Jump to content

Political correctness

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Samtheboy (talk | contribs) at 16:18, 5 June 2007 (Reverted 1 edit by 151.198.191.133 identified as vandalism to last revision by Imperator Honorius. using TW). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Political correctness (often abbreviated to PC) is a term used to describe language or behavior that is intended, or said to be intended, to provide a minimum of offense, particularly to racial, cultural, or other identity groups. A text that conforms to the ideals of political correctness is said to be politically correct.

The term "political correctness" is used almost exclusively in a pejorative sense.[1] However, terms such as inclusive language and civility are often used to praise language that is seen by critics as "politically correct". [2],[3]. Those who use the term in a critical fashion often express a concern about the dilution of freedom of speech, intolerance of language, and the avoidance of a discussion of social problems.

The existence of PC has been alleged and denounced by conservative, liberal, and other commentators.[2] The term itself and its usage, however, is hotly contested. Some commentators, usually on the political left, have argued that the term "political correctness" is a straw man invented by the New Right to discredit what they consider progressive social change, especially around issues of race and gender.[3]

History

The often quoted earliest cited usage of the term (in the form "not politically correct") comes from the U.S. Supreme Court decision Chisholm v. Georgia (1793), where it clearly means that the statement it refers to is not literally correct, owing to the political status of the United States as it was understood at that time.[4]

The term "political correctness" is said to derive from Marxist-Leninist vocabulary to describe the "party line".[5] By the 1970s this term, re-appropriated as a satirical form of criticism, was being used by some on the Left to dismiss the views of other Leftists whom they deemed too doctrinaire and rigid. It was in this sense that the popular usage of the phrase in English derived, [6][7] and was employed by such narrators as Bobby London in his underground comic Merton of the Movement. The alternative term "ideologically sound" followed a similar trajectory to this point, appearing in satirical works such as Bart Dickon.

In the 1990s, the term became part of a conservative challenge to curriculum and teaching methods on college campuses in the United States (D'Souza 1991; Berman 1992; Schultz 1993; Messer Davidow 1993, 1994; Scatamburlo 1998). In a commencement address at the University of Michigan in 1991, U.S. President George H. W. Bush spoke out against a "movement" who would "declare certain topics off-limits, certain expressions off-limits, even certain gestures off-limits."[8]

The phrase "politically correct" has become popular in other countries as well, including several Scandinavian countries (politiskt korrekt=pk), Spain and Latin America (políticamente correcto), New Zealand[9], France (politiquement correct), Germany (politisch korrekt), The Netherlands (politiek correct) and Italy (politicamente corretto).[citation needed]

As linguistic concept

This practice of using "inclusive" or "neutral" language is based on the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, which states that a language's grammatical categories shape its speakers' ideas and actions.[10] The objective is to bring peoples' unconscious biases into awareness, allowing them to make more informed choices about their language and making them aware of things different people might find offensive.

The goal of changing language and terminology consists of several points, including:

  1. Certain people have their rights, opportunities, or freedoms restricted due to their categorization as members of a group with a derogatory stereotype.
  2. This categorization is largely implicit and unconscious, and is facilitated by the easy availability of labeling terminology.
  3. By making the labeling terminology problematic, people are made to think consciously about how they describe someone.
  4. Once labeling is a conscious activity, individual merits of a person, rather than their perceived membership in a group, become more apparent.

In linguistics, the strong form of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis holds that a language's grammatical categories control its speakers' possible thoughts. While few support the hypothesis in its strong form, many linguists accept a more moderate version, namely that the ways in which we see the world may be influenced by the kind of language we use. In its strong form, the hypothesis states that, for example, sexist language promotes sexist thought.

The situation is complicated by the fact that members of identity groups sometimes embrace terms that others seek to change. For example, deaf culture has always considered the label "Deaf" as an affirming statement of group membership and not insulting or disparaging in any way. The term now often substituted for the term "deaf", hearing-impaired, was developed to include people with hearing loss due to aging, accidents, and other causes. While more accurate for those uses, the term "hearing-impaired" is considered highly derogatory by many deaf people. The term "Hard of Hearing," however, is considered an acceptable descriptive term for a limited- to non-hearing person.

