What is Political Correctness?

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 14:29:48 -0500

I don't think we have a clear understanding of what is truly Political Correctness, and what isn't.

Political correctness doesn't mean, for example, having rules that say you shouldn't call me, a black man, a nigger.

Political correctness means someone's being offended because, when trying to point me out standing in a crowd of warrant officers, you say "Chief Walker is the black male CW2 standing over there". What's wrong with that? I *am* black, I *am* male, and I *am* (for now) a CW2.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Political correctness would force me, as a part of my commissioning oath, to say "So Help Me God" when my religious beliefs prohibit it.

Political correctness would force one of my colleagues to NOT say it, when his beliefs either permit or demand it

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 12 at 2015 6:24 AM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:24:42 -0400

Dictionary definition of POLITICALLY CORRECT: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities should be eliminated.

Unfortunately what is commonly called political correctness has morphed into two extremes. (1) A philosophy oversimplified and misused by a few who are oversensitive to the words of others or pushing an alternate agenda of their own. (2) A BS catch all phrase used whenever someone is upset that they can't have it their own way or are upset they are not free to behave badly or pushing an alternate agenda of their own.

I find it ironic that of all the people whining about political correctness on RP, only one response has been posted for your question.

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 12 at 2015 6:28 AM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:28:35 -0400

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/dec/16/race.world

Political correctness is one of the brilliant tools that the American Right developed in the mid-1980s as part of its demolition of American liberalism. The core of the conservative proposition is that moral individuals are the basis for a just society and dynamic capitalism, a head-to-head confrontation with the 'liberal' view that individuals are social animals and that fair societies require universal rules asserting justice in its widest sense. Justice does not come from coercive rules, argue conservatives; it comes from moral individuals. The whole fabric of taxation, welfare, regulation, anti-discrimination legislation and public initiative is a coercive web which undermines freedom and morality. It must be fought to the last.

What the sharpest thinkers on the American Right saw quickly was that by declaring war on the cultural manifestations of liberalism - by levelling the charge of political correctness against its exponents - they could discredit the whole political project. Rush Limbaugh, the right-wing talk-show host, talking about 'feminazis', is part of the same movement as Allan Bloom, whose seminal book, The Closing of the American Mind , argues that political correctness has infected the US's capacity to think. This is the populist battering-ram behind which the Right makes the case for tax cuts for the wealthy and welfare minimalism for the poor.

The difficulty has been that American liberalism, itself split between whether it is a coalition of minorities - all of whose rights have to be respected by meticulous linguistic descriptions - or whether it represents a set of universal moral propositions about justice, has offered it many targets. By ridiculing liberalism's 'politically correct' nostrums, conservatives are able to ridicule the whole liberal enterprise. Thus, any tiny faculty of a university that maintains that Shakespeare is racist, any honest-to-god guy involved in a sexual harassment case, or any environmentalist seeking to protect unspoiled land can all be portrayed as victims or exponents of irrational political correctness. Plain-talking conservatives who want to get 'issues out into the open and debated' would never fall prey to such liberal idiocies.

It was always likely that political correctness would spill over into Britain - and it has been seized upon by conservatives and fogeys for all the same reasons. A single incident managed unwisely - says the Government allegedly considering a Minister for men, an edict from the Commission of Racial Equality over golliwogs or a council worrying about the teaching of homosexuality - will lead to a storm of mocking copy about political correctness, and for one end - it discredits the liberal cause.

Yet it matters profoundly what we say. It is an advance that it is no longer possible to call blacks niggers and that sexist banter in the workplace is understood to be oppressive and abusive. It is right that the groups in society that used to be written off as mentally retarded are recognised as having special needs. And it is right that TV and radio take care how they describe terrorists and the al-Qaeda network in the middle of this 'war' against terrorism. Murdoch's Fox TV news in the US habitually refers to Taliban fighters as 'diabolical', dismissing all critics who call for impartiality in their reporting as 'politically correct'.

So which side of this argument do you want to be on? I believe in liberal ideas of justice and public intervention. White politicians have to be careful how they talk about racial minorities in a society as racially polarised as Cantle describes; elements in the white majority are looking for any validation of their prejudices.

The political universe that wants the state to underwrite and even own public transport is the same one that asserts it matters how we talk about each other - within sane limits. Conservatives are right; the language and the politics do all hang together. It's just that they are on the wrong side of the argument

Will Hutton: Words really are important, Mr Blunkett

The American Right has sneered at liberal ideas and ideals as silly shows of Political Correctness. We are wrong to copy them.

