In the 1960s, the New Left adopted, developed and employed a relatively new concept we now know as political correctness, or PC. That, in brief, is when everything went to hell.
The subsequent and ongoing appellation evolution has led to terms like “differently abled” and “economically disadvantaged” instead of the old standbys “mentally retarded” and “poor.” Those who encourage PC usage prefer the former. Everyone else wishes they would shut up about it.
I am one of those people. PC usage is patronizing, it’s causing word denotations to change, it’s censorial, and it’s detrimental to the democratic political process, thus favoring those who seek to further their own agenda, as opposed to the right agenda.
PC is patronizing because it seeks to substantiate the speaker’s humility by using socially equal terms like “economically disadvantaged.” Poor people don’t care what you call them as long as you treat them like human beings. Finding cute ways of referring to them while at the same time promoting your own humility (which is in itself a contradiction) is just stupid. So don’t do it.
In creating egalitarian classifications, PC users are changing mainstream denotations. For instance, “bias,” in its classical definition, simply means “tendency or inclination.” By attaching the connotative evils of “prejudice” and “bigotry,” PC users are muddying up the language and causing unnecessary and harmful confusion.
And, by prescribing against the usage of certain words, they’re censoring not only the language and its practitioners, but also the ideas conveyed through that language. That goes beyond even First Amendment free-speech issues. It’s basically evil, in the purest sense.
Those who sought originally to propagate PC into mainstream culture were liberals. Sadly, their own creation has led to an unprecedented amount of power being secured by their sworn enemies: conservatives.
If, to draw from contemporary events, I’m attempting to promote and pass a stimulus bill that helps poor people and I spend the majority of my time fashioning language that’s suitably egalitarian, then I’m presenting a vulnerability that the other side can use to divert attention away from central issue of economic recovery. If I squabble about whether to say “poor” or “economically disadvantaged,” then I’m not spending time developing cogent and convincing arguments.
And by engaging in these battles, I’m opening up the entire infrastructure to similar diversion.
A perfect example would be Sen. John McCain’s recent assertion that President Obama’s economic plan “is a spending bill, not a stimulus bill.” This of course begs the question of how one stimulates a financial institution without spending money. To say as much, and show that McCain is, as usual, either a moron or a typical politician (or both), the president was then drawn into the trenches to combat non-substantive rhetoric, thus diverting attention from the bill’s contents.
So, don’t use PC language. Be respectful of others, but don’t patronize. Don’t try to purport your own humility by using terms that are “socially equal.” It’s evil, detrimental and just plain sucks.
Jeff is a creative writing major. You can tell him to “&$%# @*$!” at jweyant@asu.edu.
