User Tools

Site Tools


Tell your friends about

There are many reasons to “Vote with Your Feet” and move from corrupt, statist, liberal-Democrat, high-crime Nanny States to a low-population-density, extremely low-crime, limited government, libertarian, Constitution-loving, Pro-Second-Amendment, Patriotic, moral-conservative, God-fearing, safe-haven refuge in the American Redoubt of Idaho - Montana - Wyoming - Eastern Oregon - Eastern Washington - Northern Utah

Vote with your feet by moving ( to the libertarian safe refuge of the “American Redoubt” in Idaho - Montana - Wyoming - Eastern Oregon - Eastern Washington - Northern Utah or the Texas Redoubt or the Tennessee Cumberland Redoubt ( for more Bill of Rights freedom, especially Second Amendment gun rights — see

for state rankings,,, podcast, podcast by a conservative black Catholic Redoubter.

Sadly, the beautiful state of California is now a lost cause politically. But still keep fighting to restore her greatness.

NRA Life Member; also member of of America,, Second Amendment Foundation,,,,,,, Member Support Brigade, the Wolf Pack at, Permaculture Homesteader

American Redoubt Pages:

What exactly is the American Redoubt? See for more details from James Wesley Rawles, whose description of our Redoubt many of us wholeheartedly support.

We are “Prepared Individuals Living in Uncertain Times” is the motto of James Wesley Rawles

We Vote-with-our-Feet and have prepared “For when times get tough, or even if they don't” - the motto of Jack Spirko's SurvivalPodcast (

One could say that the American Redoubt was “founded” when Montana became a State of these United States of America on November 8, 1889, just 1 year before Idaho and Wyoming.

For those who are more attached to the East Coast and can't easily migrate to the American Redoubt in the Intermountain-West, we recommend the blog of the inspirational M.D. Creekmore who posted Joel M. Skousen, Author, Strategic Relocation North American Guide to Safe Places, on the Tennessee Cumberland Plateau solution to the “The East Coast Retreat Dilemma”:

“As a relocation specialist and designer, I found safe retreat locations and helped clients develop high security homes in every state of the union and you can too. The concept that anyone caught East of the Mississippi River is doomed is only partially valid and highly exaggerated. You can achieve a significantly higher level of safety going beyond the Appalachians to the high plateau regions of Tennessee and Kentucky. This massive and relatively unpopulated area is called the Cumberland Plateau—most of which falls within the state of Tennessee.” Joel M. Skousen ( is a relocation specialist and author of “Strategic Relocation North American Guide to Safe Places.”


“Political correctness is just tyranny with manners.” – Charlton Heston

Politically correct restrictions on what we can say and how we say it have been imposed by leftists to restrict debate and silence opposition.<ref>The Obama File: Political Correctness</ref>

-Philip Atkinson <ref>Atkinson; "The Origin and Nature of Political Correctness"</ref>

The modern politically correct movement began at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, which is one of the most liberal colleges in the United States. Political correctness is a liberal degrading of the freedom of speech. George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four famously incorporated the notion of limiting thought through language (see Newspeak). Words or actions that violate political correctness are called politically incorrect.

At American universities, liberals began imposing political correctness to prevent recognition of differences among gender, religion, belief system, sexual orientation and nationality. In the 1960s, feminists began to demand that the neutral pronouns he, him and his be replaced with expressions like “he or she”, “him or her”, “them”, etc, even though the last one is actually grammatically incorrect. They argued that no one would be able to understand that the masculine gender included the feminine gender in neutral contexts. But this was just part of their campaign to redefine the social roles traditionally associated with masculinity and femininity.

In science, political correctness punishes anyone who criticizes the theory of evolution, the theory of relativity, or liberal dogma about global warming.

Political correctness or P.C. also means the alteration of one's choice of words in order to avoid either offending a group of people or reinforcing a stereotype considered to be disadvantageous to the group. More specifically, groups which (or whose putative leaders or other activists) claim some status as systemically oppressed or discriminated against will periodically attempt to change the terms by which they are referred to and demand that society as a whole change its usage of words as well.


An example of political correctness is the changing terminology used to described handicapped people. In the past the term “crippled” was perfectly acceptable and not considered offensive. At some point, Americans like Senate Republican leader Bob Dole decided “crippled” was degrading and the preferred term changed to “handicapped.” This, too, was eventually deemed offensive and “disabled” became the preferred term. Today, even “disabled” is considered degrading to some and “differently abled” and “physically challenged” are used by those people. The same can be said for the changing uses of terms for Black Americans: “Negro” and “colored,” once perfectly acceptable terms, became offensive during the 1970s and “Afro-American” and “Black” came into use, which in turn gave way to “African-American,” and in broader usage, “people of color.” One perceived problem with “Negro” is that many persons, especially Southerners, seemed to have trouble pronouncing it, enunciating it as “nigra.”

