Political Correctness

[Jed]

Attached is a link to a meme that implies that Political Correctness (PC) has been a good thing for Society.

What are your thoughts?

https://www.facebook.com/DismantleMisogyny/photos/a.208944692619207.1073741828.208674125979597/623796777800661/?type=3

Personally, I think that PC is detrimental to society.  For one thing Politeness and Civility are not the same as PC. Two admiral traits.

PC stifles honest and truthful discussion and therefore greatly hinders the resolution of differences of opinion between people.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The basis of PC is simple good manners, which I fully support of course.

Taken to the extreme, it's a neo-Fascist, anti-intellectual disaster. The Atlantic has some good articles on the subject:

How Political Correctness Chills Speech on Campus
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/what-it-looks-like-when-political-correctness-chills-speech-on-campus/497387/

The Coddling of the American Mind
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/

How Politically Correct Should the Workplace Be?
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/04/how-politically-correct-should-the-workplace-be/477636/

 

[George Wallace]

PC stifles honest and truthful discussion and therefore greatly hinders the resolution of differences of opinion between people.

That is why we have so many today calling anyone who "questions" certain matters, or express their "concerns", such things as "Racist", "Xenophobe" or a multitude of other derogatory names in their defence of their views; which they can not defend without name calling.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I agree that good manners (civility) are desirable.  I don't agree they are the basis of PC.  PC has always struck me as exactly what the name implies: that there is a "correct" position.  And that is why PC is destructive: the presumption of a correct position implies a stance of moral advantage, which becomes an excuse for ends-justify-means enforcement of the position, from whence comes all the damage to true civility.

 

[AbdullahD]

That is why we have so many today calling anyone who "questions" certain matters, or express their "concerns", such things as "Racist", "Xenophobe" or a multitude of other derogatory names in their defence of their views; which they can not defend without name calling.

I always found it not the questions that are asked, but the manner in which they are asked that results in one be labelled rascist or some such term.

I agree to an extent that PC has gone to far and no one can say anything on certain topics without risking being labelled a "xyz". Yet on the other hand, I believe, at least currently that some "Political correctness", is good for society. In this day and age, when a person espouses easily debunked propaganda day in and day out, without giving any credence to the rebuttals.. I personally feel labelling the person a bigot or rascist is fine, depending on the situation.

But if the person has looked at the rebuttals and discounts them on a logical basis, supplies evidences to counter them, even weak evidence.. then that person should not be labelled anything. Because fact of the matter is, we are not all going to agree on everything. But the asterix beside the statement is, the higher education a person has, or the higher a person's public profile.. the stricter the rules are enforced.

Within these parameters I think political correctness is okay, but I also believe this is just being a respectable person... but as always to much of a good thing.. is bad. I always try to use the grandmother rule.. "if you wouldn't say it to your grandmother.. then it should not be said." But then again... my grandma ran around calling our african american friends by a certain term... so maybe thats a bad metric for some lol

We have to have tough, uncomfortable conversations these days, that a lot of us prefer to avoid (myself included). But calling a person a bigot or what have you, should not be used to avoid it. I also think there are some genuinely rascist bigots, who are using the anti-pc movement in order to espouse hate speech and morally destructive propaganda.

My musings take them as you will...

Abdullah

 

[Jed]

I always found it not the questions that are asked, but the manner in which they are asked that results in one be labelled rascist or some such term.

I agree to an extent that PC has gone to far and no one can say anything on certain topics without risking being labelled a "xyz". Yet on the other hand, I believe, at least currently that some "Political correctness", is good for society. In this day and age, when a person espouses easily debunked propaganda day in and day out, without giving any credence to the rebuttals.. I personally feel labelling the person a bigot or rascist is fine, depending on the situation.

But if the person has looked at the rebuttals and discounts them on a logical basis, supplies evidences to counter them, even weak evidence.. then that person should not be labelled anything. Because fact of the matter is, we are not all going to agree on everything. But the asterix beside the statement is, the higher education a person has, or the higher a person's public profile.. the stricter the rules are enforced.

Within these parameters I think political correctness is okay, but I also believe this is just being a respectable person... but as always to much of a good thing.. is bad. I always try to use the grandmother rule.. "if you wouldn't say it to your grandmother.. then it should not be said." But then again... my grandma ran around calling our african american friends by a certain term... so maybe thats a bad metric for some lol

We have to have tough, uncomfortable conversations these days, that a lot of us prefer to avoid (myself included). But calling a person a bigot or what have you, should not be used to avoid it. I also think there are some genuinely rascist bigots, who are using the anti-pc movement in order to espouse hate speech and morally destructive propaganda.

My musings take them as you will...

Abdullah

I completely agree with the above highlighted statement. I've never heard of the anti-PC movement though and in contrast, I have been called a Bigot and a Racist more times than I would care to mention for attempting to express an opinion that is against the grain of popular opinion.  I personally do not consider myself to be either, I may be 'Biased' though.  [

 

[AbdullahD]

I completely agree with the above highlighted statement. I've never heard of the anti-PC movement though and in contrast, I have been called a Bigot and a Racist more times than I would care to mention for attempting to express an opinion that is against the grain of popular opinion.  I personally do not consider myself to be either, I may be 'Biased' though.  [

Sorry, it may not be a formal movement, it is just something I have observed on diffferent forums I am on. So I named it as I saw it, however rightly or wrongly.