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 12 at 2015 6:43 AM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:43:59 -0400

Copied from another:
The phrase "Politically Correct" was associated with the dogmatic application of Stalinist doctrine, debated between Socialists and members of the Communist Party. It was used disparagingly, to refer to someone whose loyalty to the Communist Party 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.

Response by Sgt David G Duchesneau made Apr 10 at 2015 12:11 PM

Sgt David G Duchesneau — Fri, 10 Apr 2015 12:11:04 -0400

FINALLY, A DEFINITION OF THE TERM "POLITICAL CORRECTNESS!

For the last six odd years, almost all of the things I wanted to write or say, have been stymied by a recently coined term referred to as "POLITICAL CORRECTNESS"! Although I consider myself rather fluent in the English language, that term was not in my vocabulary. My curiosity got the best of me and I decided to do a little research and after two weeks of chasing fruitless leads, I found what I'd been looking for at the Truman Library and Museum in Independence Missouri . A unnamed source there sent me copies of four telegrams that were between Harry Truman and Douglas MacArthur on the day before the actual signing of the Surrender Agreement. The contents of those four telegrams below are exactly as received, not a word has been added or deleted!

(1) Tokyo , Japan
0800-September 1,1945
To: President Harry S Truman
From: General D A MacArthur
Tomorrow we meet with those yellow bellied bastards and sign the Surrender Documents,
any last minute instructions!

(2) Washington, D C
1300-September 1, 1945
To: D A MacArthur
From: H S Truman
Congratulations, job well done, but you must tone down your obvious dislike of the Japanese
when discussing the terms of the surrender with the press, because some of your remarks are fundamentally not politically correct!

(3) Tokyo , Japan
1630-September 1, 1945
To: H S Truman
From: D A MacArthur and C H Nimitz
Wilco Sir, but both Chester and I are somewhat confused, exactly what does the term politically correct mean?

(4) Washington, D C
2120-September 1, 1945
To: D A MacArthur/C H Nimitz
From: H S Truman
Political Correctness is a doctrine, recently fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and promoted by a sick mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a piece of crap by the clean end!

Response by SGT Curtis Earl made Apr 10 at 2015 12:33 PM

SGT Curtis Earl — Fri, 10 Apr 2015 12:33:42 -0400

There's no reason I can't point out the 'black' CW2 if it's a defining feature. If you're the only black Warrant in the group, I could see that. It's the most obvious feature. There's nothing wrong with that.

It's when people insist on combining race and some prejudicial ideal, that's the issue. When 1SG Snuffy is telling some story about a 'BIG BLACK' guy, he's hinting at a personal prejudice. He's equating BLACK with SCARY or DANGEROUS. - and he expects everyone hearing his tale to get his meaning. I've heard (non-black) people use the term to mean STUPID or IGNORANT or ILL-BEHAVED. But if he meant BIG and DANGEROUS, he should have said BIG and DANGEROUS. Using black in the way mentioned in my example only conveys the idea that BLACK people are inherently DANGEROUS or STUPID. In this example, 1SG has equated BLACK with something other than race or skin tone.

That's why we have Political Correctness. Because there's an entire subset of Americans that have prejudicial views on Homosexuals, Blacks, Women, or <insert group here>, and lack the wisdom to speak with respect.

And political correctness would not force you to say "So help me God" if it's against your religion. That's actually the opposite of PC.

Response by SGT Mark Sullivan made Apr 27 at 2015 9:27 PM

SGT Mark Sullivan — Mon, 27 Apr 2015 21:27:55 -0400

Political Correctness? You mean Owellianspeak? Re-read 1984 by George Orwell, is so parallel to what is happening now days it's spooky

Response by SSG Roger Ayscue made May 26 at 2016 12:12 AM

SSG Roger Ayscue — Thu, 26 May 2016 00:12:37 -0400

Political Correctness is Stupidity in it's purest form.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 5 at 2016 3:34 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 05 Oct 2016 15:34:13 -0400

Very valid points indeed. But, remember the posts about a black couple who were quite offended because written on their order was the words black people in booth (or something like that)?

I will go for the opposite. Political incorrectness is taking everything that is said as offensive and raising a stink because I am offended.

Response by SGT Mark Sullivan made Apr 26 at 2019 11:21 AM

SGT Mark Sullivan — Fri, 26 Apr 2019 11:21:50 -0400

It strikes me that the best response about Political correctness and its definition was given by Jordan Peterson
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KU9jQcFr_aU

Jordan Peterson Defines Political Correctness - Nails It!

Professor Jordan Peterson defines political correctness in one easy lesson, and then illustrates why his left-wing detractors are ignorant and uninformed.