The Pitfalls of Governing by Labels
“In honor of our great veterans on Veterans Day, we pledge to you that we will root out the communists, Marxists, fascists, and the radical-left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country . . . “ - Donald Trump, Veterans' Day Rally, November 11, 2023
“Yes, I do. [think Trump is a fascist]… voters don’t want a president of the United States who admires dictators and is a fascist.” - Kamala Harris, CNN Town Hall, October 2024
Politicians and their followers relish using labels. Labels are catchy, but their “advantages” don’t stop there. They are perfect for a sound-bite culture where brevity is valued and more likely to grab attention and produce headlines. They are tailor-made for use in speeches, debates and campaigns – and to sidestep difficult questions from citizens and reporters. Used alone or lumped with other labels they are designed to generate anger and fear, both aimed at creating faithful followers and increasing voter turnout.
Almost all politicians use them though today’s Republicans arguably seem much “better” at this than Democrats, who seem more fond of “policy-speak.” Democrats of course do use labels. Current favorites targeting opponents include “far-right extremists,” “authoritarians,” “election deniers,” “Christian nationalists,” “book banners,” “racists,” “misogynists,” “homophobes,” “science deniers” and “fascists.”
Republicans use overarching labels, including “MAGA” and “America First,” but also a plethora of second-order labels, each of which has sub-labels. “Fraud, waste and abuse” and its sub-labels “voter fraud and” “welfare cheats” along with “DEI,” and its sub-labels of “woke” and “un-American” are in widespread use. “Communists” is an all-purpose label which includes opponents who are said to be “Marxists,” “socialists,” “far-left activists,” and “bleeding-heart liberals.” “Criminals” is also de rigueur and includes “criminal gangs,” “terrorists,” “insurrectionists,” “protesters,” “rioters,” “cat and dog eaters,” “rapists” and “baby killers.” Then there are the “elites,” which category includes “coastal elites,” “globalists,” and “intellectuals” and the special category of elites labeled “the swamp,” also referred to as “bureaucrats,” “the “deep state” and “feds.”
While talking in labels may be popular it is not healthy in an American republic designed to be anchored in the virtues of civility, reason, dialogue and informed debate. Labels are seldom accompanied by any definition that would allow them to be challenged by reasoned argument. Most labels can’t even be described with much consistency by a diverse group of those who use them. If you doubt this, ask a few people who invoke them to tell you the difference between a communist, socialist, Marxist and fascist.
Labels are treated as facts, such as that there is “voter fraud,” but they are seldom accompanied by objective evidence that justifies the label. The supposed “facts” are often simply anecdotes treated as proof of a generalized conclusion or conspiracy theories which lack objective foundation. A story of an undocumented immigrant who commits murder is used to justify classifying all undocumented immigrants as criminals despite crime statistics that demonstrate they commit all crimes at lower rates than citizens. Labels fashion and spread stereotypes, such as that all MAGA followers are white nationalists, a stereotype that no high school or college student could ever justify using in a term paper. Further, once a label gains traction it tends to have staying power. Labeling political opponents as “communists” has been around for over a century and persists even though the Communist Party in America today is for all practical purposes extinct.
The primary danger of governing by labels, of course, is that they undermine democratic values and institutions. They are designed to divide Americans from each other. They take the place of and discourage thinking. The offer simplistic solutions, such as “protect free speech” without the conversation needed to build a broad-based public consensus of just what the problem is and acceptable courses of action. Such “label-solutions” also lead to government “fixes” that even adherents come to regret. In February 2025 almost all of the 350 employees who safeguard our nuclear arsenal were fired (“reduce government waste”) and then had to be quickly rehired once the public became aware of what they did. Since a label is a broad term, it can too often be used to justify illegal, unconstitutional and/or unethical behavior such as withholding federal funds and demanding the ouster of university presidents - all in the name of ridding higher education of “DEI.”
From May 25th to September 17, 1787, delegates to the Constitutional Convention debated proposals to strengthen the weak government then existing under the Articles of Confederation. The record of these debates and the Federalist Papers written to defend the Constitution demonstrate the careful thinking with which arguments were made – and the near-absence of argument by labels. They reflected a high point of Enlightenment thinking – the application of reason to guide our emerging republic. The United States was new on the world stage, designed as it is for self-government. “We, the People” would rule, not kings, queens or tyrants. That requires much more of its citizens. It requires thinking. Labels get in the way.
Photo Credit: TheDailyStar.net
