The evils of political correctness.

[DrZoidberg]

Here's a great documentary about political correctness

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb2iFikOwYU

 

[Speakpigeon]

Here's a great documentary about political correctness

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb2iFikOwYU

I've never been clear what the fuss was about political correctness. PC is PC. I mean, political correctness is a personal choice. There's no compulsion in PC. You do it if you want to. You won't go to jail if you're not PC. You won't have to pay a fine. All you would ever face is reprobation from some people, which is the fate of just about all of us on this planet. Whatever you're doing, some people will reprove. So, what exactly are these bloody idiots people complaining about?

I also don't think many people on this forum will feel concerned either way. Still, I commit this first reply to the OP to motivate dissenting opinions.

As to the video, I have to say it's definitely very, very good.

It says everything that needs saying. I don't think the gentleman knows the possible consequences of saying it, though. I think this is typically a case of damn if you do, damn if you don't.

Still, the good point is that somebody takes the time to present the case against PC in an articulate and effective way, which is such a relief around here. Some posters on this forum could learn a few lessons. So, I agree PC is a blunt instrument and that's all you need to know: The police is a blunt instrument, the army is a blunt instrument. Anything is a blunt instrument. Even precision laser-guided bombs are a blunt instrument as shown by the many small babies killed by the U.S. military collateral damage they can cause. Even this post is a blunt instrument.

That being said, my position is fully expressed in the first paragraph above. And who could cogently disagree?
EB

 

[untermensche]

Jews are a race?

This thing is an hour. The first 5 minutes bored me to tears.

He doesn't seem to understand basic math.

He says that 1/5 of the billionaires in Britain are Jewish (again, not a race), which represents a significantly disproportionate number compared to the number of total Jews in the population.

He then says it is somehow remarkable that the average Jewish income is twice the national average.

But of course this would be expected since there are so many more billionaires per capita being averaged in.

Does this get better?

 

[fromderinside]

I haven't watched the video but I get the impression that generalizations are made about specific tribes as part of the blunt instrument presentation. Some, would try to discredit parts of a presentation to make the task of understanding effects of correctness more obscure. Correctness is just laziness of those holding various political views to sanction, enrage, or belittle this or that collection of beliefs using codes rather than rational discussion to inform or make points.

Is this discussion going to tell us anything about social science or are we just going to tar this and that making the discussion useless with respect to a rational view of the study of social behavior as science.

 

[untermensche]

I haven't watched the video but I get the impression that generalizations are made about specific tribes as part of the blunt instrument presentation. Some, would try to discredit parts of a presentation to make the task of understanding effects of correctness more obscure. Correctness is just laziness of those holding various political views to sanction, enrage, or belittle this or that collection of beliefs using codes rather than rational discussion to inform or make points.

Is this discussion going to tell us anything about social science or are we just going to tar this and that making the discussion useless with respect to a rational view of the study of social behavior as science.

How about you start by defining this obscure term "Political Correctness".

Stifling debate is not some other thing called "Political Correctness".

Pointing out where people are being abusive with speech is not some other thing called "Political Correctness".

Trying to get people to stop being abusive with speech is not some other thing called "Political Correctness".

Arguments on campuses are not this other thing called "Political Correctness".

The term "Political Correctness" is a term invented by Republicans to shift attention from serious issues to get idiots to look at non-issues.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Never mind

 

[braces_for_impact]

Republicans are just as politically correct, just in their own, special snowflake kind of way. Try going to your local GOP meeting and saying you support the right of a woman to choose, or think Climate change is real, or want to keep church and state separate. Let's see how quickly they yank and burn your conservative card.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I haven't watched the video but I get the impression that generalizations are made about specific tribes as part of the blunt instrument presentation. Some, would try to discredit parts of a presentation to make the task of understanding effects of correctness more obscure. Correctness is just laziness of those holding various political views to sanction, enrage, or belittle this or that collection of beliefs using codes rather than rational discussion to inform or make points.

Is this discussion going to tell us anything about social science or are we just going to tar this and that making the discussion useless with respect to a rational view of the study of social behavior as science.

You're misunderstanding his message. Or how I interpret his message. He's not saying that Jews having such and such much money is something we should worry about. Or that higher crime rates among blacks has something to do with them being black. Or that Pakistanis targetting young girls for sex has something necessarily to do with them being either Pakistani, black, or Muslim.

What he's saying is that these are features that people, out in the country, who aren't intellectuals notice. Normal people see patterns and then wonder about why they're not being adressed in the public discourse. Mainstream media has loads of Voldemort-words. Things that must not be named. To anybody uneducated, that will look like a cover up. He's saying that we have to stop being afraid of racial profiling.

Smart and well educated people realize that behaviours of members of an identifiable group might have complex reasons. So they have no problems navigating with the political correct discourse, and still get the important information out of it. But this is a small minority in any society. It's just that this is the small minority that has traditionally dominated the media. Because it's the minority who can write. But today, with the Internet, that small minority cannot any longer dominate the media.

