News Political correctness Vs Freedom of speech

  • Thread starter Thread starter the number 42
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Political correctness (PC) is criticized as a form of communal tyranny that emerged in the 1980s, aiming to prevent offense by restricting language and behavior. This suppression of free expression is likened to the oppressive atmosphere of Soviet-era Ukraine, where dissent could lead to severe consequences. On college campuses, PC is said to distort curricula and undermine intellectual integrity, prioritizing ideological conformity over genuine discourse. While some advocate for respectful communication, others argue that excessive PC stifles honest dialogue and promotes censorship. Ultimately, the debate centers on balancing freedom of speech with sensitivity to diverse perspectives.
the number 42
Messages
129
Reaction score
0
"Political Correctness (PC) is the communal tyranny that erupted in the 1980s. It was a spontaneous declaration that particular ideas, expressions and behaviour, which were then legal, should be forbidden by law, and people who transgressed should be punished.
...The declared rational of this tyranny is to prevent people being offended; to compel everyone to avoid using words or behaviour that may upset homosexuals, women, non-whites, the crippled, the mentally impaired, the fat or the ugly.
...Helen... was a citizen of Kiev during the Red Terror, and described living with official truth and the constant threat of arrest. Knowing the content of the latest party newspaper was critical to avoiding internment, as public contradiction, either directly or indirectly, meant denouncement to the KGB. If you complained about being hungry when food shortages were not officially recognised, then you became an enemy of the state. If you failed to praise a Soviet hero, or praised an ex-hero, then again your fate was sealed. The need to be politically correct dominated all conversation and behaviour.
...Unless plain speaking is allowed, clear thinking is denied. There can be no good reason for denying freedom of expression"
http://www.users.bigpond.com/smartboard/pc.htm

"On America's college campuses [political correctness] has diminished freedom of speech, warped curricula, politicized grading and replaced intellectual integrity with vapid sloganeering...
Deconstruction first removes all meaning from "texts," then inserts new meaning: one way or another, the text illustrates the oppression of women, blacks, homosexuals, etc., by white men and Western culture. The intended meaning of the author is irrelevant"
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com/

"'The enemies of intellectual liberty always try to present their case as a plea for discipline versus individualism... [but] to write in plain, vigorous language one has to think fearlessly, and if one thinks fearlessly one cannot be politically orthodox.' ––George Orwell"
http://members.aol.com/williefank/pc-essay.htm

You disagree with political correctness? Fascist!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I always loved the irony of extreme political correctness. Liberals are supposed to be the champions of freedom (1st amendment above all), yet the US's bastion of censorship is its bastion of neo liberalism: Berkeley, California. True to liberalism though, it isn't institutional censorship, but popular censorship: if the school paper publishes an unpopular idea, the students will steal and destroy the papers so people can't read the article!
 
Last edited:
There is a way to remain politically correct while continuing to exercise your Freedom of Speech. One just need to think about what they say and how to say it, before tey open their mouths.
 
misskitty said:
There is a way to remain politically correct while continuing to exercise your Freedom of Speech. One just need to think about what they say and how to say it, before tey open their mouths.

Views that aren't PC can be said in a vulgar way that nobody will agree with, or in sensitive and academic terms. Those who insist on these views not being expressed will still find the latter unacceptable.
 
russ_watters said:
I always loved the irony of extreme political correctness. Liberals are supposed to be the champions of freedom (1st amendment above all), yet the US's bastion of censorship is its bastion of neo liberalism: Berkeley, California.

Dang! I had a bet with myself that we'd never agree on anything.
 
You should be allowed to speak your peace on a subject as you see fit, whether it offends people or not. However, a clearly articulate and educated opinion can get the same point across and allow you to maintain your integrity.
 
One shouldn't go around trying to please everyone all the time. Its acceptable to disagree with people. Political correctness is a an attempt to avoid hurt feelings.
 
I can't believe you just said that! That's SO patronising.
 
I didn't make the comment to be patronizing. I just think its better to speak your mind but try to do it as politly as possible. Many times this isn't what happens, but we can't really help that.
 
