Political Correctness – The Liberal Brand of Censorship
By Michael Bresciani (12/13/06)
Trying to find the origins and history of what is know today as "political
correctness" would prove trying to the fairest minded researcher. The best
anyone may be able to determine about it with any certainty is that it is
a system of checks and balances whose very premise hangs in mid air from
absolutely nothing.
Being hard pressed to find a single appropriate definition of it, I will
use that of Mr. Philip Atkinson put forth on the website
ourcivilisation.com. Philip said “Political Correctness is the communal
tyranny that erupted in the 1980s. It was a spontaneous declaration that
particular ideas, expressions and behavior, which were then legal, should
be forbidden by law, and people who transgressed should be punished. It
started with a few voices but grew in popularity until it became unwritten
and written law within the community. With those who were publicly
declared as being not politically correct becoming the object of
persecution by the mob, if not prosecution of the state.”
If you are offended by definitions that appeal to the raw emotions and
prefer a more scholarly explanation then perhaps this one from Wikipedia
will do. Offering this second definition so that any offense to the reader
may be thwarted is the most practical example of what drives the notion of
political correctness in the first place. The preceding statement is
tongue in cheek, what follows is the definition.
“Political Correctness (also politically correct or PC) is a term used to
describe language, or behavior, which is claimed to be calculated to
provide a minimum of offense, particularly to the racial, to the cultural,
or other identity groups being described.”
Almost all that pertains to maturity and certainly all that pertains to
New Testament Christianity have been based on common politeness, holding
others in high esteem and genuine respect for all people. Political
correctness seems more involved in images rather than the Christian belief
that all men are created in the image of God. The difference is that the
former is based in perception and the latter in reality.
When Christians see images of fanatically driven Muslim extremist flying
into buildings to kill themselves and take as many with them as they can,
that does not provoke feelings of political correctness. Any one with an
ounce of humanity, Christian or not, would initially want to use far less
than savory words to describe the perpetrators of this kind of mass
murder. It is only the Spirit of God and the word of God (Christ’s
commandments) that persuade the believer to see right through the outward
display and see each participant of such acts as worthy but misdirected
souls who are created in the image of God, in spite of the image they are
creating.
Rather than being double talk such a viewpoint when practiced is only
proof that political correctness is contrived while genuine humanity
driven by Gods love cannot find an adequate substitute in a mere ersatzes
intellectual concept.
Thousands of problems arise from mindless adherence to the unwritten
tenants of political correctness. One is that while it tries to make a
culturally level playing ground for all common speech it tends by its
nature to provoke falsehood, and it genders class distinctions that go far
beyond reality. For example as it pertains to the dreaded N word an entire
class or group is silently ignored. They are never called out for their
use or misuse of the word. That group is African Americans.
In African American social life, films and music, the N word is used
profusely. That is they use the word to describe themselves frequently.
That never seems to raise the question among the proponents of political
correctness about the classes of users and non-users it is creating. It
seems that the N word is only off limits to Caucasians but not to African
Americans. The Blatant use of racially bent titles as in the movie “White
Men Can’t Jump” are overlooked because white people supposedly are the
only ones who are known for political incorrectness. Here is double talk
at its nefarious height.
Far from being a level playing field that is created by strict PC, it is a
world of class defining word wrangling and semantic nonsense. Political
correctness is a true enemy to free speech, common sense and common
decency. It is a doctrine that has been floated on the waves of liberalism
private “Imaginary Ocean” rather than anchored in any real part of
America’s founding principles, law or jurisprudence. Perhaps it may be
good for some humor, even if that is not ever what was intended. To wit,
look at some of these politically corrected definitions of some rather
common phrases and words.
Old Person – Gerontologically advanced
A Crook – A morally or ethically challenged individual
Drug Addict – Chemically Challenged
Bum – Displaced Homeowner
Alcoholic – Anti-sobriety activist
Insane People – Selectively Perceptive
One of the more disconcerting aspects of PC trends is its marriage to
anything that emerges from pop culture or is in its throws to gain new
acceptance. The great push for homosexuality to be accepted as a part of
our culture or even as a new race of people that should be accorded every
protection of law is one example. Our laws are framed to protect all
people but not all behavior. To even suggest that laws should do so puts
the whole matter into a subjective mode and yet there are those who still
think the laws should be changed.
Now, as prescribed and officially sanctioned PC terms are more acceptable
we are shying away from knowable and familiar PC terms and have begun
sliding down the slippery slope of mere connotations and implied meanings.
In an article titled “Politically Correct Candidates” that appeared on The
Conservative Voice website, December 13, 2006, columnist Joe O’Connell
said “…racism is no longer the kidnapping and deportation and enslavement
of tens of thousands of a different race. Racism has become a word or
merely an idea implied by someone other than the declared bigot. Sexism is
no longer the beating of women and the denial of vote rights. Sexism is
now a glance or a mistaken comment.” When political correctness becomes a
fashionable or commonly acceptable attitude we are at tyranny’s door which
leads directly down the hall to the room marked “goodbye freedom of
speech.”
How far will we go with this exercise in cultural reconstruction and
alteration of cultural perceptions? Since it is now popular among millions
of Muslims to commit acts of terror and suicide bombings shouldn’t we
accept this as emerging cultural phenomena worthy of protection of the
law? The answer is understood, or maybe not. Undoubtedly someone will take
exception with the comparing of homosexuality and terrorism but there are
still millions of Americans and others who think the promulgation of the
homosexual agenda is a terror to their culture and to their children.
Perhaps the pillars of PC could create a PC boot camp to assuage the PC
challenged starting on a volunteer basis. They might name it “The Center
for Intensified Sensitivity Training for the PC Challenged.”
David Kupelian of the World Net Daily said in an article from that news
organization on September 28, 2001 “”The news media, the filter through
which Americans receive their information, is reluctant to define the
enemy. Indeed, within the last week, it has become politically incorrect
to describe the Islamic terrorists who blew up the World Trade Center and
Pentagon, murdering thousands of Americans, as “Islamic terrorists.”
Kupelian’s article was penned in 2001 so it may be safe to say that by now
it we should be approaching the place where it is OK to defend the enemy
whom we can no longer define outside of the parameters of acceptable PC.
Again look to the gay agendas militant stand and their obvious advances to
see if this could be true.
Talk about definitions, Kupelian goes on to say what might be considered a
summary definition of the final outcome of serious adherence to the
tenants of PC.
“Now that we’ve talked about what we’re up against, let’s think about
political correctness, that bizarre self censorship that currently makes
us afraid even to name the enemy, let alone fight it.”
“Political correctness, at its core, is intimidation. Terrorism, of course
is the ultimate in intimidation.”
Among the many enemies hurtling themselves at America right now, political
correctness should be identified and resisted with every fiber of our
moral strength. It is the neo-censorship of the left. It is the brain
dribbling of the spineless and if taken seriously will demand its pound of
flesh from our national character as would any other enemy we now face.
America has already lost enough weight. Let’s fatten up for the fight and
persist.
Hiding behind words is after still hiding. Telling the truth as fair men
in consideration of others even if it is to our own hurt is now and will
always be an act of bravery and a show of character. The last time I
looked, the best Americans I’ve ever encountered or heard of are still
made of this kind of stuff and it is still called the right stuff.
Rev Bresciani is the author of two Christian books. His articles on the
second coming of Christ, faith, politics and the American way of life are
read in every country throughout the world. Come visit
http://www.americanprophet.org/
(Printer friendly version) Email: Michael Bresciani