The jury is out. The well educated intellectual elite have lost the fight. Stupid people (yes, they are stupid) now control most of the information landscape. The intellectual elite will have to change their style of communication, or they will stop being an elite. There's no point to being smart if it doesn't help you influence anything.

He's also saying that political correctnes has already led to children being raped and beaten to death. Because of political correctness people in positions of authority have feared doing anything about it because they're afraid of being branded racists. That's bad. And it's not like we can deny this has happened because of poltiical correctness. it did.

I think that is what he's saying.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Republicans are just as politically correct, just in their own, special snowflake kind of way. Try going to your local GOP meeting and saying you support the right of a woman to choose, or think Climate change is real, or want to keep church and state separate. Let's see how quickly they yank and burn your conservative card.

I don't think so. I think conservatives are a lot more tolerant of decenting opinions. This is annecdotal evidence, not backed up by any research. I rarely get the feeling of "boy, this guy is a strident fucking moron" around conservatives. It happens a lot around leftys. They tend to be a hell of a lot more pleasant and laid back kind of people. Rush Limbaugh once appeard on a Family Guy episode and was made fun of the whole episode. Conservatives just seem better at taking verbal abuse without getting ruffled about it.

I live in Sweden. So there's selection bias here.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Is this discussion going to tell us anything about social science or are we just going to tar this and that making the discussion useless with respect to a rational view of the study of social behavior as science.

Time to end rationality and return to good old experience and recording.

No comment, PC or otherwise.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

I would tentatively define political correctness as follows.

PC is an attitude of trying to make out as socially offensive the public expression of any true characteristic of some specific and clearly identifiable segment of the population, if this characteristic is generally seen as somehow problematic.

This attitude results from the belief among the morally enlightened minority that any such expression will most likely have discriminatory motivations.

Political correctness has been institutionalised to some extent, especially in the U.S. and in the U.K., ostensibly to try to prevent discrimination against the communities most at risk of discrimination.

I think PC may be seen as a palliative to the impossibility of prosecuting discriminatory speech in the U.S. and in the U.K. There's barely any mention of PC in France where you can say whatever you like only as long as it is legal and a lot of what the Nazis people say in the U.S. in particular would fell foul of French laws.
EB

 

[untermensche]

PC is an attitude of trying to make out as socially offensive the public expression of any true characteristic of some specific and clearly identifiable segment of the population, if this characteristic is generally seen as somehow problematic.

This is as clear as mud.

What are you talking about?

Telling people they are saying offensive things is telling people they are saying offensive things.

It is not this other thing "Political Correctness", which is a Republican invention, an imaginary problem, to distract from the fact that Republican policies harm the many to give favors to the most wealthy, to those who least need them.

 

[Valjean]

Watched the video. I think he makes some very good points.

 

[untermensche]

I thought this was bad but after watching 25 minutes I realize it is total shit.

He says that many Jews in Britain actually are successful and many have power.

Big deal? What myth is he shattering? What point is he making?

He goes on to talk about crime. This is jumbled nonsense. A bunch of unconnected facts about the various criminals around London. Again what point he is trying to make is unknown.

The best part was when he was bested in the little staged debate and the truly intelligent black man said, "You have to be smart Trevor".

He then uses the same ignorant argument heard many times before. Black people are killing other black people, therefore it is really the black criminal that is the root cause of the problem.

The root causes are poverty and lack of opportunity. That is what causes high murder rates. Add in the high amounts of money available due to insane drug prohibition and you make a bad problem worse.

Then he moves on to bombings in London. 4 people out of the entire Muslim community. As Britain was killing and torturing and disfiguring who knows how many Muslims in Iraq.

Once again NO POINT.

Does this guy ever make a point?

 

[bigfield]

Here's a great documentary about political correctness

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb2iFikOwYU

To summarise: Phillips argues that leftist elites in various positions of influence and power--particularly whites--are afraid to confront problems in minority populations because other leftist elites will call them racist, leaving right-wing populist elites (like the UKIP) as the only ones willing to confront those problems (and offering bad solutions).

 

[Speakpigeon]

Here's a great documentary about political correctness

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb2iFikOwYU

To summarise: Phillips argues that leftist elites in various positions of influence and power--particularly whites--are afraid to confront problems in minority populations because other leftist elites will call them racist, leaving right-wing populist elites (like the UKIP) as the only ones willing to confront those problems (and offering bad solutions).

And so I would ask the question: whose fault would it be?

The suggestion is that it is PC which is misguided because it results in bad consequences so let's get rid of it.

Yet, it's not true that it is PC in itself that leads social service officers for example to fail those they are supposed to protect. Rather, they fail in their mission because of the general context in which they have to exercise their responsibilities, of which PC is just one element. For example, they themselves may not be so bright that they understand how to do what they have to do in the context of PC. Bring in brighter people and the problem will be solved. Or, they may experience constant overload of work: Too many abuses and too few officers to deal with them. Bring in more officers and the problem will go away. Or, they may entertain their share of prejudices about people they have to deal with and feel wrong-footed by PC to the extent that they are unable to find the right course of action to deal with those against whom they have prejudices. Bring in the money necessary to train social service officers to make sure their prejudices become irrelevant.

