Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Historical comparison for political correctness?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Historical comparison for political correctness?

    For the essay I'm writing I need a historical comparison for modern day political correctness?

    Does anybody have anything that could help me?

  • #2
    I don't think there is a comparison. People in the past said what they thought, period. Only in today's guilt-ridden socities are people totally obesssed with avoiding clear speech.

    I suppose the closest thing to it would be the careful crafting of sentences during periods of severe religious persecution in order to say sometrhing without calling attention to oneself and ending up in the torture chamber or tied to the stake. The Catholic Inquisition in Spain comes to mind.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Kevin23 View Post
      For the essay I'm writing I need a historical comparison for modern day political correctness?

      Does anybody have anything that could help me?
      The first thing you would need to do is define "political correctness."
      Every 10 years a great man.
      Who paid the bill?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Zemlekop View Post
        The first thing you would need to do is define "political correctness."
        Well, he probably means - avoidance of expressions or actions that can be perceived to exclude or marginalize or insult people.
        Rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated... again...

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by sickpup View Post
          Well, he probably means - avoidance of expressions or actions that can be perceived to exclude or marginalize or insult people.
          Or the use of euphemisms to make something sound less bad.
          "The State is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else."

          Frederic Bastiat

          Comment


          • #6
            MM said as much as what I was going to say.

            Stuff like way back when, where it was wrong to say the world wasn't the center of creation.
            Where it was wrong to say we evolved from apes.
            Where is was wrong for women to speak out at all for that matter.
            In some cases, where it might have been wrong for a person of colour to speak out ie slave era USA.

            It's been wrong to say anything bad of the Jews for quite some time now.
            In some cases, it was wrong to support one flavour of religion over another.
            Just watched a program the other day on banned books of the Bible, and it became wrong just to acknowledge some things at all.

            There were no troubles with gays in the time of Rome, but sure went out of fashion in the centuries in between.

            As PC as the world is today, it's got nothing over our past centuries.
            Life is change. Built models for decades.
            Not sure anyone here actually knows the real me.
            I didn't for a long time either.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by sickpup View Post
              Well, he probably means - avoidance of expressions or actions that can be perceived to exclude or marginalize or insult people.
              Pretty sad when we live in a world where simply words can marginalize an adult. Wait. Is there any such thing as an adult anymore?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by sickpup View Post
                Well, he probably means - avoidance of expressions or actions that can be perceived to exclude or marginalize or insult people.
                Yes, but how does that exclude being civil or polite? I realize we know what p.c. is in a "I knows it when I sees it kind of way." But if Kevin is writing an essay, and making a cultural or historical comparison, he'll need to be more specific. The big problem there is that politeness and civility are often very relative. In my experience what's p.c. in a small town in southern Virginia is very different from what's p.c. in San Francisco.

                For me the term implies some sort of effort to legislate civility or politeness, so that the negative sanctions are more than just social.
                Every 10 years a great man.
                Who paid the bill?

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think the scope is much wider than that:

                  1. No one is "fired" anymor - they are "downsized", "right-sized", "outsourced" or their position is "reclassified to optimize operations".

                  2. Non-combatants are no-longer killed in wars - they are now "collateral damage". Buuildingd are not bombed - they are "taken out" by "surgical strikes".

                  3. There are fewer and fewer "terrrorists" - but a lot more "insurgents".

                  4. Civil wars have become "civil unrest".

                  5. No one stages a coup anymore - they "destabilize" the existing government.

                  6. The government refers to taking away civil liberties, iindefinite imprisonment without right to counsel or trial, and eavesdropping on innocent Americans as "increased Homeland security", which is part of the "war on terrorism".

                  7, People are not ""handicapped anymore - they are "(pick one) challenged."

                  8. Lastly, there are no irresponsible or criminal people in todays PC world - they are all "victims" instead. There are no drug addicts or alcoholics, either - just people who are "victims of a disease".

                  There are no longer the familiar "black and white" judgements of reality - everything is now just an endless sea of gray, in which human beings are expected to navigate without directions or landmarks.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Kevin23 View Post
                    For the essay I'm writing I need a historical comparison for modern day political correctness?

                    Does anybody have anything that could help me?
                    During the golden age of duelling proper etiquette was considered a vital craft in order to avoid insulting another gentleman and finding oneself staring down the business end of a rapier.

                    Likewise today those in the legal and advertising business must carefully choose their words to avoid a legal duel with the speech police. Whatever you do, don't call a black man articulate!

                    There's a possible comparison for you.
                    A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by MountainMan View Post
                      I think the scope is much wider than that:

                      1. No one is "fired" anymor - they are "downsized", "right-sized", "outsourced" or their position is "reclassified to optimize operations".

                      2. Non-combatants are no-longer killed in wars - they are now "collateral damage". Buuildingd are not bombed - they are "taken out" by "surgical strikes".

                      3. There are fewer and fewer "terrrorists" - but a lot more "insurgents".

                      4. Civil wars have become "civil unrest".

                      5. No one stages a coup anymore - they "destabilize" the existing government.

                      6. The government refers to taking away civil liberties, iindefinite imprisonment without right to counsel or trial, and eavesdropping on innocent Americans as "increased Homeland security", which is part of the "war on terrorism".

                      7, People are not ""handicapped anymore - they are "(pick one) challenged."

                      8. Lastly, there are no irresponsible or criminal people in todays PC world - they are all "victims" instead. There are no drug addicts or alcoholics, either - just people who are "victims of a disease".