A further issue is that terms selected by an identity group as more acceptable descriptors will then pass into common use, including use by people whose attitudes are those formerly associated with words which the new terms were designed to supersede. The new terms thus become devalued, and a further set of expressions must be coined. This can give rise to lengthy progressions such as "negro", "colored", "black", "African-American". (See Euphemism treadmill.)

Criticism

General

Critics argue that political correctness implies censorship and endangers free speech by limiting what is in the public discourse, especially in universities and political forums. University of Pennsylvania professor Alan Charles Kors and lawyer Harvey A. Silverglate, connect political correctness to the ideas of Marxist Herbert Marcuse, in particular his claim that liberal ideas of free speech were in fact repressive. They see this "Marcusean logic" as being at the basis of the hundreds of college speech codes formulated on American university campuses.[11] Lind and Buchanan have characterized PC as a technique originated by the Frankfurt School, opponents of the Nazi regime in 1930's Germany. According to Lind and Buchanan, the work of the Frankfurt School aimed at undermining Western values by influencing popular culture through Cultural Marxism.[12][13]

Others contend that politically correct terms are awkward, euphemistic substitutes for the original stark language. They also draw comparisons to George Orwell's invented language Newspeak.[14]

Camille Paglia, a self-described "libertarian Democrat," argues that political correctness gives more power to the Left's enemies and alienates the masses against feminism.[15]

In effect, critics of political correctness claim that it marginalizes certain words, phrases, actions or attitudes through the instrumentation of public disesteem.[16][17]

Conservative critics of political correctness, argue that it is a form of coercion rooted in the assumption that in a political context, power refers to the dominion of some men over others, or the human control of human life. Ultimately, it means force or compulsion.[18] Correctness in this context is subjective, and corresponds to the sponsored view of the government, minority, or special interest group. By silencing contradiction, political correctness entrenches the view as orthodox. Eventually, it is accepted as true, as freedom of thought requires the ability to choose between more than one viewpoint.[19][20] Some conservatives refer to Political Correctness as "The Scourge of Our Times."[21]


Some argue that political correctness creates a list of acceptable and unacceptable words and phrases that can be manipulated depending on circumstance. It also creates an environment where people are made to feel that they are being prejudicial for simply questioning ideologies.[citation needed]

As engineered term

Some commentators argue that the term "political correctness" was engineered by American conservatives around 1980 as a way to reframe political arguments in the United States. According to Hutton:

"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....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."[22]

Such commentators say that there never was a "Political Correctness movement" in the United States, and that many who use the term are attempting to distract attention from substantive debates over discrimination and unequal treatment based on race, class, and gender (Messer-Davidow 1993, 1994; Schultz 1993; Lauter 1995; Scatamburlo 1998; Glassner 1999). Similarly, Polly Toynbee has argued that "the phrase is an empty rightwing smear designed only to elevate its user".[23]

An similar objection to the discourse surrounding "political correctness" is the claim that doctrinaire insistence on the use of approved words is just as prevalent on the political right. In 2004, then Australian Labor leader Mark Latham described conservative calls for civility as "The New Political Correctness [4]. Similar comments were made in relation to the decision to rename French fries as Freedom Fries [5].

Satirical use

The use of political language modification has a history in satire and comedy. Two of the earlier and famous examples are 1992's Politically Correct Manifesto by Saul Jerushalmy and Rens Zbignieuw X and 1994's Politically Correct Bedtime Stories by James Finn Garner, in which traditional fairy tales are rewritten from an exaggerated PC viewpoint. Other examples include Bill Maher's former television program, which was entitled Politically Incorrect and George Carlin's "Euphemisms" routine.

  • The band SR-71 has a song called "Politically Correct."
  • The band Manic Street Preachers have a song entitled "PCP" which deals with what they see as the negative aspects of Political Correctness.
  • Gretchen Wilson has a song featuring Merle Haggard called "Politically Uncorrect" in which she challenges the idea of political correctness, instead trying to argue for more traditional values that are so often forgotten with politically correct language.