  • #10
misskitty said:
I didn't make the comment to be patronizing. I just think its better to speak your mind but try to do it as politly as possible. Many times this isn't what happens, but we can't really help that.

:biggrin: But how would you like it if you weren't allowed to say what you just said, just because I found it offensive? i.e. I didn't think you were being patronising at all, I was just making a point. Hope you don't mind :redface:
 
  • #11
Oh no its ok...I understand what your meaning was...:smile:

I would be indescribably upset if I wasn't allowed to speak my mind because it offended someone. I would try to do everything I could to make it possible for me to speak what was in my head.
 
  • #12
Its almost IMPOSSIBLE to say anything without offending anyone...which is soo incredible annoying and bothersome...:devil:
 
  • #13
I hate the idea of 'political correctness'.

If what i say offends you, don't listen. Better yet, go away. Problem solved.

Now granted, it is better to be respectful of people, i won't argue with that, but a garbage man is a garbage man, not a friggin engineer.
 
  • #14
franznietzsche said:
I hate the idea of 'political correctness'.

If what i say offends you, don't listen. Better yet, go away. Problem solved.

Now granted, it is better to be respectful of people, i won't argue with that, but a garbage man is a garbage man, not a friggin engineer.


Lol... :smile: I can agree with that. I don't completely disagree with political correctness. Thats also one way to express an opinion. :wink:
 
  • #15
Political correctness is ok, but what I can't stand is political correctness gone mad.

We're not allowed to sing "Baa baa black sheep" any more in our schools. If anyone can convince me that this move will discourage racism, then I'll be their personal slave for a time period of not less than six hours.
 
  • #16
brewnog said:
Political correctness is ok, but what I can't stand is political correctness gone mad.

We're not allowed to sing "Baa baa black sheep" any more in our schools. If anyone can convince me that this move will discourage racism, then I'll be their personal slave for a time period of not less than six hours.


YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS! Your school banned Baa Baa Black Sheep?? Thats dumb. How is that song racist? I can't stand it either when people go over board ith political correctness. That drives me up the wall.
 
  • #17
the number 42 said:
Dang! I had a bet with myself that we'd never agree on anything.

Both Russ and Franz ... ever better ! PC is a plague, just a cheap way of giving a punch.
 
  • #18
brewnog said:
Political correctness is ok, but what I can't stand is political correctness gone mad.

We're not allowed to sing "Baa baa black sheep" any more in our schools. If anyone can convince me that this move will discourage racism, then I'll be their personal slave for a time period of not less than six hours.


I would sing it anyway.

Then they can discipline me, and i can sue for infringement of my first amendment rights. For irony's sake, i'd call the NAACP for support. :biggrin:
 
  • #19
Brilliant idea. Hopefully win loads of money!:biggrin:
 
  • #20
misskitty said:
Brilliant idea. Hopefully win loads of money!:biggrin:


How insulting!

I'm conservative dammit!

I don't want the money. I want that school board in jail.
 
  • #21
Not ment as an insult. You can be conservative. You can put the school board in jail and put that money to good use.
 
  • #22
misskitty said:
Not ment as an insult. You can be conservative. You can put the school board in jail and put that money to good use.


I don't want any bloody money.

Have i worked for it? Have i done anything to deserve it? No. And unlike most other Americans, i know that that means i shouldn't get it. I don't want it. I wouldn't take it.

I just want the school board in jail for violating the law. Simple. Justice. A concept utterly foreign to most Americans.
 
  • #23
Are you always this negetive about everything? You can say what you like...you're right of free speech.
 
  • #24
misskitty said:
Are you always this negetive about everything?

Oh, I'm very positive. I'm positively sure that I'm this negative.


You can say what you like...you're right of free speech.

Non-sequitur?
 
  • #25
Why, just the other day someone repeated the age-old advise that I should not discuss religion and politics.

