OPINION: Relatively extreme

“Extremist” is a common pejorative often offered as a frame when discussing politics, as in “he is a right wing extremist,” but what does being accused of being an “extremist” really mean?

If you were to stand at the goalpost of a football field and someone else stood at the other goalpost, you could rightfully observe that the other person was, relative to your position, at the extreme end of the field. Of course the other person could say exactly the same thing about you, and that is the problem with relative terms like extreme.

If someone sees you as extreme right then that person is necessarily extreme left from your perspective. Relative terms say as much about the speaker’s position as the subject’s while offering no absolute position.

Extreme also implies that there is nothing past that point. The idea that out of eight billion people you happen to be at the absolute edge is absurd.

People with weak or no rational arguments will often open with a relative term in an attempt to frame the subject of discussion in a negative light. Usually there are no rationale, facts, or reasons for what is essentially an ad hominem attack. It is simply an insult intended to bolster what is likely an intellectually vapid argument.

This doesn’t mean that all descriptive openings are worthless. For example, if one were to say “Convicted sex offender John Doe was arraigned on charges of rape” and Mr. Doe indeed had a record of sex offenses then that framing is informative and gives context.

However if one were to say “political extremist Jim Jones is bent on destroying the Republican Party,” then “political extremist” is superfluous and a clear indicator that the speaker lacks a convincing argument and needs to bolster it with insults. Surely if one had clear and convincing evidence of Jones’s malfeasance the listener would quickly conclude for themselves that Jones had a position outside the mainstream. An argument which causes the listener to arrive at the intended conclusion themselves, without framing, is far more persuasive and memorable.

A relative term, such as “far right wing” can legitimately be used if the case is made as to why the term applies. However, in most cases there is no supporting argument and the author relies on the emotional shock value.

If someone is invested in a particular view or opinion and they are exposed to a convincing argument which counters their position they may be triggered into cognitive dissonance. You can tell when this happens because the subject will misstate the argument or counter with an irrational “word salad.”

The adage regarding debate is that if you cannot attack the argument, attack the man. You can then take comfort in the fact that if you are attacked, but not your arguments, then you have already won the debate by reducing your opponent to hurling insults.

In politics, much of what is offered as argument is simply propaganda and sloganeering in an attempt to persuade without informing. Right Wing Extremist, Reject Hate, Black Lives Matter, Love Lives Here, Save NIC and Don’t Say Gay are all political slogans intended to shut down discussion. These slogans offer little in actual substance and some, like Reject Hate, are paradoxes because they are admonishing you to hate hate. But if you hate hate then you are the hater to be hated. Slogans are designed to evoke an emotional response and often set aside reason and logic to accomplish that end.

It is interesting to note than the etymology of the word “slogan” is from the Gaelic term slaugh-gairm which means “battle shout,” which is an attacking army’s scream intended to intimidate their opponents. How fitting to be used in politics, which has become a culture war.

If someone accuses you of being a right wing extremist, or some variation on that theme, you can typically completely disarm their verbal assault with a simple question: What are the facts supporting your claim? What follows will usually be an amusing clutter of words that make no rational sense. Alternately, they may say something along the lines of “there are too many examples to name,” which means there aren’t any at all.

Don’t take insults offered by shallow minded people personally. See them for what they are, an admission that they have no argument, so they have resorted to attacking the man.

When this happens, smile and walk away. You have won.

It’s just common sense.

• • •

Brent Regan is chairman of the Kootenai County Republican Central Committee.