Debates and political labelling

I belong to about 10 or more discussion yahoogroups and googlegroups. Some discussions can lead to debates, naturally. In one of my discussion groups, I figured in frequent debates recently. Many people just dislike free market and less government philosophy, while I often passionately defend that philosophy, that's why.

There are sentiments of course to ban insulting terminologies and name-calling. It's understandable.

But I think that certain labelling -- statist, free-marketer, socialist, capitalist, communist, Marxist, liberal, conservative, etc. -- are ok.

It us the addition of adjectives like "dogmatic ___ (any of the above label)", or "stupid ____" or "neurotic/idiotic ____" that is foul.

The above labels refer to a particular philosophy or economic/political belief. A socialist should be explicitly and categorically differentiated with a capitalist or free marketer. Or a nationalist should be categorically differentiated with a pro-globalist.

Debates should be encouraged. Lousy government policies -- like endless borrowings -- were made easy because there are no serious debates among policy makers, among legislators, between legislators and those in the executive branch. Seems that everyone in government, from the Executive, Legislative and Judiciary, are not worried that the public debt keep rising and rising so long as they get some perks and pork barrel somehow.