Now, many people will say, why should we spend more of our money to solve a problem other people have? So, as I see it, PC is to some extent wishful thinking whereby you keep pushing for a progressive political agenda without being able to secure the money necessary to implement it properly. This is pretty much the same situation as for all social policies, including public education, health, housing, policing etc. Another way to put it is to say that there is a contradiction between our ambitious progressive goals and the limited resources we are prepared to secure.
EB

 

[bilby]

Republicans are just as politically correct, just in their own, special snowflake kind of way. Try going to your local GOP meeting and saying you support the right of a woman to choose, or think Climate change is real, or want to keep church and state separate. Let's see how quickly they yank and burn your conservative card.

I don't think so. I think conservatives are a lot more tolerant of decenting opinions. This is annecdotal evidence, not backed up by any research. I rarely get the feeling of "boy, this guy is a strident fucking moron" around conservatives. It happens a lot around leftys. They tend to be a hell of a lot more pleasant and laid back kind of people. Rush Limbaugh once appeard on a Family Guy episode and was made fun of the whole episode. Conservatives just seem better at taking verbal abuse without getting ruffled about it.

I live in Sweden. So there's selection bias here.

Yeah, whoever is in the majority can get away with being loudly stupid with little risk of correction.

In Sweden, that's the left.

In the USA, it's very much not the left.

 

[Bronzeage]

Political correctness is simply calling someone an asshole when they are being an asshole. I can remember when some sports writers refused to call Mohamed Ali by that name. It offended their sensibility, and so decided to be offensive in return, or as we would call them, assholes.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Political correctness is simply calling someone an asshole when they are being an asshole. I can remember when some sports writers refused to call Mohamed Ali by that name. It offended their sensibility, and so decided to be offensive in return, or as we would call them, assholes.

I agree. But there's more to the story. It has consequences that might not be so fun.

Example. Racism is about opinions. It's not about what words are used. When I was young the word for black people in Sweden was "neger". It had no connotation either way. A neutral word.

Then we got MTV in the early 90'ies and Sweden was suddenly exposed to a flood of American media, and the English word "nigger". Then started a transition where people started equating the English "nigger" with the Swedish "neger". If you know anything about European languages and the words for black, the racist assumptions is odd.

After this we got a transition period when older not racist people (who didn't watch MTV) were called racist and didn't understand why.

The Swedish "neger" discussion high-lights the issue. The Swedish PC people didn't care whether people were racist or not. They only cared what words people used. Sure, words matter. But context also matters. USA has a context that Sweden doesn't. If I tell you "din mammas fitta luktade get när jag knullade henne" you're not going to get offended, because it's not a language you use (I hope).

The Swedish PC brigade were using the word neger to bash people. It is intellectual snobbery. Either you are well read, well eduated and intellectual and know how to navigate the offensive words of the day or you reveal yourseld as an uneducated idiot. I wonder why the people most angry about PC is the uneducated working class? Each time they speak publically they are walking into a mine field of faux passes they don't master. Good intentions won't save them.

PC is being used as a bat to bash educationally weak classes in our socieites. I don't know about you, but I'm not cool with that.

I think there's a good test we can use for if someone is a pc-nice person or a pc-asshole. If you watch your mouth to not say offensive shit, you're a pc-nice guy. If you are listening for trigger words, rather than trying to understand what is meant in what other people are saying, and then making a show out of it, you're a pc-asshole.

Being offended about Mohammed Ali converting to Islam and joining the Nation of Islam is perfectly fine. We're allowed to have opinions. The Nation of Islam is not your garden variety Islamic congregation. They are not nice people. We have to be able to say that without being labelled Islamophobic or racist.

Most PC debates are more about words being used than what people mean. It's possible to use racist slurs without being racist. It's all about context. This seems to be completely lost today. Anybody saying the "n-word" is saying "nigger". They're synonyms. A world where one is ok to say but not the other is an insane world. We're so wrapped up in pseudo discussions and debates about trigger words that PC has turned into a joke.

That was a long rant. But this fear of not being PC has led to an inablity to talk about things in a language most people understand. That's what I took away from the documentary.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Political correctness is simply calling someone an asshole when they are being an asshole. I can remember when some sports writers refused to call Mohamed Ali by that name. It offended their sensibility, and so decided to be offensive in return, or as we would call them, assholes.

You are being offensive in return so I would guess your sensibility has been offended by these assholes.

Also, it's not because somebody calls himself the Kind of the World that we should encouraged his delusion.

Still, I assume he had legally changed his name (to Muhammad Ali) so that should have been the end of the matter.

Except if you want to be an asshole.
EB