Extreme Left Lunatics!

Two weeks ago, there was an attempted assassination of a presidential candidate in the United States. In the aftermath, there were condemnations of political violence and calls for unity. However, less than two weeks later, this same candidate is now stirring up division, talking about “extreme left lunatics,” ultra-liberalism, and abortions.

I have to say that I don’t quite understand how these are messages of unity. How is this supposed to bring together opposing viewpoints? I also don’t understand why ultra-liberalism is being thrown into these derogatory terms.

The use of these “ultra-” and “extreme-” prefixes is interesting. Ultra-liberalism. Extreme right. Extreme left… What does this even mean? “Extreme right” seems to be some sort of nickname for nationalism, which is, of course, utter nonsense. Nationalism is just nationalism—it’s not particularly right or left. Rightly speaking, “extreme right” should actually mean “excessive privatization” or something like that. Opinions vary on whether that’s good or bad. “Extreme left,” on the other hand, would be some form of “excessive state control.”

Words matter. Each word has a specific meaning in our understanding of language—and that meaning varies between people. For example, I find the term “ultra-liberalism” to be relatively positive, while others might see it as very negative. But that could also be because we don’t share the same understanding of what “liberalism” means, let alone its extremes—yet somehow, we still have to use the same word to describe this differing meaning.

This applies to many value-laden words. It means that we have to ask ourselves every time we encounter such words what the actual meaning behind them is. Maybe this presidential candidate means well when he says “extreme left lunatics,” or maybe he’s trying to sow division, or perhaps it’s just an accurate use of these words in this particular context?

Context matters, after all. It’s very easy to find all sorts of lunatics, both in history books and in current events. The presidential candidate himself is probably one of them, if we’re being completely honest. It’s a kind of madness to threaten to blow up the capitals of other nations if they don’t behave. But even if it wouldn’t be an unreasonable description to call the presidential candidate a lunatic, it wouldn’t be helpful for the discussion. At the same time, there are demands for politicians to speak clearly.

I believe that politicians should speak clearly and not be afraid to use strong words. But people should be able to explain why it’s appropriate to use such strong language. It’s a fairly simple demand. When strong words are used, no one ever asks whether the reason for doing so is justified.