See also

References

  1. ^ Lind, Buchanan, Sobran, Hentoff, Schlesinger.
  2. ^ Conservative critics of PC: Lind, Buchanan, Sobran. Liberals: Hentoff 1992, Schlesinger 1998. Other: Brandt 1992. See below for sources.
  3. ^ Messer-Davidow 1993, 1994; Schultz 1993; Lauter 1995; Scatamburlo 1998; Glassner 1999.
  4. ^ Chisholm v State of GA, 2 US 419 (1793) Findlaw.com - Accessed February 6, 2007. "The states, rather than the People, for whose sakes the States exist, are frequently the objects which attract and arrest our principal attention [...]. Sentiments and expressions of this inaccurate kind prevail in our common, even in our convivial, language. Is a toast asked? 'The United States,' instead of the 'People of the United States,' is the toast given. This is not politically correct."
  5. ^ Ellis, Frank (2004). Political correctness and the theoretical struggle. Auckland: Maxim Institute.
  6. ^ Ruth Perry, (1992), "A short history of the term 'politically correct' " in Aufderherde
  7. ^ Joel Bleifuss (February 2007). "A Politically Correct Lexicon". In These Times.
  8. ^ Remarks at the University of Michigan Commencement Ceremony in Ann Arbor, May 4 1991. George Bush Presidential Library.
  9. ^ mapp (Friday, 9 December 2005). "Political Correctness - Next Steps". Retrieved 2007-04-19. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  10. ^ Development and Validation of an Instrument to Measure Attitudes Toward Sexist/Nonsexist Language Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, March, 2000 by Janet B. Parks, Mary Ann Roberton [1]
  11. ^ Kors AC and Silvergate H, "Codes of silence - who's silencing free speech on campus -- and why" Reason Magazine (online), November 1998 - Accessed February 6, 2007.
  12. ^ William S. Lind states Political Correctness is a form of cultural marxism
  13. ^ Buchanan interview on Fox News
  14. ^ Schmidt M. "The Orwellian Language of Big Government" NTUF Policy Paper 152 Accessed February 3, 2007.
  15. ^ Camille Paglia says it best-- Accessed February 2, 2007. "My message to the media is: Wake up! The silencing of authentic debate among feminists just helps the rise of the far right. When the media get locked in their Northeastern ghetto and become slaves of the feminist establishment and fanatical special interests, the American audience ends up looking to conservative voices for common sense. As a libertarian Democrat, I protest against this self-defeating tyranny of political correctness."
  16. ^ "Beyond political correctness." HPR online (the online site of the Harvard political review), Posted March 6, 2006 - Accessed February 6, 2007.
  17. ^ Young C. "Under the radar - political correctness never died." Reason Online July 2004 - Accessed February 6, 2007. "On campuses across America, the censorship of speech and ideas in the name of sensitivity continues unabated."
  18. ^ Bailyn B. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. p. 55-56. Cambridge: The Harvard University Press, 1967,1992. ISBN 0-674-44302-0. "The essence of what they meant by power was perhaps best revealed inadvertently by John Adams as he groped for words in drafting his Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law. Twice choosing and then rejecting the word "power," he finally selected as the specification of the thought he had in mind "dominion," and in this association of words the whole generation concurred. "Power" to them meant the dominion of some men over others, the human control of human life: ultimately force, compulsion."
  19. ^ Strauss L. Persecution and the Art of Writing. p. 23. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1952. ISBN 0-226-77711-1. "They have not been convinced by compulsion, for compulsion does not produce conviction. It merely paves the way for conviction by silencing contradiction. What is called freedom of thought in a large number of cases amounts to — and even for all practical purposes consists of — the ability to choose between two or more different views presented by the small minority of people who are public speakers or writers. If this choice is prevented, the only kind of intellectual independence of which many people are capable is destroyed, and that is the only freedom of thought which is of political importance."
  20. ^ Mansfield HC "The cost of free speech." The Weekly Standard. October 3, 2005 - Accessed February 6, 2007. "For lively exchange you need balance, as it is easy for a dominant majority to be unruffled by dissent when it is only from a token few."
  21. ^ Political Correctness: The Scourge of Our Times - Agustin Blazquez with the collaboration of Jaums Sutton
  22. ^ Hutton W, "Words really are important, Mr Blunkett" The Observer, Sunday December 16, 2001 - Accessed February 6, 2007.
  23. ^ Toynbee P, "Religion must be removed from all functions of state", The Guardian, Sunday December 12, 2001 - Accessed February 6, 2007.

