Huckleberries: CAVE prompts acronym-onious discussion

With city elections looming, Huckleberries Online had a rip-roarin’ debate this week over labeling groups, specifically those dubbed “CAVE” in Coeur d’Alene. Or Citizens Against Virtually Everything. A woman pseudonymed Wondering launched two threads that attracted a combined 200 comments with the statement: “I find (CAVE) a dangerous term as it intimidates people from speaking out in their own name. It creates prejudice and it’s a harmful label.” She made a decent point. So did others, including:

“ Thom George: “CAVE isn’t derogatory, it’s descriptive.”

“ Dennis: “The problem as I see it is that the CAVE group has alienated themselves to the point that even if they have a ‘valid’ question or concern, no one wants or is willing to take them seriously.”

“ Dogwalk Musings: “It would seem CAVE includes many who have questioned a process and/or a project into an overall category as being against everything. Lumping everyone into a group because they choose to question seems unfair and negative to me.”

“ Family Phil: “It’s easier to call them CAVE people instead of ‘Citizens Against Community Centers, Libraries, Parks, Trails, Greenbelts, Education Corridors, and Beautiful New Retail Developments.’ “

“ Sweet Herb: “I probably lean toward considering words or terms such as CAVE as an attempt to belittle, dehumanize a person, rather than attack the position specific of that person. A debate by its very nature, has people on both sides, otherwise, it’s a love fest within a group. For the majority to use a belittling term actually subtracts from the debate, and not only insults the target, but makes the accuser lose stature.”