Also spelling has gone down hill in Canadian society. They usually get the first few letters right and then lose track

 

[mariomike]

How Politically Correct Should the Workplace Be?
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/04/how-politically-correct-should-the-workplace-be/477636/

Interesting.

I joined my career full-time Department two months after High School graduation.
There were no women, or Diversity, in Operations or Communications back then. It was a social group with its own culture.

I didn't do the hiring, I just worked there.

At the Academy, the Chief told us recruits that we came from a society with many prejudices. That he wouldn't try to change our beliefs. But, "If you treat anyone with disrespect, I can change your employment!”

Being probies, that  got our attention! It took about 60 seconds, and there was no movie. 

It was not an idle threat. Customer Satisfaction was everything.  You were going into people's homes.

When did you feel better satisfied as Taxpayers, then or now?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Keep in Mind it was the PC mindset to support the sending of native kids to residential schools, re-locate the Inuit and intern and seize the assets of Japanese-Canadians. What is PC evolves for the moment and suits a particular agenda.

 

[Jed]

Keep in Mind it was the PC mindset to support the sending of native kids to residential schools, re-locate the Inuit and intern and seize the assets of Japanese-Canadians. What is PC evolves for the moment and suits a particular agenda.

Precisely.  It was also PC to do lobotomies as required medical procedures, sterilize mentally handicapped people, treat women  to a double standard, etc.

 

[Blackadder1916]

Keep in Mind it was the PC mindset to support the sending of native kids to residential schools, . . .

Precisely.  It was also PC to do lobotomies as required medical procedures, . . .

Horseshit!  The underlying mindset of those actions was racism, bigotry and stupidity (either in combination or individually).  That you would try to so link now-repudiated (and rightly so) actions, makes me wonder if you know what "political correctness" means.

noun: political correctness;

the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

PC is the mindset of the day, it's is neither fixed or rigid. The term to describe did not even exist, but the concept of popular belief being correct, because it is a popular belief existed long before the term was created.

from wiki: Early-to-mid 20th century

In the early-to-mid 20th century, the phrase "politically correct" was associated with the dogmatic application of Stalinist doctrine, debated between Communist Party members and American Socialists. This usage referred to the Communist party line, which provided "correct" positions on many political matters. According to American educator Herbert Kohl, writing about debates in New York in the late 1940s and early 1950s,

    The term "politically correct" was used disparagingly, to refer to someone whose loyalty to the CP line overrode compassion, and led to bad politics. It was used by Socialists against Communists, and was meant to separate out Socialists who believed in egalitarian moral ideas from dogmatic Communists who would advocate and defend party positions regardless of their moral substance.

 

[a_majoor]

PC is the mindset of the day, it's is neither fixed or rigid. The term to describe did not even exist, but the concept of popular belief being correct, because it is a popular belief existed long before the term was created.

from wiki: Early-to-mid 20th century

In the early-to-mid 20th century, the phrase "politically correct" was associated with the dogmatic application of Stalinist doctrine, debated between Communist Party members and American Socialists. This usage referred to the Communist party line, which provided "correct" positions on many political matters. According to American educator Herbert Kohl, writing about debates in New York in the late 1940s and early 1950s,

    The term "politically correct" was used disparagingly, to refer to someone whose loyalty to the CP line overrode compassion, and led to bad politics. It was used by Socialists against Communists, and was meant to separate out Socialists who believed in egalitarian moral ideas from dogmatic Communists who would advocate and defend party positions regardless of their moral substance.

And the term has exactly the same connotation today, to define the "correct" positions and prevent open debate or arguments on topics considered "off limits" to Progressives. The cloaking of PC dogma as "being polite" and so on is simply to disguise the true intent and disarm politically unengaged people who value politeness and manners, not realizing they are actually being forbidden to speak under the guise of not giving offence.

 

[FJAG]

And the term has exactly the same connotation today, to define the "correct" positions and prevent open debate or arguments on topics considered "off limits" to Progressives. The cloaking of PC dogma as "being polite" and so on is simply to disguise the true intent and disarm politically unengaged people who value politeness and manners, not realizing they are actually being forbidden to speak under the guise of not giving offence.

It strikes me that too often the term Progressive is improperly used when you are describing individuals or groups that are uncompromising in their viewpoints. Progressives per se have been behind some of the most positive developments in our western society. For a quick example see here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism

And her: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism_in_the_United_States

The problem that in any free society you have a**holes at both end of the spectrum who simply will not accept that there may be a different viewpoint. Conservatives have their own problems. For just a few example see here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativism_(politics)

And here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism

In its simplest form political correctness means nothing more than: "treat others the way that you would want them to treat you".  Unfortunately for some people on both sides of the debate it too often means "be like me and do as I say or f*** off" to the extent that if you aren't or don't then as a minimum you get yelled at.