The question of politically correct language has spilled over from the use of racially descriptive words and affected the use of traditional language. In 1999, an aide to the mayor of Washington DC described a budget decision as “niggardly” (a word meaning “stingy,” unrelated to the racial slur). The aide immediately came under criticism and was forced to resign even though he had not said anything racially charged. However, his name was cleared within a matter of days and was offered to return to his previous position. <ref></ref>

As well as language, political correctness discourages the use of racial or stereotypes in fiction out of concern that these stereotypes may become self-perpetuating. For example, frequently seeing the image black gang-members decked out in gold chains, carrying guns and listening to rap may pressure young black people into seeing this lifestyle as the more 'acceptable' choice for their racial group. The common image of female-dominated occupations (nurses, secretaries, care workers, etc) and of male-dominated occupations (IT workers, military, machinery operators, mechanics, etc.) can discourage individuals of either gender from considering those occupations traditionally belonging to the other. Additionally films like “The Siege” and “True Lies” have been criticized by pro-Islamic groups as having Muslims portrayed as terrorists, despite the fact that most current terrorists are in fact radical extremist Muslims. Thus, political correctness becomes the consideration of all public statements and media for their unintentional social impact.

Political correctness can even affect terminology that's viewed by secularists as too “pro-religion” or an alleged “violation of the separation of church and state” in the United States. The best example of this is the active promotion of the use of C.E. and B.C.E. as the abbreviations used after dates (instead of the commonly and traditionally used A.D. and B.C.). Additionally, atheists as school administrators or government union workers at liberal schools use political correctness as a means for renaming terms they view as too pro-religious. For example, a Seattle student at a local elementary school volunteered to do a project as part of a community-service effort that she was doing through her school, supplying plastic eggs filled with jellybeans, called “Easter eggs.” The student had an idea to fill little plastic eggs with treats and jelly beans and other candy to give to her classmates, but she was concerned how the teacher might react to the eggs after learning earlier in the week about “their abstract behavior rules.”<ref></ref> After asking the teacher for permission, the student reportedly explained, “She said that I could do it as long as I called this treat spring spheres.' I couldn't call them Easter eggs.”<ref></ref><ref></ref>

Differing Opinions

Demands for politically correct language usage are rooted in the notion widely promoted among left-wing academics and sociologists that Western culture promotes systemic oppression against some groups by marginalizing them and excluding them from the “norm”; the groups thus supposedly systemically marginalized are referred to as “the Other” by these left-wing academics. The implication is that these groups are systemically excluded from the mainstream. “Colored people” is therefore deemed offensive because the order of words puts “colored” first, emphasizing their difference from the mainstream, while “people of color” is acceptable because putting the term “people” first emphasizes that they are people and thus does not emphasize their difference from the “norm”.

Some people allege that instead of encouraging supposedly marginalized groups to integrate with and assimilate into the mainstream of Western culture, political correctness ironically encourages them to emphasize and indeed to wallow in their marginalization from society, and to make a public display of such. This is known as identity politics. According to this view, gays and lesbians are therefore encouraged to label themselves as “queer” and make public displays of “queerness” calculated to disturb the sensibilities of mainstream people, rather than integrate into the mainstream themselves; Black Americans are encouraged to adopt Afrocentrism and convert to Islam or to conform to stereotypical black behavior, etc.

The Language Police

Conservative scholar Robert Bork has charged that the educational system is a battleground where the future of America is being undermined and ill-served. He has counseled against the troubles which will ensue as a result of anti-religious policies in the schools, permissive attitudes toward homosexuality and abortion, as well as welfare policies that have destroyed families since Lyndon B. Johnson's War on Poverty. <ref> Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline. by Robert Bork published by Harper Collins © 1997</ref>

In her book “The Language Police”, Diane Ravitch documents just how easy it is to get a word, phrase or idea banned from modern textbooks and references. Ravitch asserts that textbook producers are beholden to small non-elected educational boards in a few key states such as New York, Texas and California and that few citizens know anything about these boards or who holds the seats of power on these boards. It's not difficult for an interest group to mobilize a campaign to bombard the educational board. Meanwhile, the public is not even aware that their words or values are under attack from this corrupt system, while many elected Conservatives have rallied against this policy.

