I agree with Peter. The first time I was called a 'modernist' was when I visited Platina. It did not generate any warm, fuzzy feelings in my heart. It is divisive to use these types of descriptions.
I object to labeling people inaccurately, but if someone is a modernist, I would not hesitate to label them as such, because my concerns would not be with warm fuzzy feelings or being divisive; true modernism is a heresy and has destructive spiritual consequences, and anyone holding such an opinion should be corrected, and if they persist, rebuked. Sometimes, being divisive is a virtue, although our modern American ears do not wish to hear this.
Applying the label indiscriminately, however, cheapens the gravity of the situation and when applied to people who do not consider themselves to be what the label is and do not confess it, can be a rude, hurtful, and counter-productive experience for all, however.
Anyway, in the Antiochian Archdiocese we have mixture of folks (some are more traditional than others). I like the variety and the balance it provides.
I find the cleavage in modern American jurisdictions over "traditional" vs "less traditional" concerning as it could lead to further schisms down the road.