Against

  • Dinesh D'Souza, Illiberal Education: The Politics of Race and Sex on Campus New York: Macmillan, Inc./The Free Press, 1991, ISBN 0-684-86384-7
  • Henry Beard and Christopher Cerf, The Official Politically Correct Dictionary and Handbook, Villard Books, 1992, paperback 176 pages, ISBN 0-586-21726-6
  • David E. Bernstein, "You Can't Say That! The Growing Threat to Civil Liberties from Antidiscrimination Laws," Cato Institute 2003, 180 pages ISBN 1-930865-53-8
  • Daniel Brandt, "An Incorrect Political Memoir", Lobster Issue 24: December 1992.
  • William S. Lind, "The Origins of Political Correctness", Accuracy in Academia, 2000.
  • Nat Hentoff, Free Speech for Me - But Not for Thee, HarperCollins, 1992, ISBN 0-06-019006-X
  • Diane Ravitch, The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn, Knopf, 2003, hardcover, 255 page.
  • Nigel Rees, The Politically Correct Phrasebook: what they say you can and cannot say in the 1990s, Bloomsbury, 1993, 192 pages, ISBN 0-7475-1426-7
  • Kors, Alan C. (1998). The Shadow University: The Betrayal of Liberty on America’s Campuses. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-684-85321-3. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Arthur Schlesinger Jr., The Disuniting of America: Reflections on a Multicultural Society, W.W. Norton, 1998 revised edition, ISBN 0-393-31854-0
  • Howard S. Schwartz, Revolt of the Primitive: An Inquiry into the Roots of Political Correctness, Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2003 Revised Paperback Edition ISBN 0-765-80537-5

Skeptical

  • Ellen Messer-Davidow. 1993. "Manufacturing the Attack on Liberalized Higher Education." Social Text, Fall, pp. 40–80.
  • Ellen Messer-Davidow. 1994. "Who (Ac)Counts and How." MMLA (The Journal of the Midwest Modern Language Association), vol. 27, no. 1, Spring, pp. 26–41.
  • Scatamburlo, Valerie L. 1998. Soldiers of Misfortune: The New Right's Culture War and the Politics of Political Correctness. Counterpoints series, Vol. 25. New York: Peter Lang.
  • Debra L. Schultz. 1993. To Reclaim a Legacy of Diversity: Analyzing the "Political Correctness" Debates in Higher Education. New York: National Council for Research on Women.
  • P. Lauter. 1995. "'Political correctness' and the attack on American colleges." In M. Bérubé & C. Nelson, Higher education under fire: Politics, economics, and the crisis in the humanities. New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Barry Glassner, The Culture of Fear New York: Basic Books, 1999, ISBN 0-465-01489-5 / ISBN 0-465-01490-9

Further reading

  • Aufderheide, Patricia. (ed.). 1992. Beyond P.C.: Toward a Politics of Understanding. Saint Paul, Minnesota: Graywolf Press.
  • Berman, Paul. (ed.). 1992. Debating P.C.: The Controversy Over Political Correctness on College Campuses. New York, New York: Dell Publishing.
  • Buchanan, Patrick J.2002. The Death of the West, St Martin's Press.
  • Gottfried, Paul E., After Liberalism: Mass Democracy in the Managerial State, 1999. ISBN 0-691-05983-7
  • Jay, Martin., The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research, 1923-1950, University of California Press, New Ed edition (March 5, 1996). ISBN 0-520-20423-9
  • Switzer, Jacqueline Vaughn. Disabled Rights: American Disability Policy and the Fight for Equality. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press, 2003.
  • Wilson, John. 1995. The Myth of Political Correctness: The Conservative Attack on High Education. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Political_correctness&oldid=136083811"