4 ms·
I don't see that as tribalistic/negative language at all. However, I do see it in the unqualified assertion that left-wing people want "more mass immigration",
by happytoexplain 4y ago
I don't see that as tribalistic/negative language at all. However, I do see it in the unqualified assertion that left-wing people want "more mass immigration", which seems misleading and tangential to their actual desires (which seem to be more about treating immigrants better and allowing more cases of legitimate asylum seeking, rather than actively seeking "more" and "massive" immigration in the general case). Even just the more innocuous version of that statement - "make immigration easier" - is not even a popular opinion of leftwingers, as far as I can tell.
Edit: Where "popular" means a strong majority. However, I'm speaking totally intuitively. I'm not sure what the reality of the numbers are, and there are so many subtly different opinions one can poll for just be tweaking the wording.
- reaperducer 4y agoI don't see that as tribalistic/negative language at all. Left wing is a tribe. Right wing is a tribe. Just like all the sportsball teams are tribes. Politics would work better if politicians, and their followers, worked for people, rather than their tribes.
- happytoexplain 4y agoEh, labels are useful. I don't believe that saying "left/right wingers tend to X" means "the world is black and white" or "everybody is left/right wing and that's all you need to know about them". It's how you use labels that matters. And yeah, a label can get misused so bad that it loses its usefulness in honest discussion, but I think "left/right-wing" is far from that death. It carries too much useful meaning when thoughtfully applied.
- throwaway894345 4y agoEven accepting that "left wing is a tribe", summarizing the views of a tribe (especially in relatively objective terms) isn't the same as engaging in tribalism.