutionalists' would be the most accurate label. Especially since the Bill of Rights is the most important and widely revered legal document that is being violated by these 'Corporateers'-which is another good label but doesn't quite work since not everyone distrusts corporations...YET!

Like showing pride in the American flag, the Republicans have co-opted the language of patriotism for their own ends. We can't just use the same terms for them, even if they are far more accurate, or we risk being dismissed as name callers and our accusations dismissed as sour grapes. Making our own labels carries far more weight than buying theirs.

My personal favorite was the "cheap labor conservative" tagline.

Wish I had the link handy, there is a guy with a site who details why that's the perfect phrase. I love it.

The link is to Conceptual Gorilla: http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/

Absolutely brilliant!

I used to think the CLC one was fine, but there are traditional conservatives who'd (rightly) feel unfairly stigmatised.

it calls attention to the disjuncture between them and traditional conservatives. No, the label doesn't apply to all conservatives, and that is the point. The CLC's have betrayed some of those in their party as much as they have the American people.

with whom we otherwise might make common cause.

For the group that wants to do away with every function of government except kicking the powerless in the teeth.

The American right have been allowed to define the terms of debate for 30+ years. It's time to take back the language, and boldly.

I think that having some type of "catch phrase" to describe repubs is something that democrats have been lacking for quite some time. Nazi and other terms like that won't work. It needs to be something that the entire public can relate to and understand. Pseudo-patriot and anti-democratic are good places to start, however, I think it might be more than the general public can grasp.

The repubs have tagged the democrats with "lying liberials" and "liberial media" and we desperately need something that all democrats can use when describing repubs. At this time, I'm not sure what I would reccommend, however I would really like to see duers come up with something that can be used consistently when referring to our repub friends.

Glad you started this thread and hopefully others will have some lasting suggestions.

You are right that it can't be too strong and must be truthful.

because thats what they are.

"Red Ink Republicans"? It's accurately descriptive and is a perfect refutation to "Tax and Spend Democrats"...

Red Ink Republicans




Say, you don't mind if I borrow all of your retirement funds to give to my rich friends do you? Of course not! Now, remember, I have no obligation to repay, 'cuz I've got your best interests at heart. And remember, it's unpatriotic to say anything against my "borrowing" all of your social security pension because I once wore a flight suit years after I deserted. SUCKER!!!!!

Corpsies?

Corporate socialists?

F***ING ANTI-AMERICAN GOOSE-STEPPING BASTARDS. I MINCE NO WORDS.

but may not have mass market appeal.

"NAZI" was just short for the name chosen for the party of those who were in the fascist movement in Germany but fascists attempted take over all of Europe in the 1930's. Party names varied and the definitions of fascism varied slightly from country to country. All fascists like to obfuscate issues with their assinine ongoing propaganda, you know, like saying that the left is right and the right is "conservative". They hold us to the false left/right continuum so that all objections and all moves against them are moves that can be lumped into what they call a "left-wing agenda" and those "on the left" can be made scapegoats along with all the original enemies of "the right" like women, Jews, Arabs, homosexuals, etc., in other words their original enemies list is everyone except white male heterosexuals of European stock who are not excepted if they can be pointed to and called "leftists".

Since "the rightwing has been around for 1300 years the best name should really have something to do with the "corporative society" which is a specific hierarchical lifestyle that allows for unlimited power and unlimited control of all wealth and turns the masses at the bottom into serfs or vileins, and we, the masses, find ourselves prisoners in a feudal society with no rule of law, no constitution and no hope for human or civil rights.

We have to call them what they are.

The Busheviks, naturally, think that the Mainstream Media acts for the Democrats as Faux and the rest of Goebbels v2.0 shamelessly and in a co-ordinated fashion, acts as Bushevik Propaganda Machine.

Even though it would be wrong, I am reduced to wishing that we DID have a Left-Wing Propaganda Machine, because the Busheviks have shown that Goebbelsian Lies still work as well as they ever did.

But as to the question of "why can't we do that?"

Ok, first pony up $1,000,000,000 in under-the-table money to emulated Scaife, Olin, and the rest of the Busheviks and their "pocketbook propaganda". Then, install Terry McAuliffe or some other former DNC/Clinton campaign head as Head of CNN.

That's a start to emulating Goebbels v2.0.

So that's why we can't do it.

It really does seem hopeless, maybe it is.

I like to think of Goerge Washington in 1780 at times like these. He was as outfinanced and "outgunned" as we were. He was despondent, thought the French were never going to actually fight, and near certain that defeat was around the corner.

But he kept on, didn't give up and a little more than a year later, was victorious.

I am not saying we should give up. I wouldn't give up if Bushevik Stormtroopers were banging on my door at 3am.

What I am saying is in response to your question of "why can't we do that"?

We can't because our own civility kept us from fully recognizing the monstrous evil of Goebbels v2.0 when it was in embryo. Now, that same civility and the denial that keep us from realizing that some people are just fucking monsters (like the Busheviks, their Capos, Buttons, and Fellow Travelers) and that sometimes fire must be met with fire because fucking monsters understand nothing else.

We can't because of all this denial kept us from doing what we had to do to "stay competetive" (as personally reprehensible that might have been) which was to create a Party Sub-Media like the Busheviks did and choke them with $$$$$ so that they could counterbalance Goebbels v2.0.
That is what I am saying, not that we should give up...NEVER GIVE UP!

Works for me.

It's quick and says quite a bit.

How about one for the anti-Americanism of the right?

i think that's what the editor of Harper's called 'em.

and if you think about it, it's true.. using taxpayer money to fund corporations sounds like corporate socialism to me, and every red-blooded american hates a Commie.

This web site is like a manual for understanding Cheap Labor Conservative philosophy and tactics. I find it so helpful -

http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/index.html

.

like tony blair really are cheap... and not satisfying.

.. but that term, spelled with the "ou" of british spelling adds a double entendre to the meaning that just increases it.

It is the most reachable, accurate of the colloquial terms i've seen for those criminal treasonous felons.

nt

See http://LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/Liberals to see why "Conservatives" are so inferior to LIBERALS !

...radicals pretending to be conservatives, when there is nothing truly conservative about them.

That's a gentlemanly way of putting it, but pretty clear.

It's high time they are exposed as the extremists that they truly are.

I forgot where I heard that phrase, i.e., don't know who said it, but I thought it was apropos and not so over-the-top that it would be dismissed by the politically undecideds.

asshole twitwad, god-podding, knuckle-dragging, breast squeezing fucknuts!

But will they play on MSNBC?

maybe we should go with "asshole twitwad, god-podding, knuckle-dragging, breast squeezing fucknuts!"

and that's a GOOD thing :-)