I remember when the term “politically correct” first started. It seemed simple enough. It was like your mother or your grandmother saying to you, “Don’t say things like that, they’re not nice.” Or “Don’t call people names because it just isn’t a nice thing to do.” Now who could object to this softening of our language? What could be wrong with not objectifying certain groups or certain ideas just because they were out of the mainstream? Well, like so many things that start out with good intentions, the rest of the story has now to be told.
is a difference between objectifying and identifying. I’ll give you an
example which happened recently. A bad guy was ripping off ladies in a
shopping center parking lot by telling them they had a problem with
their car. He would volunteer to repair it for a sum of money. To make a
long story short, he didn’t fix anything and took off with the money.
The police asked the TV station to broadcast his description so they
could catch him. The station did the broadcast but refused to say
whether he was white, black, Asian, or any other identifier that could
possibly be construed as politically incorrect. The bad guy was
eventually captured but not because of the broadcast. He just got too
greedy and got caught. Identifying him would not objectify him. But even
if it did, what is wrong with telling everyone he is just a low life
crook who preys on women? Telling the viewing audience his race would
only serve to help identify him.
believe this new attempted restriction on human interaction has a more
insidious motive. It has become a mechanism for control. If any group
can control your speech, they can also control your thoughts. Consider,
for example, hate crimes. How ridiculous is that? If a person kills a
homosexual because he is a homosexual, it really doesn’t matter whether
the killer loves or hates the victim, the victim is still just as dead
regardless of the emotion of the killer. Murder is a crime and it
doesn’t need any other description. The killer needs to be dealt with
because of his actions, not his thoughts.
a family of Muslims in Canada was found guilty of murdering their
children because those children had, in the families’ view, become too
westernized. The family felt justified in killing them because of their
strict religious conviction. Our national media refused to identify the
family as Muslims because they thought that would be politically
incorrect. Let’s face it, did anybody think these were Baptists? This
was a so-called “honor killing.” Identifying murderers as murderers is
not politically incorrect regardless of their religion especially when
their religion is also their motive. Stupidity under any guise is still
stupidity and failing to report stupidity for any reason is equally
wrong. The inventors of political correctness should be ashamed.
real troubling part of this is that it is not going away. Normally
ridiculous concepts like this die under their own weight. Not political
correctness however. The self proclaimed arbiters of what is right and
good for the unwashed masses will not let it. By the way, you will not
likely find many of them at a Tea Party rally. You probably will not see
them at any function of the Republican Party. No, this is definitely a
liberal leftist concept. Conceived by and propagated by the liberals,
they see political correctness as their crowning achievement of control.
try to be careful when I write or talk. I try to be fair. But, the only
control on my words is the control I place on myself. If some person or
group is offended, that’s just too damn bad. I have freedom of speech
and thought and so do you. I refuse to cede my freedoms to a bunch of
people who believe they know what is best and neither should you.
Ron Scarbro February 22, 2012.
Some Great Tips from Brian Tracy...
6 years ago