Extremism!

You thought I was talking about another kind of extremism, didn't you?


I'd really like to examine how that word has come to be used lately. It comes from the Latin extera, meaning near the edge or outside. However, these were the first results I get from Google on 23 February 2012:

• Extremist groups demand yet infringe on religious rights ‎ Truman Index – 11 hours ago The United States was founded with the belief that everyone should be free, which of course, includes the freedom of religion, but… Newt Gingrich Calls Obama An 'Extremist' Who Supported … ‎ Huffington Post – 14 hours ago “If we're going to debate about who is the extremist on this issues, it is President Obama, who, as a state senator, voted to protect doctors who killed …

In my view the term 'extremist' has become a low blow when one can't come to phrase a solid argument in the time given….hence it is used by the papers all the time, where it is much easier to call names than to report the whole story. The difference between the two above results in Google are quite clear…one has a specific story, to report: “Gingrich said X”. That is a fact. As to whether Gingrich is right or not on Obama being an extremist, is able to be determined by the one reading the story. However, in the first case, the writer makes her personal opinion announced as fact for all (he's talking about the HHS mandate). Are the groups being reported about (Catholics of course) self-proclaimed 'extremists?” Of course not they are only extremist in this article because the writer sees them that way. The next time you disagree with someone, just call them an extremist, chances are it will win your the argument with more people than if you went into the details. Using the term “extremist” unsupported is about as low, tacky and cheap as you can get in an argument because it is essentially against freethinking…as if what other people believe should affect what I believe.






Then I continued to search and on the next page this popped up:

Oh, and one more: