The Limitations of Political Self-descriptions and Self-Labelling and Labels

Many people very ostentatiously and very superficially describe to themselves and others, and very theatrically tell others and present to others about themselves, that they are a conservative, or a liberal or libertarian, a socialist or a communist, or a fascist or an anarchist, but why should anyone believe these very tendentious, very partial, and very limited and abstract superficial labels and self-descriptions that people tell others about their so-called being and their existence?, and what’s more, why should anyone else believe them about any of any of this or what they say and tell others about any of this?

I say all of this, firstly, because if many people say and describe these things about themselves, are they talking about their social, material, and economic influences and conditions?, their so-called human essence or human nature?, or their existence which as an somewhat partial existentialist I believe precedes essence and being?

Whilst I disagree with Marxist political solutions - not least because like very right-wing socialism, Marxists haven’t progressed much, only in a superficial and deluded academic sense - the part of existentialism and Marxism that I believe in, is Dialectical Materialism - which some may say is the engine-block of Marxism, because I believe that we experience the material world and the thing first, and then we name and describe it, ourselves, and others.

There is also a big difference between experiences - again which are primary and come first - and actual perceptions, which are secondary like language, descriptions, and the vast majority of written, spoken, and language so-called meanings and explanations.

Shared meanings and language are still very important though - as in a lot of ways language is all we have got - and as Thomas Szasz says, language is also a like the material world in that it is another body, existence, and then a being that we all live within, but that this being or beings is both created by our material world and language and also created by ourselves by our actions, thoughts, feelings, desires, our experiences and then our perceptions, and then also created and re-created by the words and language that we use, which re-influence, re-creates, and which all then effect and affect our secondary experiences termed as our perceptions.

Sometimes it is a very good thing to transcend or break-out from shared language, shared communication, and shared meanings, especially is there is a very false, misconceived and misinterpreted, very rigid, and very limited or fake consensus with these things, although a person can get labelled as insane for doing this, but again, shared language, shared communication, and shared meanings and a genuine creative and scientific consensus and understanding of all of this are very important as well.

Getting back to the ostentatious, very superficial, very tendentious, very partial and very abstract labels and self-descriptions which many people have of themselves, when they tell and very theatrically present to others that they are a conservative, or a liberal or a libertarian, a socialist or a communist, or a fascist or an anarchist - firstly, these things can only be validated and verified albeit still very limitedly - by a person’s actions, and not by their very ostentatious, abstract, very limited, partial, and very reversible descriptions of themselves, and how they want to see themselves to themselves and others in these ways.

What’s more, it is usually the case, them when many people self-describe themselves as a conservative, a liberal, a social or a communist, or a fascist or an anarchist, in their actions they are usually quite the opposite of all these things, as these self-descriptions which they superficially and theatrically present and project to others about themselves, are to a great extent very partial, limited, and deceitful to themselves and others, about both what they actually do and what they actually are as individuals and as existent human beings.

All these very partial, very reversible, and very theatrical self-descriptions many people make of themselves and present to others, as kind of actors playing a role or part in a rather outdated, boring, and tired play, are all actually some aspects of ALL human beings - even though again they are still all very partial, very theatrical, and limited descriptions - and if anyone tells you or anyone else otherwise, then they are lying about all of this.

I am not being very anarchistic or nihilistic about all of this, as I do accept that in some ways people have a sort of right, and are in a way accurate about these so-called political self-descriptions and very partial and limited labels about themselves, but I personally feel and believe, that it is not up to people to tell others what they are, when these things deny the somewhat totality of all of these aspects of every single human being, and because it is up to other people to decide about all of this about individuals and people collectively, and for others to evaluate and/or judge or describe people upon their actions, and not upon their very abstract self-descriptions.

Another reason why many people just use one part of all these partial aspects of all human beings - and which I agree with some so-called socialists are all influenced and conditioned by social, material, and economic or class factors - is that people choose one aspect of all these factors of human beings, and they decide that this is the path they want to follow - and which then makes them feel superficially very high in self-esteme and very good about themselves, and which also makes them feel very safe and secure amidst the somewhat uncertainty, flows, breaks, and changes, and the somewhat chaos and meaninglessness of many aspects of nature, society, the universe, and life.

Everyone has a conservative, a liberal, a socialist and communist, and an anarchist and a fascist character trait, which again, often than not because they deceive themselves and others about all of these things, deny and suppress these other aspects of themselves, and then project this onto others and protest too much, and then the reversal of all these aspects of every human being then come out with a vengeance, revealing their ignorance, extreme hypocrisy, superficiality, tendentiousness, very superficial and very poor and bad-acting theatrical role-play, and their inautheticity to be fairly honest about, realise, act upon, and present to others their real true selves, as individuals, social, material, and mindful beings.

What’s more, as existentialism reveals to us and says, and in order to realise their material and social influence and conditions, they and we all need to first realise that their and all our existence is primary - it is experienced and comes first - and then after they or we all experience the material thing, they and we all then name it and describe it to themselves, ourselves, and others.