The labelling game ricocheting

For decades, the branding game was one sided. Names like communist, extremist, terrorist and a danger to country were quite often attached to the ‘undesirables’ and some unfortunate ones ended up behind bars while some left on a self imposed exile. The milder forms were anti govt, quitters, xenophobia, racist, betrayers and yes traitor, were also used on those not in favour.

With the advent of the internet, this branding game is now played with greater vigour by the other side. The anonymous bloggers have had a field day calling the govt all kinds of fanciful names, and yes, including traitor, selling out the people and country. Corruption, cronyism, greedy, untrustworthy, and many worse labels that were very personal and very unpleasant.

Not that these labels are true, but true only to those who did the labelling, the way they are being used is going to rub people the wrong way. The scathing attacks of course are undesirable and should not be encouraged on all sides. It is best that people avoid labelling people or boxed anyone into any pigeon holes they wanted to put the other party in a bad light. It reflects badly on the person who did the labelling as well.

The only good thing arising from this nonsense is that both camps must now know that both can play the game and both have their own avenues to do so. This is like the possession of nuclear weapons, both are just as destructive and it is best to avoid using them. In the internet, the use of labelling is quite new as this was not available to the users till now. The novelty of a newly acquired tool would entice the users to be more generous and frequent in its use. Hopefully both sides would know that it is to their best interest that this tactic of branding be ruled out and be avoided,

Let there be lesser or no name calling so that both sides can appear more civilised and nicer to each other. The playing field is quite level or at least being levelled.