Paul Graham en What You Can’t say menciona

When you find something you can’t say, what do you do with it? My advice is, don’t say it. Or at least, pick your battles.

Suppose in the future there is a movement to ban the color yellow. Proposals to paint anything yellow are denounced as “yellowist”, as is anyone suspected of liking the color. People who like orange are tolerated but viewed with suspicion. Suppose you realize there is nothing wrong with yellow. If you go around saying this, you’ll be denounced as a yellowist too, and you’ll find yourself having a lot of arguments with anti-yellowists. If your aim in life is to rehabilitate the color yellow, that may be what you want. But if you’re mostly interested in other questions, being labelled as a yellowist will just be a distraction. Argue with idiots, and you become an idiot.

The most important thing is to be able to think what you want, not to say what you want. And if you feel you have to say everything you think, it may inhibit you from thinking improper thoughts. I think it’s better to follow the opposite policy. Draw a sharp line between your thoughts and your speech. Inside your head, anything is allowed. Within my head I make a point of encouraging the most outrageous thoughts I can imagine. But, as in a secret society, nothing that happens within the building should be told to outsiders. The first rule of Fight Club is, you do not talk about Fight Club.

Estas siendo clasificado con alguna definición por un grupo de gente? como: eres capitalista, comunista, socialista, neokeynesiano, marxista, feudalista, etc. Llevalo un nivel de abstracción mas arriba. Graham menciona:

If the anti-yellowists seem to be getting out of hand and you want to fight back, there are ways to do it without getting yourself accused of being a yellowist. Like skirmishers in an ancient army, you want to avoid directly engaging the main body of the enemy’s troops. Better to harass them with arrows from a distance.

One way to do this is to ratchet the debate up one level of abstraction. If you argue against censorship in general, you can avoid being accused of whatever heresy is contained in the book or film that someone is trying to censor. You can attack labels with meta-labels: labels that refer to the use of labels to prevent discussion. The spread of the term “political correctness” meant the beginning of the end of political correctness, because it enabled one to attack the phenomenon as a whole without being accused of any of the specific heresies it sought to suppress.

Ernesto Sabato dice en Antes del Fin:

El escritor debe ser un testigo insobornable de su tiempo, con coraje para decir la verdad, y levantarse contra todo oficialismo que, enceguecido por sus intereses, pierde de vista la sacralidad de la persona humana. Debe prepararse para asumir lo que la etimología de la palabra testigo le advierte: para el martirologio. Es arduo el camino que le espera: los poderosos lo calificarán de comunista por reclamar justicia para los desvalidos y los hambrientos; los comunistas lo tildarán de reaccionario por exigir libertad y respeto por la persona. En esta tremenda dualidad vivirá desgarrado y lastimado, pero deberá sostenerse con uñas y dientes. 1

Si te tachan en alguna definición subele un nivel de abstraccion.

Footnotes

  1. El escritor es encapsulado en 2 definiciones como capitalista y comunista a la vez. El pensamiento no es unilateral