Where are the politics when it comes to “political correctness”? Is this Wiki definition correct?:
I can’t see wanting to treat others as we would ourselves as being a “political” matter.
What am I missing here?
Well, yes, it does exist. In long-ago days, it often came with the label “appropriate.” (Or inappropriate.) “That kind of language is not appropriate.”
The sanitizing of the language under Jimmy Carter is an example: he directed the Dept of the Interior to get rid of a lot of names that might be offensive. Sunset Crater, for instance, lost “Shit Pot Mountain.” Bummer that!
Then there was the de-sexing of language. “Chairperson” and the like. Also the fancying up of language. Garbage collectors became “sanitation engineers.”
It was a goofy movement, entirely well intentioned, and usually benign. It wasn’t so much Orwellian as kind of Pollyanna-ish. Let’s all think nice thoughts, and we’ll be nicer people.
Today, it’s mostly used as a slur, and usually exaggerated in hyperbole. But it really did exist, and to some degree still does.
I think the term originally referred to the idea that people who have opinions that most people find offensive keep those opinions to themselves. They may still hold those offensive beliefs but they’ll publicly express more mainstream beliefs. In other words, they’re saying the correct thing because it’s politically expedient to do so.
It’s not politically correct to call gay people “queer”. Unless you’re gay.
It’s not politically correct to call black people “negroes” or “colored people”, even though that was a common usage at some time, and the latter can still be found in the NAACP.
It’s not politically correct to refer to white people as “crackers” or “honkies”, although I’m not sure if it ever was.
Is the only reason not to refer to others using slurs politics, though?
No, I think it just originated as a political idea, then made the transition into a number of different uses. Take the word idiot. It was once a politically correct term with no discrimination associated with it at all. It’s true definition is: a person whose IQ is below 75. Due to it’s overuse as an insult, the line was blurred on what the word actually meant. So, the word idiot could no longer be used in a political atmosphere, as a term to describe mentally handicapped people, without making the person who said it look like a bigot of sorts. They might not actually be a bigot, but they are certainly politically incorrect.
I don’t know. It’s an important reason, and hence the name. It can be a perfectly good descriptor, even if it is often used incorrectly.
But what about racial slurs against African Americans, Indians, Native Americans, and the various peoples of the Middle East? Would you feel comfortable using crude slurs if there were no political penalties for doing so?
In some cases, yes. Ideally, people wouldn’t use slurs because of a genuine change of heart. But if we can’t achieve that ideal, then it’s acceptable if people don’t use slurs just because of social pressure.
If we can’t change the way racists think, we can at least change the way racists act.
Well, depending on the situation, I do use crude slurs in a humorous way. I don’t use completely taboo words like the n-word, even though some of my black friends actually tell me to call them nigga, and that it’s cool for a white person to say it without the “er.” It’s not really a crude slur in that context, more so like calling them dude or bro.
In the context your describing, I would definitely not feel comfortable because crude slurs are also synonymous with racism and bigotry. Political correctness is definitely an anti-bigotry tool, so if it wasn’t there, I think there would be some people out there that would readily use more slurs. But in all reality, there is nothing really stopping the racist people out there now from using the slurs. I mean it’s not like these political penalties are strictly enforced or taken seriously unless your a public figure. IMHO, the fact that it is wrong keeps people from using crude racial slurs in a derogatory manner, not the fact that it is politically incorrect.
Political correctness is what people call it when someone calls them out for saying something offensive.
It is not really a political matter in itself, but what you are missing is that expression originated as a joke that was spread as a piece of political propaganda. It was probably originated by some conservative commentator* who was drawing attention to the fact that the fuss made by left-wingers about avoiding speech that had the potential to cause offense to minorities (or women, or members of any other group perceived on the left to be oppressed) was in some respects analogous to the great care that people living under oppressive Communist dictatorships, such as in Stalinist Russia, (and particularly actual Communist Party members) had to take about expressing opinions that did not conform to the party line. Not conforming to the official Communist Party line was (supposedly, at any rate) known as “political incorrectness” in Communist bureaucratese. The idea of applying the expression to leftist concerns about offensive language was to gently insinuate the notion that the fact that leftists worried about, and censured, offensive speech was evidence that they were like Stalinist Communists, "enemies of freedom"™, and, ultimately.
The expression is now so common that many people may now use it quite unaware of the fact that it is intended to deride the political left. Nevertheless, it still does so in many people’s minds.
