Political Correctness And The Death Of The Truth In Society

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

1. Perhaps the biggest issue with PC is that it stifles legitimate debate....
2. Sometimes it's used to silence debate, and other times it's used to smear a persons reputation.....
3. ...all they teach is 'one way obligated respect'..which causes more tension and resentment that it prevents.

(numbers added for clarity)
(1) and (2) are evident, not least on this thread - but think about (3); that "tension and resentment" are precisely the intended result of all PC blather, or how else would any political agenda be furthered? Minorities and their acolytes have learned this only too well - time you and Pythagorean did too.

2 Replies

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

Perhaps the biggest issue with PC is that it stifles legitimate debate.

I think it is the other way around. When someone wants to stifle legitimate debate, they claim the other side is being "politically correct". That term is so nebulous that it can provide cover for any position so that the original poster doesn't have to defend it. If you believe that blacks, Muslims, Catholics, Jews, etc have a certain trait and someone calls you a bigot you can either debate why that particular group inherently possesses that characteristic, proving your bigotry is correct and well founded or you can duck the argument by claiming that others are politically correct, implying that your point is clearly correct and that everyone would realize that if only people didn't hide behind blinders. The very act of claiming "political correctness" is a refusal to defend your position. It's like saying someone is a radial conservative or a radical liberal (or a bigot) as an excuse to dismiss their argument without debating the merits.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Thanks for reminding about Internet and its penetration. FYI, Internet is not yet 100 percent as the case is with Tv which is almost 100 percent on conservative estimates for the western worlds.

But you remonstration just helps my argument more. Thanks again.

about, your observation ...."Our problem is much closer to the fact that we are approximating Sharia Law than it is that we are too loose. "

.......... is a pachydermal cake piece!

URL: http://able2know.org/reply/post-4336759

0 Replies

@Pythagorean,

Because we have a bunch of simple minded people, psycos, skitzos, stressed, sadists, arrogant and all kinds of weird people that needs direction and a slap in the face to treat eachother with respect and decentcy. If we all just did as we saw fit, everything would spiral out of control and end is chaos.

0 Replies

It seems that there is a consensus building in this thread that political correctness is acceptable in a political discourse. In a democracy, what are the other options?..... It is amply clear, that people or groups of people has to give respect, dignity and an ear to all groups at par. The moment one group thinks that a little discretion or discrimination can be played with, for expedient reasons it could create a backlash. The fall out of an unjust allegation or accusations can be devastatingly negative.

All human groups are looking for parity. Whether it is on liberty, freedom, equality or justice or the right to follow ones tradition or beliefs. every individual chooses a path of non-confrontation. Any political differences which are played out on the political arena, functions under a given framework of law. This consensus ensures stability and peace.

But here, i recognise that it is more pertaining to socio-cultural aspects of human societies, and the incompatibility of certain groups whose actions or deeds, and probably words, does not seem to augur any kind of acceptance from another group, like a majority group. If the majority becomes intolerant than the obvious consequence is anarchy and subjugation.

In the 21st century, especially in human societies of the modern era, we cannot let groups dictate terms on minorities. Adherence to law, is the only way to out. There are good examples at galore, to ignore the principles of secularism. Also, the basic principles of appropriate human behviour or dialogue cannot be compromised neither be sacrificed. History has great many lessons to teach all groups that political incorrectness has been the cause of many conflicts and human suffering.

Having said this, one should also not lose sight of destructive forces creeping into a system of a tolerant, secular human society. There is no doubt about the fact that humans are quick enough to deweed any poisonous or harmful grasses that crop up time and again.

1 Reply

@Jackofalltrades phil,

Quote:

It seems that there is a consensus building in this thread that political correctness is acceptable in a political discourse

I disagree.

3 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
It seems that there is a consensus building in this thread that political correctness is acceptable in a political discourse
I disagree.

Nothing new with you disagreeing with the consensus.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@High Seas,

Quote:

but think about (3); that "tension and resentment" are precisely the intended result of all PC blather, or how else would any political agenda be furthered?

Inspiration, Oration, Passion, thoughtful solutions, back room deals, traded favours, Lobby groups?

Quote:

Minorities and their acolytes have learned this only too well - time you and Pythagorean did too.

Hmmm...how you interepreted my post is a bit nebulous - perhaps you missed the point of my post, for you write as if we agree - right up until the last part of your last sentence.
----------------------------
Hi Engineer, PC can be used to attack people, and it is nowhere near as powerful as the 'racism' card. Secondly, most charges of PC that I have ever seen are correct. Usually (at least in Australia) it's not raised until it gets to the stage of 'Political Correctness gone mad'...or someone uses it as an excuse for being rude.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

Nothing new with you disagreeing with the consensus.

I think we are talking fifth grade literacy here but since you can't handle that lets dumb it down......I disagree that their is a consensus in this thread about the acceptability of Political Correctness.

1 Reply

@High Seas,

High Seas wrote:

vikorr wrote:
1. Perhaps the biggest issue with PC is that it stifles legitimate debate....
2. Sometimes it's used to silence debate, and other times it's used to smear a persons reputation.....
3. ...all they teach is 'one way obligated respect'..which causes more tension and resentment that it prevents.

(numbers added for clarity)
(1) and (2) are evident, not least on this thread

This is as bad as the whining Rapist Boy (a.k.a. "Hawkeye") does. No one here has been "stifled." It is part of the use of the charge of "PC" used by the right that they attempt to stifle debate. It doesn't work in either direction. Certainly no one in this thread has been obliged to respect anyone else, any more than they've been stifled. It is typical of the right that they accuse others of using PC to do exactly what they are attempting to do--to stifle debate.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Nothing new with you disagreeing with the consensus.