Since religion is subjective and is personal interpretation (cannot be substantiated), I do not discuss it--I don't have that kind of time (i.e., infinity). Keeping up with current events is much more important in other countries of the world than it is in America, and politics is a staple of conversation abroad. So one might ask, why is it so "politically incorrect" to discuss politics in the US? Maybe most Americans are uncomfortable with it because they don't stay up with the issues. In this forum people in other countries know a lot more about US history, constitution, events, etc. than my fellow Americans do (outside the Ivy Towers). More disconcerting is since 9-11, I feel there has been a trend to suppress dissent in our country (ironically in the guise of patriotism). If these people really love their country and want to spread democracy, they might want to try a little of it right here at home first.
 
  • #26
franznietzsche said:
I would sing it anyway.

Ha! I knew you were racist, and now we have the proof. :biggrin:
 
  • #27
Could you translate non-sequitur for me please?
 
  • #28
SOS2008 said:
Why, just the other day someone repeated the age-old advise that I should not discuss religion and politics.

Since religion is subjective and is personal interpretation (cannot be substantiated), I do not discuss it--I don't have that kind of time (i.e., infinity). Keeping up with current events is much more important in other countries of the world than it is in America, and politics is a staple of conversation abroad. So one might ask, why is it so "politically incorrect" to discuss politics in the US?

Its not. Me and my friends mostly discuss politics and philosophy. Of course then again, i refuse to waste my time with someone who can't. So i guess you just run with the wrong crowd.

Maybe most Americans are uncomfortable with it because they don't stay up with the issues. In this forum people in other countries know a lot more about US history, constitution, events, etc. than my fellow Americans do (outside the Ivy Towers).

Oh i can think of quite a few non-americans here who know about as much about US history as your friends do, which is to say, nothing. They're just better at pretending.

More disconcerting is since 9-11, I feel there has been a trend to suppress dissent in our country (ironically in the guise of patriotism). If these people really love their country and want to spread democracy, they might want to try a little of it right here at home first.

Since when? I dissent all the time, i have yet to be oppressed.
 
  • #29
SOS2008 said:
More disconcerting is since 9-11, I feel there has been a trend to suppress dissent in our country (ironically in the guise of patriotism).
You "feel" it? Its the law, that's more than a feeling.

SOS2008 said:
If these people really love their country and want to spread democracy, they might want to try a little of it right here at home first.
Very true. You can't represent democracy in the world with bombs, torture, and gagging orders.
 
  • #30
misskitty said:
Could you translate non-sequitur for me please?


I would, but I'm feeling a strong strain of intellectual elitism all of a sudden, so how about you use that new-fangled dictionary.com that's about five seconds away?

I don't mean to be rude, I'm just annoyed by the number of lazy people who insist on asking questions that they could easily get an answer to in seconds without expecting other people to take time out of their day solely to answer some question that has been repeated and covered over and over already (yes, I'm ranting).

At any rate, its latin, meaning "does not follow". Roughly equivalent to the response "where the heck did that come from?" when someone says something "from out in left field."

Oh, and it should be without the hyphen, that was my error.
 
  • #31
the number 42 said:
Ha! I knew you were racist, and now we have the proof. :biggrin:


If i didn't know you were joking, i would hate you for that. Sadly, i know people who would respond that way and not be joking. Yes, i hate them.
 
  • #32
That reminds me of something someone said to me once. It was along the lines of to get Peace you need to have a War. 42, your right. Democracy simply can not flourish in a world with violent restrictions.
 
  • #33
franznietzsche said:
If i didn't know you were joking, i would hate you for that. Sadly, i know people who would respond that way and not be joking. Yes, i hate them.

Exactly my point. People say this stuff and mean it, and it shuts the rest of us up because... who can be bothered dealing with trying to explain to a bunch of do-gooder idiots that 'baa baa black sheep' is about a sheep, not a black person.

I would hate you if you took my jibe seriously. In fact, I think I hate you anyway, you sheep-hater :biggrin:
 
  • #34
franznietzsche said:
So i guess you just run with the wrong crowd.

