Department of Labelling

Ezra Klein writes:

Sources tell me that the Bush administration has stopped using the term "protectionist" because they found it polls really well. Instead, skeptics will now be termed "economic isolationists," so as to better smear them as people who would've lost World War II.

But how can it be a smear if it's, well, true? Protectionists are economic isolationists.

Comments

[MarkedExcess]

Would you call an American that calls for trade policies that result in a very low or zero trade deficit---as opposed to zero trade---an "economic isolationist"?

[Randy (Internet Ronin)]

Truth is not nearly as important as whether or not the name hurts someone's feelings. As you know, the Archbishop of Canterbury has expressed interest in outlawing this practice, depending upon into which groups the hurter can be lumped and whether or not the hurtee qualifies for official victim status.

[dearieme]

Nature may abhor a vacuum but it seems perfectly content with vacuity. Anyway, I recommend "outreach to a diversity of suppliers".

[Kurt]

Well sure, and when Bill Clinton made comments about Jesse Jackson winning a previous South Carolina primary it was also true. So I guess he couldn't possibly be trying to smear Obama as "the black candidate" right? Would that things were so simple.