I think we are talking fifth grade literacy here but since you can't handle that lets dumb it down......I disagree that their is a consensus in this thread about the acceptability of Political Correctness.

Oh, I understood you perfectly the first time, Hawk. You should go ahead and assume from now on that you never, ever need to explain anything to me, ever, unless I specifically ask you to do so.

But you are still incorrect. You are free to disagree, but the majority of other posters have decided you are wrong.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

High Seas wrote:
vikorr wrote:
1. Perhaps the biggest issue with PC is that it stifles legitimate debate....
2. Sometimes it's used to silence debate, and other times it's used to smear a persons reputation.....
3. ...all they teach is 'one way obligated respect'..which causes more tension and resentment that it prevents.

(numbers added for clarity)
(1) and (2) are evident, not least on this thread

This is as bad as the whining Rapist Boy (a.k.a. "Hawkeye") does. No one here has been "stifled." It is part of the use of the charge of "PC" used by the right that they attempt to stifle debate. It doesn't work in either direction. Certainly no one in this thread has been obliged to respect anyone else, any more than they've been stifled. It is typical of the right that they accuse others of using PC to do exactly what they are attempting to do--to stifle debate.

And you are absolutely correct. This is a major part of modern right-wing Conservatism - the pervasive view that they are somehow minorities who are oppressed against, and calling them out on their hateful language is as bad or worse as the hateful language itself. The culture of victimhood is more evident in the Republican party and the Conservative mindset than in any other part of our society these days.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

These are all political tools, and the right uses them no less than the left. Rapist Boy will always whine that he is censored, that he is not allowed to express his opinion. There is nothing more ludicrous, in that if he truly were censored, if he truly were prevented from expressing his opinions, he would not in fact be able to make the charge in any of the far too many threads into which he has introduced that whine.

Engineer is correct, the right uses the charge of "PC" exactly as some people in this thread are claiming that political rectitude is used--to attempt to stifle debate.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

the pervasive view that they are somehow minorities who are oppressed against, and calling them out on their hateful language is as bad or worse as the hateful language itself

Trying to control someone else behaviour IS worse than not liking their behaviour and thus objecting.....

No one would have much of a problem with granting you the right to say "you are and ass" however the PC crowd says instead "you are and ass, and you should not say what you just said". This can not be allowed to stand, this is a violation of liberty.

1 Reply

How is your liberty violated, whiner? Who has stopped you from puking up your idiocy? It is just incredible to me that after all these years you continue to peddle this whine, when it is so patently false, when, on the face of it, you are saying just exactly what you want to say.

Clown.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
the pervasive view that they are somehow minorities who are oppressed against, and calling them out on their hateful language is as bad or worse as the hateful language itself
Trying to control someone else behaviour IS worse than not liking their behaviour and thus objecting.....

Calling someone out for being hateful or incorrect isn't trying to control their behavior. At all. It's responding to THEIR behavior with YOUR behavior.

I don't have any power to keep you from saying whatever you like, Hawk. But there are consequences to words and it's your responsibility to live up to the consequences. And if you don't like them, tough ****. Nobody cares.

Quote:

No one would have much of a problem with granting you the right to say "you are and ass" however the PC crowd says instead "you are and ass, and you should not say what you just said". This can not be allowed to stand, this is a violation of liberty.

No, it isn't. What about my right to tell you 'you should not have just said what you said?' I have that right just like you have the right to say things.

The truth is that you haven't once - not once - been barred from saying anything you like, ever. Have you? And this whole thing is just an excuse for people who like to say hateful things to argue that they shouldn't be held responsible for doing it.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

No, it isn't. What about my right to tell you 'you should not have just said what you said?' I have that right just like you have the right to say things

you never had the right to claim control over another person. "you should not say that" is always out of line, all you have the right to say is "I would not say that, and I think less of you when you say that". Stating your judgement is not at all the same as is trying to impose your judgment on others.

1 Reply

Explain how Cyclo has imposed, or even attempted to impose, his judgment on you, or anyone else?

You either can't make the necessary distinction here between control and suasion, or you think others who read this are so stupid they won't be able to see it.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
No, it isn't. What about my right to tell you 'you should not have just said what you said?' I have that right just like you have the right to say things
you never had the right to claim control over another person.

Telling you that you shouldn't have said something isn't 'claiming control' over you. It's my opinion, is all. The problem for you is that most people share my opinion and shun yours.

Quote:

"you should not say that" is always out of line, all you have the right to say is "I would not say that, and I think less of you when you say that". Stating your judgement is not at all the same as is trying to impose your judgment on others.

But, nobody has any power over you to compel you to do anything! You make it out as if you are being oppressed in some way. You're not. You just can't stand up to the opprobrium that inevitably arises from your insensitive and often hateful comments.

Like I said earlier - tough ****. If you don't like hearing criticisms for what you say, go somewhere else or shut the **** up. 'cause I and others are going to keep doing it. And you can keep telling us that we were wrong. And the system works! We all get to say what we like - proving my point!

America-a-a-a-a, **** Yeah!

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

Telling you that you shouldn't have said something isn't 'claiming control' over you. It's my opinion, is all.

It is your opinion that you have the right to invade other peoples domain. This is an opinion for which I thoroughly condemn you, and I encourage others to join me in my condemnation of you.

1 Reply

Political Correctness And The Death Of The Truth In Society

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know