Not by choice. I'm adrift in a sea of "red" -- where you can get your thumb on the real pulse of America. To that point and prior comments in other threads about the warm and fuzzy photos of the war in Iraq, I add to this the matter of immense numbers of ribbons on peoples vehicles (read it before you freak): www.commondreams.org/views05/0214-23.htm[/URL]. Just yesterday I saw a vehicle with not one, not two, but FOUR of these things on their car. I've made the suggestion that a movie be made entitled: "Escape from Jesusland"

Now what was this thread about? :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #35
SOS2008 said:
Not by choice. I'm adrift in a sea of "red" -- where you can get your thumb on the real pulse of America.

Buddy, i am that sea of red. And i still discuss politics and philosophy. I still dissent. There is a difference between conservative and moron, just as there is a difference between "liberal" and moron (despite what i routinely see around me everyday).
 
  • #36
SOS2008 said:
Not by choice. I'm adrift in a sea of "red" -- where you can get your thumb on the real pulse of America. To that point and prior comments in other threads about the warm and fuzzy photos of the war in Iraq, I add to this the matter of immense numbers of ribbons on peoples vehicles (read it before you freak): www.commondreams.org/views05/0214-23.htm[/URL]. Just yesterday I saw a vehicle with not one, not two, but FOUR of these things on their car. I've mad the suggestion that a movie be made entitled: "Escape from Jesusland"

Now what was this thread about? :smile:[/QUOTE]

I believe this thread was addresing political correctness versus freedom of speech... :smile:

We have gotten a bit off topic haven't we?

I think if we're going to discuss racism, then we should do it in the White Pride thread...specifically set up to discuss racism.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #37
Yes miskitty, let's get back to your statement
Democracy simply can not flourish in a world with violent restrictions.
.

I think democracy is tougher than that. It has outlasted murderous attacks on free speech like the gunning down of Brann the Iconoclast on the streets of Waco, the murder of the civil rights activists, and for that matter a hundred years of Jum Crow and lynchings. Your quotation of Pax quaetitur bello is apt. Liberty like peace is always an ongoing struggle.
 
  • #38
Yes miskitty, let's get back to your statement
Democracy simply can not flourish in a world with violent restrictions.
.

I think democracy is tougher than that. It has outlasted murderous attacks on free speech like the gunning down of Brann the Iconoclast on the streets of Waco, the murder of the civil rights activists, and for that matter a hundred years of Jim Crow and lynchings. Your quotation of Pax quaetitur bello is apt. Liberty like peace is always an ongoing struggle.
 
  • #39
the number 42 said:
Exactly my point. People say this stuff and mean it, and it shuts the rest of us up because... who can be bothered dealing with trying to explain to a bunch of do-gooder idiots
It's impossible to carry on a meaningful dialogue, which is required in a democracy, when one person does not think it's necessary to think outside of one's unsubstantiated belief system -- Sam Harris' recent book "The End Of Faith"
 
  • #40
SOS2008 said:
It's impossible to carry on a meaningful dialogue, which is required in a democracy, when one person does not think it's necessary to think outside of one's unsubstantiated belief system -- Sam Harris' recent book "The End Of Faith"


Its impossible to cary on a meaningufl dialogue, which is required in a democracy, when one person does not think it's necessary to think for himself, and instead just quotes other people's opinions, as if that person mattered.
 
  • #41
SOS2008 said:
It's impossible to carry on a meaningful dialogue, which is required in a democracy, when one person does not think it's necessary to think outside of one's unsubstantiated belief system

... and dismisses the other's viewpoint a priori. Its easy for both camps to fall into this trap, but at least I'm in the camp that insists that the other person states honestly their position. Its the only way to test propositions, and in the case of those people wanting to ban 'baa baa blacksheep', to test them to destruction.
 
  • #42
franznietzsche said:
Its impossible to cary on a meaningufl dialogue, which is required in a democracy, when one person does not think it's necessary to think for himself, and instead just quotes other people's opinions, as if that person mattered.

Its impossible to carry on in a democracy when one person makes unsubstantiated statements. How many sheep did you hate today, Mr Anti-Shepherd?
 
