4 ms·
That is just so...weak. I acknowledge the historical origins, but is anyone really bothered by this? "Democrat" is obviously a demonym for those in the Democr
by lliamander 6y ago
That is just so...weak. I acknowledge the historical origins, but is anyone really bothered by this? "Democrat" is obviously a demonym for those in the Democratic Party, so shortening it to the "Democrat Party" (i.e. the party of the "Democrats") seems perfectly reasonable. I mean, it does lend itself to silly orthographic puns like "DemocRAT" etc., but by itself doesn't really seem particularly offensive.
- mywittyname 6y agoAdopting a disparaging name for a group of people that you don't like is a means of dehumanizing them.
- lliamander 6y agoTrue, I just find it odd that this is seen as (or was ever intended to be) disparaging, rather than a mere grammatical variation.
- dragonwriter 6y agoHeck, before it was adopted as the name of the party, Democratic was also a disparaging epithet conjured by the faction’s opponents (though not one involving torturing grammar, because that's not how Federalists rolled.)
- lliamander 6y agoTo be fair, Democracy had (up until that point) a rather tumultuous history. And even in the modern day, it is often the case that self-styled "Democratic" institutions are measurably worse than their counterparts. For example, compare the "People's Democratic Republic of Korea" to South Korea, or the "Democratic Republic of Congo" to the mere "Republic of Congo".