At the very least, you would want a refund. Irritating, yeah. But it doesn't happen all the time.
But what if the labels were always wrong?
Worried that one time the “aspirin” will be rat poison?
So why do we accept mislabeling from the Media?
It happens all the time.
Take the labels: “moderate”, “leftist”, “extreme lefts”, “hard left”. By and large, “moderate” translates to “right of center” and usually “conservative”. “Conservative” often as not means loony-tunes fascist.
Is Bernie Sanders a "socialist"? Nope."Liberal" on some things; "conservative" on others.
And the Hillary? Nope. Not a "liberal democratic". Her positions range from right of center to left-of- fascist. A sort of pink, hippy Hitler.
Let's not even get started on Donald Trump!
Is there a rule of thumb on deciphering media levels.
Yes -- they are always wrong!
A good example is the Corbyn "revenge" shuffle.
A new kind of rave dance?
But the Brit media has been calling Corbyn's reshuffle of his "shadow cabinet' a kind of malevolent, bad-spirited blowback. Their articles come complete with anti-Corbyn MPs tweets, warning of the impending collapse of the UK.
You would think that the Queen had been caught shagging the royal butler.
Or the PM had put his dick in a pig's mouth.
(Oh, he did? Never mind)
Now, keep in mind that Corbyn's is a just "shadow" cabinet, not the real thing. A thing of the imagination.
Also keep in mind that cabinet reshuffles are routine, pedestrian things that party leaders do to ensure that everyone is on the same page. Like cleaning the litter box. Although in this case, there were more lumps of dried shit than usual.
Also keep in mind that such reshuffles are expected when a new party leader inherits holdovers from previous "shadow" cabinets. Did I mention dried shit?
Corbyn is now accused of being a "hard leftist", a Stalinist, intolerant of dissent -- despite having bent over backwards to accommodate the backbiting Blairites on his front bench. His policy has been unfailing moderate in his management of differences of opinion. But clearly that masks an authoritarian intention of creating a gulag someplace, like a dom club in Liverpool for Hillary Benn.
|There WILL be discipline|
Naturally, the media refer to the Blairites as "moderates" and Corbyn as an "extremist"
The Blairites are in favor of wasting billions on a nuclear system they cannot use without approval from the US -- and which they patently do not need -- certainly not at a time of fiscal distress, when the army can hardly afford body armor for its troops. Since the Scottish are forced to host Trident despite not wanting it -- the issue is also nationally divisive. Moderation? No. Stupidity.
|London: the road to gentrification|
The Blairites favor more privatization -- "Tory -lite " policies which cost them the last election. "Centrism"? No-- Conservatism. Of course, "centrism", an unwillingness to take sides is inherently conservative. So that when you have Tory-right versus Tory-left, voters will go for the real stuff.
The Blairites are political morons.
The Blairites favor a continuation of Blair-ish policies in the Middle East -- unwinnable wars-- which accomplish nothing other than depleting the exchequer and killing British soldiers. Is a taste for bloodshed "moderation"?
Jeremy Corbyn just wants to get the economy back on line, reduce inequality and create a better standard of life. Yes, he wants affordable education and better transportation systems, and if that means more funding for public education and public transport, fine. He wants government to be more responsive to ordinary people and communities. And he wants to avoid foreign entanglements and violence. Clearly a dangerous man.
A"Stalinist" according to the Daily Mail, the Telegraph , the Times, the Guardian and the Independent.
Labels, labels, labels. But one thing about mislabeling. Eventually, you do get rat poison --- or a Tony Blair -- or, in the US, a Hillary Clinton. And people will die.