  • #43
SelfAdjoint, you're right. Democracy is a lot tougher than what I outlined it to be.

Everyone, let's not forget that this is a discussion and a demcratic one at that. Can we ty to be a litte more respectful of other peoples' opinions, whether they are quoting other people or not. Everyone's opinion is equally important.

In fact, that was an important ingrediantin democracy the last time I checked. Able to speak your mind freely and still be respected for what you have to say. As well as have an equal chance to respond and CIVILY disagree. Not just saying someone is wrong and you hate them.
 
  • #44
misskitty said:
SelfAdjoint, you're right. Democracy is a lot tougher than what I outlined it to be.

Everyone, let's not forget that this is a discussion and a demcratic one at that. Can we ty to be a litte more respectful of other peoples' opinions, whether they are quoting other people or not. Everyone's opinion is equally important.

In fact, that was an important ingrediantin democracy the last time I checked. Able to speak your mind freely and still be respected for what you have to say. As well as have an equal chance to respond and CIVILY disagree. Not just saying someone is wrong and you hate them.

Whaaat? Nitchy-hates-sheep. Why are you defending him - do you hate sheep too? Just as I thought; this forum is full of sick animal-haters. I don't know why the law allows you to say such things. All it does is encourage the abuse of sheep and upset normal decent people like me.
 
  • #45
misskitty said:
Everyone, let's not forget that this is a discussion and a demcratic one at that. Can we ty to be a litte more respectful of other peoples' opinions, whether they are quoting other people or not. Everyone's opinion is equally important.

:smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile:

In fact, that was an important ingrediantin democracy the last time I checked. Able to speak your mind freely and still be respected for what you have to say. As well as have an equal chance to respond and CIVILY disagree. Not just saying someone is wrong and you hate them.

:smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile:
 
  • #46
misskitty said:
Everyone, let's not forget that this is a discussion and a demcratic one at that. Can we ty to be a litte more respectful of other peoples' opinions, whether they are quoting other people or not. Everyone's opinion is equally important.

I don't know that I'd go that far. Expert opinions are always more valuable and important than the opinions of a layperson. If I wanted to design a piping array for an irrigation system, I'd ask my dad. If I wanted advice on how best to handle a medium sized group of preteen girls, I'd ask my mom. They each have their own specialty.

That's another thing I've never liked about the PC crowd - that sense of entitlement that leads people to believe that their opinions are necessarily worthwhile and mean something. I'm no including anyone that's posted so far in this thread, but there are plenty around here that post nothing but mindless drivel and hate-mongering.

In fact, that was an important ingrediantin democracy the last time I checked. Able to speak your mind freely and still be respected for what you have to say. As well as have an equal chance to respond and CIVILY disagree. Not just saying someone is wrong and you hate them.

I don't think they're being entirely serious.
 
  • #47
loseyourname said:
I don't know that I'd go that far. Expert opinions are always more valuable and important than the opinions of a layperson. If I wanted to design a piping array for an irrigation system, I'd ask my dad. If I wanted advice on how best to handle a medium sized group of preteen girls, I'd ask my mom. They each have their own specialty.

But i thought all people were created equal, how could one person possibly be better at something than another. The union isn't going to like that...oh, wait. I'm not liberal. I forget so easily sometimes.

That's another thing I've never liked about the PC crowd - that sense of entitlement that leads people to believe that their opinions are necessarily worthwhile and mean something. I'm no including anyone that's posted so far in this thread, but there are plenty around here that post nothing but mindless drivel and hate-mongering.

Rule of thumb: If you think your opinion means anything, it definitely does not.

If you know that your opinion means absolutely nothing to anyone but yourself, congratulations, you've stepped above the intellectual level of overly chewed gum.

My opinion means absolutley nothing, in objective terms, and that's a fact. And i know it.

I don't think they're being entirely serious.


Us? Serious? Deadly.
 
  • #48
I need a fire extinguisher to put out the flames in this thread.
 

Similar threads

Replies
27
Views
5K
Replies
10
Views
4K
Back
Top