Labels

I think this applies here. It's a crosspost from a blog I threw together this morning.  I'm hoping I'll get a little more feedback than I usually would if I post it on a fitting pod or two.  I plan to follow up in a slightly different direction, but still following the “labels” theme.

from my blog of this a.m.

I'm struggling with the use of labels.  Particularly, since joining this site, I've become sensitive to advertising with which political party/candidates I've aligned (yet at the same time making it obvious).  I run into similar problems when it comes to the many philosophies I've been studying, my religious/spiritual preference, etc.  I jaunt around town with a canvas bag with a few buttons that read things like “proud Minnesota liberal,” ”Wellstone,”  etc.  In doing so, I know that right off the bat there are going to be people who look at me and tisk and think I'm a fool, a lefty (and I am a lefty, but that's not the point), and I will have done nothing for these folks other than to irritate them.  I'm wondering if perhaps I ought to stick to some of my other buttons (literally and figuratively).  My “I read banned books,” or “VOTE,” or “Namaste,” or “Go green” buttons.  Those give you something to think about without throwing up walls of separation that come with the labels.  Am I helping or harming the cause when I adhere another DFL bumper sticker to my car?  Isn't it almost like picking a fight?  “I'm right, you're an idiot, and I'm going to advertise that you're an idiot.”  That may be a little extreme, but I'm really questioning how I identify and align myself and why.  We all like to belong and identify with a group.  It's just human nature (Catholic, Republican, Buddhist, existentialist), and certainly it's not all bad…but how much of it is?

Ok, poorly written as that was, you get my point.  So here's my conflict.  I can't sit on my hands and represent nothing that has a name.  Also, those Wellstone stickers get my blood pumping EVERY time.  They always get a clenched fist, in celebration, and a “damn right!” from me as I cruise or bike down the road.  When I read the buttons, stickers, and shirts I agree with, I'm inspired to DO MORE NOW.  I tell people, “way to advertise, love the cap,” etc.  When I come accross (most) those statements with which I disagree, assuming dialogue is not involved, I at least feel good that these people have taken some action are at least in some way involved (save for the ribbons splashed accross the nation).  I like ALL activists (um…okay again, except the ultra right wing religious zealots (Pat Robertson comes to mind) and those fellows who were protesting the funerals of GI's as they thought it was punishment from God for being homosexuals…good freeking grief). 

I think I'm leaning toward removing the DFL button (except during election seasons) in favor of a button about our loss of civil liberties (this DOES NOT have to mean I'm DFL) or my Go Green/Simplilfy, etc., buttons.  My fave button right now - Namaste.  Never heard of the word until just recently.  Now it pretty well sums things up for me. 

 -I know my writing has been sloppy, my apologies.

 Below is an excerpt taken from the Unitarian Universalist website UUworld.org.  It is the summing up of a sermon titled “Was Thomas Jefferson really one of us?”  that I found to be a great read.  It is in regard to this topic (labeling) and applies accross the board to labeling ourselves and others.  If you have a minute, perhaps you will enjoy the read as well.  Food for thought.

-So many labels can be pinned onto Jefferson: hero, statesman, genius; slaveowner, racist, sinner; enlightened, tradition-bound. To call him by any single one of these is to leave out crucial parts of the story. To call him a Unitarian or a Universalist doesn't really give us a true handle on what he believed-which goes for all of the other Founding Fathers and celebrities on the lists of Famous UUs, regardless of whether they were official UUs or UUs by association or “UUs-at-heart.”

The words “Unitarian” and “Universalist” are no more adequate than “Asian” and “American” when it comes to describing you, me, each other, or our ancestors. At best, the words are hints; they are not definitions. To use them carelessly-to be content with superficial assumptions and summary categorizations-cheats us of both the heartening and heartrending complexities of our truths.

From a sermon delivered at the First Unitarian Universalist Church of Nashville, Tennessee

Re: Labels

Zoe,

An interesting topic that is so relevant for our times. When ones labels something, it is an attempt to classify it, to identify our relationship to and with it, and many other things. So, why the effort spent on reducing and classifying things into concepts, knowing that at the most basic levels, all things are the same and integrally connected? To reduce the aliveness of any manifestation of creation into a concept is already a form of violence.  And the term that you and others enjoy so much, more than just a saying, an aspiration to try and live by. and so…

~Namaste~

Love and Light

Re: Labels

Hey Zoe -

Great post, and thanks - this is indeed a great spot for it!

Words ascribing attributes - such as those about Jefferson in your quote - can be useful, as their context is usually pretty universal, i.e., everyone ‘knows’ what adjectives like “brave”, “honest”, “genius”, etc. mean.

But when you try to use a single word - a label like liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, etc. - to represent a set of bundled qualities, beliefs, or opinions of a person - or worse yet, the entire character and intent of a person - then you’ve got *massive* deletion of information going on. Line up 50 “democrats” and I think you’ll find none of them agree with the entire democratic platform, in fact, I’ll bet you’ll find they agree with each other on fewer than 50% of the issues. Same for any ‘label’ group. 50 people labeled as ‘democrats’ are going to be as diverse and different in their values, pursuits, experience, and thoughts as 50 people labeled ‘Doger fans’.

We’re a diverse set of humans, each with a unique crucible of experience and knowledge. The challenges and systems we are dealing with are complex and very large. Our personal needs and goals are different. Our diversity and different perspectives are an asset and strength, when properly applied and coordinated.

Broad labels that attempt such large representation of a person or group of people are so massively simplified and so extremely inaccurate that they are actually useless, linguistically.

Emotionally, however, as you’ve experienced, they are quite useful and affecting. They “rally teams” and instantly create a conflict model of “us vs. them”. And each person is rallied to the core, since each person is interpreting the word as it means the most to them. Hmmm. Clarity, accuracy and actual communication between folks seem to be lacking here. Reality check, anyone?

Check two things: (1) study up on nominalizations and extreme generalizations (stereotypes in some lingos), and see how they function linguistically and in the human brain interpreting them (i.e., notice that each human brain simply assigns its own meaning to the word, and there is no guidepost definition to help the brain choose otherwise), and (2) simply observe the effects that using these kinds of words have on people, groups, and outcomes. What do they produce in the end? Is that what you want to produce in your life, neighborhood, and your country?

Thanks much for posting. This was a great topic to write about for me. :)

Namaste,
–Katin

Re: Labels

Thank you both for your comments.  I'm so glad it captured an audience and hadn't been rehashed too many times without me.  I honestly hadn't questioned my use of labels before, or seen how ineffective and even harmful they could be toward any forward movement, whatever the issue.

Katin I love those two self checks you give at the end of your post.  I wish I could insert those questions into the minds of everyone right now, just once, and see how the world would change.  I've certainly more to observe myself and within myself. 

Re: Labels

Labels and their uses are what we humans do - we try to make sense of the world and classify it.  The trouble is that life is a dynamic flux and not a static end product.  Hence when we lable something we tend to create static end products that are understood by each person who encounters the label - individually.  We all have our own semantic reaction to a label.

'Life, the Universe and everything' is the territory and as we explore it we make maps.  We are map makers and map users.  Labels are one example of a simple and short sign posts we place on our maps.