Political Naming What If's

[Maponus]

A lot of peoples perceptions of what ideologically charged words means isn't based on any real understanding of what that ideology was originally intended to be. Instead, people seem to improvise meanings based on what they read on google and what political parties in their country are called. Thus, when somebody disagrees with their shallow definition of say, Socialism, they get into non-productive arguments on that meaning. See the discussion that will follow a right winger discovering that the Nazis were called (and still are, within German academia) 'National Socialists'.

But what they often don't realise is that these names were often picked almost at random. Many of the early Nazis, mostly Austrian ones, was resistant to the use of the term 'National Socialist' because it made them sound like a anti-German Czech Socialist Party with a similar name (from whose programme, incidentally, they plagiarised) and Hitler wanted to call the Party the 'Social Revolutionary Party' and even after the National Socialist name had stuck he would still use the word 'Social State' instead of 'Socialism.' So, what if the name 'National Socialism' had never come into use? How would this affect our view of Nazism?

As well, people today tend to think Social Democracy is something opposed to or created as an alternative to Marxist socialism. In fact, Social Democracy was originally synonymous with Marxism before the Bolsheviks and the Comintern popularised the use of the 'Communist Party of X' in the place of 'Social Democratic Y of X'. So if the Bolsheviks had never renamed themselves the Communist Party and continued to refer to themselves as the Russian Social Democrat Party throughout the entirety of Soviet history? How would this affect peoples view of Social Democracy?

Any other naming what ifs you can think of?

 

[Thande]

Yes, political party and ideology names are often rather arbitrary. Portugal has a Social Democratic Party that's its main right-wing conservative party. "Liberal Democrats" can mean "vaguely right wing state party in one party dominant state" (Japan), "wishy-washy middle of the road minority with high-minded ideals" (UK) or "crazy Nazis" (Russia) among others. Denmark's main right-wing party has a name sometimes translated as "The Left". The word "People's" can have either left or right wing connotations depending on the context. And so forth.

 

[Kishan]

Many left of center democratic parties would have chosen the term "national socialist" for naming their parties if the Nazis had not used the term and discredited it. In the Third World countries both nationalism and socialism were and still are two attractive and popular ideologies. In fact the term socialism was more popular than the term democracy, as people preferred it over the hated capitalism. Words like "capitalist","bourgeoisie","landlord" etc. were used as terms of abuse. In Bangladesh the main opposition is named Jatio Samajtantrik Dal, which means National Socialist Party.

 

[MSZ]

You are correct that political parties would often adopt such names so as to make it purposely vague as to what they actualy stand for - it makes it easier for them to change their views if they see them becoming less popular. Personally I always foundany party calling itself "Democratic Party" being weird, as it can mean absolutely anything, from christian democratic, through centrism to even social-democracy. Its hard to even say that "democratism" is even an ideology here - almost every party is a "democratic" one anyway.

Similarly the term "people's" gets throw around often, possibly meaning anything - socialist, populist, nationalist, agrarian. It is a matter of convenience and good PR, to attract workers. Post-communist countries have that so often, that it is impossible to even say what kind of ideology a party follows most of the time - since what can you think a party called "Freedom and Solidarity" or "Bridge" or "Left" stand for? Can be anything really.

 

[Lord Grattan]

You are correct that political parties would often adopt such names so as to make it purposely vague as to what they actualy stand for - it makes it easier for them to change their views if they see them becoming less popular. Personally I always foundany party calling itself "Democratic Party" being weird, as it can mean absolutely anything, from christian democratic, through centrism to even social-democracy. Its hard to even say that "democratism" is even an ideology here - almost every party is a "democratic" one anyway.

Similarly the term "people's" gets throw around often, possibly meaning anything - socialist, populist, nationalist, agrarian. It is a matter of convenience and good PR, to attract workers. Post-communist countries have that so often, that it is impossible to even say what kind of ideology a party follows most of the time - since what can you think a party called "Freedom and Solidarity" or "Bridge" or "Left" stand for? Can be anything really.

The moniker Progressive is another such term, as social progress, though looked at through different lenses, is championed and valued by folks on both the left & the right.

 

[d32123]

The moniker Progressive is another such term, as social progress, though looked at through different lenses, is championed and valued by folks on both the left & the right.

And then there are Progressive Conservatives in Canada, which sounds like an oxymoron to most Americans.

 

[Maponus]

Many left of center democratic parties would have chosen the term "national socialist" for naming their parties if the Nazis had not used the term and discredited it.

There was already a party called the National Socialist Party here in Britain before Hitler, it was actually a Marxist party that supported first world war as a struggle against "Prussian militarism".

 

[Zajir]

You also have stuff like sinistrisme in France where due too right wing thought being associated with monarchy, right wing parties where named Radicals or Republican Left.

This also happened in Nepal after the declaration of the republic, with all parties being theoretically socialist or communist but actually occupying the whole spectrum.