                      There are no longer the familiar "black and white" judgements of reality - everything is now just an endless sea of gray, in which human beings are expected to navigate without directions or landmarks.
                      Sorry, I couldn't resist dropping in a counterpoint. Most of these are right. However:

                      Originally posted by MountainMan View Post
                      Non-combatants are no-longer killed in wars - they are now "collateral damage". Buuildingd are not bombed - they are "taken out" by "surgical strikes".
                      We still call civilian casualties civilian casualties. I haven't found any PC dehumanizing there. And "taken out" is not a PC euphemism. "Take out" has been a well recognized slang term for killing and bombing long before PC reared it's ugly head.

                      Originally posted by MountainMan View Post
                      The government refers to taking away civil liberties, iindefinite imprisonment without right to counsel or trial, and eavesdropping on innocent Americans as "increased Homeland security", which is part of the "war on terrorism".
                      No American has suffered indefinite imprisonment without counsel or trial. Terrorists have, but they aren't American citizens. And innocent Americans aren't wiretapped. You have to have overseas dialogue with a terrorist or terror organization before you show up on the Pentagon's radar.

                      Those two points aside I agree 100%.
                      A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Kevin23 View Post
                        For the essay I'm writing I need a historical comparison for modern day political correctness?

                        Does anybody have anything that could help me?
                        This may help...

                        The Origins of Political Correctness by Bill Lind
                        Where does all this stuff that you’ve heard about this morning – the victim feminism, the gay rights movement, the invented statistics, the rewritten history, the lies, the demands, all the rest of it – where does it come from? For the first time in our history, Americans have to be fearful of what they say, of what they write, and of what they think. They have to be afraid of using the wrong word, a word denounced as offensive or insensitive, or racist, sexist, or homophobic.

                        We have seen other countries, particularly in this century, where this has been the case. And we have always regarded them with a mixture of pity, and to be truthful, some amusement, because it has struck us as so strange that people would allow a situation to develop where they would be afraid of what words they used. But we now have this situation in this country. We have it primarily on college campuses, but it is spreading throughout the whole society. Were does it come from? What is it?

                        We call it "Political Correctness." The name originated as something of a joke, literally in a comic strip, and we tend still to think of it as only half-serious. In fact, it’s deadly serious. It is the great disease of our century, the disease that has left tens of millions of people dead in Europe, in Russia, in China, indeed around the world. It is the disease of ideology. PC is not funny. PC is deadly serious.

                        If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels are very obvious...
                        Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by MountainMan View Post
                          I think the scope is much wider than that:

                          1. No one is "fired" anymor - they are "downsized", "right-sized", "outsourced" or their position is "reclassified to optimize operations".

                          2. Non-combatants are no-longer killed in wars - they are now "collateral damage". Buuildingd are not bombed - they are "taken out" by "surgical strikes".

                          3. There are fewer and fewer "terrrorists" - but a lot more "insurgents".

                          4. Civil wars have become "civil unrest".

                          5. No one stages a coup anymore - they "destabilize" the existing government.

                          6. The government refers to taking away civil liberties, iindefinite imprisonment without right to counsel or trial, and eavesdropping on innocent Americans as "increased Homeland security", which is part of the "war on terrorism".

                          7, People are not ""handicapped anymore - they are "(pick one) challenged."

                          8. Lastly, there are no irresponsible or criminal people in todays PC world - they are all "victims" instead. There are no drug addicts or alcoholics, either - just people who are "victims of a disease".

                          There are no longer the familiar "black and white" judgements of reality - everything is now just an endless sea of gray, in which human beings are expected to navigate without directions or landmarks.
                          Great post MM
                          Life is change. Built models for decades.
                          Not sure anyone here actually knows the real me.
                          I didn't for a long time either.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            PC is also annoying when it is such, that one group can do it, while another can not.

                            For instance, why can black persons use all of the terms they get so angry over when used by us? If they hate the words, then why do they consider them ok to be used at all, even if by them?

                            I personally think "proud black person" is a contradiction somewhere.

                            Affirmative action, why is it fair only applies to anyone other than a white male
                            Life is change. Built models for decades.
                            Not sure anyone here actually knows the real me.
                            I didn't for a long time either.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by MountainMan View Post
                              I think the scope is much wider than that:

                              1. No one is "fired" anymor - they are "downsized", "right-sized", "outsourced" or their position is "reclassified to optimize operations".

                              2. Non-combatants are no-longer killed in wars - they are now "collateral damage". Buuildingd are not bombed - they are "taken out" by "surgical strikes".

                              3. There are fewer and fewer "terrrorists" - but a lot more "insurgents".

                              4. Civil wars have become "civil unrest".

                              5. No one stages a coup anymore - they "destabilize" the existing government.

                              6. The government refers to taking away civil liberties, iindefinite imprisonment without right to counsel or trial, and eavesdropping on innocent Americans as "increased Homeland security", which is part of the "war on terrorism".

                              7, People are not ""handicapped anymore - they are "(pick one) challenged."

                              8. Lastly, there are no irresponsible or criminal people in todays PC world - they are all "victims" instead. There are no drug addicts or alcoholics, either - just people who are "victims of a disease".

                              There are no longer the familiar "black and white" judgements of reality - everything is now just an endless sea of gray, in which human beings are expected to navigate without directions or landmarks.
                              True enough, but these are just examples of euphemisms (mostly). What is the unifying thing that makes these euphemisms p.c. and not other ones? After all, functionaries and others have using euphemistic language for along time.
                              Every 10 years a great man.
                              Who paid the bill?

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X