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
*Actually, when I think more about it, I am not sure it really did originate in conservative circles. Back when I used to move somewhat in leftist circles in Britain, in the '70s, I think I heard it being used as a self-deprecating joke amongst leftists themselves. Later, however, some conservatives in America seem to have picked up on the idea and spread it about more widely as a bit of humor tinged, anti-left propaganda, as described.
Did anyone actually read the Wki piece? It actually pretty plainly explains the history of the phrase and how it relates to politics.
It’s modern use as a pejorative is based on the fact that it was a term used by socialists and communists and typified their defense of party lines regardless of their merit or morality so long as they advanced the cause.
I only read the wiki quote, but for history I was going off of this:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Politically_correct
This says that the modern politically correct movement did originate as a political term, which is what I said in my first post. I think this more accurately addresses the Topic Creator’s question, because as far as I know, most people don’t think of “politically correct” as being associated with socialists and communists. That’s kind an old school version of the term.
I think the understanding you have of “political correctness” did originate as strictly a political term and it is still a political term. However, everyday people now apply it to themselves so they are not perceived as ignorant. Here’s what conservapedia has to say about it:
This is an example where using masculine pronouns was normal, until a group of feminists made the point that it is sexist to not distinguish gender in neutral texts.
Basically an identical point to the one I made about the word idiot.
So, to more accurately answer your first question, when it comes to certain terms, you yourself are not the “political” matter like you said. But the oppressing/negative nature of a term, is definitely a political matter.
A word of advice: Never cite Conservapedia. People will have more respect for your cite if you just tell them it came to you in a dream.
Conservapedia is a terrible citation, even for this. There’s a lot of spin in their definition.
Stepping outside that, I’m going to go a bit more “meta.”. Back around 1980 or so, when I first heard the term “politically correct,” my peers used it very specifically to mean “something the CURRENT political paradigm would find correct or acceptable.”. It was explicitly tied to whatever politics was currently ascendant. So in the Reagan era, we would say “raising the minimum wage would not be politically correct,” because it would not be popular with the party in power at that time.
The idea that what was politically correct CHANGED as political fortunes ebbed and flowed was a useful if cynical meme.
Gradually over time the term became exclusively associated with one particular political philosophy. We deplored this bastardization of our useful and cynical term, but couldn’t dictate usage. I don’t know whether that was part of Karl Rove’s strategy of defining / redefining the terms to win the political argument or just natural shift in language, but I’m still frustrated about it. And I don’t know if our usage was standard anywhere else.
This is the first time I’ve ever used conservapedia or heard of it for that matter. I read through the article and it seemed legitimate enough. I should have looked into it’s credibility. :smack: The description of the changing definition of “political corectness” in wikipedia seems to support what i said anyways.
I appreciate the heads up on conservapedia though!
Conservapedia is the group that decided to write their own translation of the bible because the KJV was too liberal. Take from that what you will.
I think it has its current political connotation because of the reasons noted in Wiki regarding the movement in academia and elsewhere to cleanse language and social policy of anything that the left deems as not inclusive or as insensitive to the “oppressed.” I use the quotes here because I think it’s that definition is often what makes eyes roll.
I think virtually EVERYONE has a line beyond which they believe there is undue offense given, and that decent people shouldn’t go over that line. The Right wouldn’t call that PC, they’d call it common decency, but it feels the same to me. But if we have ten people in the room, we’ll get ten definitions of where that line is.
Where it becomes a joke (relative to one’s own sensibilities) is when it obscures perfectly serviceable terms (what’s wrong with “garbage collector”?) or looks to legally codify what ought to be left to public sanction and individual opinion. Consider some of the “hate speech” rules in certain universities, for example. I consider that not just foolish but dangerous if left unquestioned. And for me, some of the more extreme examples do indeed allow for very easy inferences of Orwellian restrictions that first change language, then change minds. I’m not saying I’d dismiss any restriction of speech as Orwellian, but those that seem to say, “You must speak as we do!” do make me twitch.
IMO it’s essentially a political debate, but you know what? Almost everything is!
In my experience it is a term usually used by conservatives to disparage the way that the left expresses its ideology. They use it to try to control debate by forcing an opponent to accept their analysis of a situation and so limit their ability to argue their own case. Liberals do the same but do not use the term political correctness.