Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Referring to political opposition of any sort as "insurgents", in a representative-style government, is both ridiculous and reprehensible. Stopped reading right there.
Which is annoying, because I agree with the headline argument. The underhanded rhetorical tactics are unacceptable, however.
Huh what is the issue? "Insurgent campaign" is a pretty common term of art in American politics for political campaigns that go against the establishment, it's not derogatory or anything.
See for example: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3291719
I was unaware of the broader trend and find it disturbing too. It's a poor choice of words. Fine for the tiny percentage of the population that is technically minded, but for the overwhelming majority, it will carry connotations that will have trickle-down effects across the broader electorate.
It subtly influences anyone who doesn't think about it very hard to view those campaigns unfavorably, given how the word insurgency is most closely associated with terrorism and warfare.
Things like this need to go through a science communication translation to avoid harming the public.