Personally I view myself as a Progressive but I view with utter disgust some of the flaky and things being generated in our universities and society in general by a some extremist, intolerant members of the Snowflake generation.

In short, don't generalise and in particular don't use a term for a forward moving and open thinking segment of society as a pejorative one simply because at one extreme end of the spectrum it contains a closed and narrow minded element.

:cheers:

 

[daftandbarmy]

And the term has exactly the same connotation today, to define the "correct" positions and prevent open debate or arguments on topics considered "off limits" to Progressives. The cloaking of PC dogma as "being polite" and so on is simply to disguise the true intent and disarm politically unengaged people who value politeness and manners, not realizing they are actually being forbidden to speak under the guise of not giving offence.

Exactly.

Risking a slight tangent, I also have a problem with people who proclaim themselves as spokespersons for various 'communities' that they purport to represent. Sadly, with the easy availability of various virtual public speakers' corners these days, too many unelected politicians assume positions well above their stations.

This classifies is 'stolen leadership' as far as I'm concerned, and is also a tactic too prevalent amongst the 'professionally outraged' these days.

 

[a_majoor]

Terms like Progressive, Liberal, Conservative and so on have had their meanings changed and corrupted over the years.

Theodore Roosevelt would certainly not recognize today's "Progressives" as having anything in common with the Progressive movement of the late 1800's, modern day "Liberals" are conserving ideas which were introduced by the New Dealers in the 1930's and Conservatives hearken back to ideas introduced by Liberals such a John Locke and Edmund Burke in the Enlightenment. And of course we hear National Socialism and Fascism defined as being "Right Wing", despite the rather clear indication in the name  (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei ).

At any rate, the defining features of "Political Correctness" is preventing discussion on various topics under the ruse of "being polite" or "preventing offence", regardless of who is attempting to silence you.

 

[Brad Sallows]

A "bigot" is just means a person is close-minded.  Not every opinion merits respect or even tolerance, so "bigot" is (should be) neutral without further explanation.  For example, I'm bigoted against people who dream of imposing any flavour of totalitarianism or who idolize totalitarians.

"Racist" just means belief that "races" (whatever those are) have inherently different characteristics and aptitudes.  Racism is (should be) essentially a consequence of belief in natural selection (that theory held in high regard by so many people who view their own intellect, education, and social attitudes as exemplary).  Racism too is (should be) neutral without clarification.  A racial difference will almost always be seen as net positive/advantageous on one side of the difference, which tempts people to conclude that the people on the other side are somehow lesser; but any given difference should imply no moral superiority or inferiority on either side.  Most times when I see "racism" thrown out pejoratively, what is actually at stake is "culturalism" - and sometimes, the bias is (as with "bigot") merited.  Not every cultural quiff deserves tolerance.

Those terms - along with "sexist" and a few others - are overused to the point of meaninglessness and have become empty pejoratives.  Without explaining why a person is racist (or whatever), the accusation is empty (albeit thought by most people to be nasty).

 

[Lumber]

A "bigot" is just means a person is close-minded.  Not every opinion merits respect or even tolerance, so "bigot" is (should be) neutral without further explanation.  For example, I'm bigoted against people who dream of imposing any flavour of totalitarianism or who idolize totalitarians.

"Racist" just means belief that "races" (whatever those are) have inherently different characteristics and aptitudes.  Racism is (should be) essentially a consequence of belief in natural selection (that theory held in high regard by so many people who view their own intellect, education, and social attitudes as exemplary).  Racism too is (should be) neutral without clarification.  A racial difference will almost always be seen as net positive/advantageous on one side of the difference, which tempts people to conclude that the people on the other side are somehow lesser; but any given difference should imply no moral superiority or inferiority on either side.  Most times when I see "racism" thrown out pejoratively, what is actually at stake is "culturalism" - and sometimes, the bias is (as with "bigot") merited.  Not every cultural quiff deserves tolerance.

Those terms - along with "sexist" and a few others - are overused to the point of meaninglessness and have become empty pejoratives.  Without explaining why a person is racist (or whatever), the accusation is empty (albeit thought by most people to be nasty).

This is all just semantics. As with political correctness, it doesn't matter what is actually true, it only matters what people believe to be true. To just about everyone, racist mean: being prejudice, discriminatory, or antagonistic against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

Here's another term for you: self-interest. It's important, because it's the whole reason that Political Correctness is able to flourish. A person is smart; people are stupid. Most people, I would argue, have opinions that are far more extreme than the "PC" position; so why do they hide their opinions tow the party line? Mob rule and the information age. You can't get away with anything these days. You can't make your position know one day, then change it the next, even if you've had a genuine epiphany. Anything you say will stick with you for years to come. There's no such thing as maturation any more; the mob won't just you on who you are, nor even on the sum of what you've done. Rather, it'll judge you solely based on the few most extreme and negative things you've done.

So you go the safe route; you stay in your safe space being the PC line.

 

[Shrek1985]

Anyone else catch the recent CBC radio show about how being politically incorrect is a cover for hate and wrong-think?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Anyone else catch the recent CBC radio show about how being politically incorrect is a cover for hate and wrong-think?

Coming from the CBC, that would be the apogee of irony.