Presently, however, this may not be the case. In 2010, a group of conservatives on the Texas State Board of Education pushed the state to adopt educational standards that emphasized the role Christianity played in America's founding. Those educational standards also sought to counteract political correctness by removing parts of the curriculum that espoused political correctness and contradicted conservative values. As one of the largest states in the Union, Texas represents one of the largest markets for textbook publishers. <ref></ref>

Once a big state makes a textbook purchase, it's very difficult for a small state or any municipality to make any changes. Thus, profound changes can be inserted into textbooks and reference books by putting pressure on a handful of educational administrators. The work of textbook selection committees is sometimes done privately, to avoid politicizing textbooks, but the reverse has happened. <ref>The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Children Learn by Diane Ravitch © 2003 published by Knopf</ref> Ravitch has documented “bias guidelines” for major publishers of texts and tests. These “guidelines” consist of advice to writers and editors about words and topics that must be avoided.<ref></ref>

Ryan Sorba has proposed changing the terminology used to refer to homosexuals to prevent the politically correct language police from controlling the debate.<ref>Christian conservatives discuss strategy for fighting war against gays: Start with semantics, from The American Independent</ref>

Many blacks with Caribbean heritage (such as those from Jamaica or Haiti) have criticized the term “African-American” since they do not actually have African heritage. Additionally, in 2009, Paulo Serodio, a white male who was born in Mozambique, Africa was harassed and ultimately suspended from a New Jersey medical school for saying he was a “white African-American”. Serodio, who initially did not use any politically correct name to describe himself, only used the term when forced to classify himself as either “Caucasian”, “African-American”, or one of several other options. <ref> ABC News: “White-African American” Suing NJ Med School</ref>

Furthermore, even in Canada, which is more liberal than the United States, blacks are not referred to as “African-Canadian”. Instead, they are either called “black” or (depending on their heritage) “African” or “Caribbean”. This shows that America's political correctness has now gone further to the left than Canada's.

Totalitarianism and Political Correctness

The comprehensive and detailed control of all ideas, beliefs, and statements is one of the most problematic features of totalitarian regimes.:// Political correctness can trace its origins back to the world of 1920's Germany, where Communist academics sought to impose their Marxist views on students.

It is now acceptable in many Universities to have courses on gender, homosexual and African American studies, which, in fact, encourage the mainstream public to become different to avoid criticism.



See also


Lefty Topics

AtheismEvolutionismEugenicsGlobalismGlobal warming alarmismHollywood valuesMoral relativismNew age movementPopulation controlProfessor valuesScientologySocialismValuesWicca

AbortionBirth controlAffirmative actionGun controlHomosexual agendaIncome redistributionNanny StateNationalizationObamacarePolitically correctPrayer censorshipSocial JusticeStatism

Tools Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals"Cloward and Piven StrategyBiased gradingCensorshipHate speechJudicial activismLiesLiberal intoleranceLiberal logicMainstream MediaMythsNetwork abuseObfuscationPay to playRedefinitionRevisionismScientific fascismSlanderTrapsTricksVandalismVideo game industry

ArroganceBiasBigotryBullyingClass warfareCronyismDeceitDouble standardDenialHypocrisyJournalistic malpracticePropagandaRace baitingStupidityStyleTrollUncharitablenessWhining

Labor UnionsLiberals and friendshipMedia eliteGeorge SorosLiberal quotientNihilismPornographyPublic schools

Liberalism can refer to a number of political philosophies derived from Classical liberalism. In this article, the American political platform referred to as “liberal” within the United States is contrasted with other meanings of the word, particularly in Europe and in other parliamentary democratic systems.

  • “Whereas Liberalism is the triumph of emotion over reason (as defined historically), Conservatism is an applied intellectual process; based on observation, deduction, and the study of provable historical fact.” - Sandy Stringfellow<ref>Sandy Stringfellow</ref>
  • Cal Thomas said, “One of liberalism's many problems is that once an idea or program is proved wrong and unworkable, liberals rarely acknowledge their mistake and examine the root cause of their error so they don't repeat it.”<ref>Cal Thomas</ref>
  • Fred Seigel wrote, “Liberalism has become an ugly blend of sanctimony, self-interest, and social connections.” <ref>Fred Seigel</ref>
  • :A distinguishing element of liberalism has been its admiration of autocratic leaders and this explains its embrace of dictators from the likes of the German Kaiser, Lenin and Stalin, through to men like Fidel Castro and his murderous sidekick, Ernesto “Che” Guevera.<ref>The Curse of Liberalism Alan Caruba - September 9, 2013</ref>
  • Michael Savage wrote, “As much as the Left fashions themselves as being progressive, they’re not. In reality, today’s leftist movement is made in much the same way as a sausage—it’s a blend of fascist, Communist, and socialist ideologies from twentieth-century Europe, with a pinch of Nazism, all ground together, yet retaining the flavor of its various parts.”<ref>Quote from ''Liberalism is a Mental Disorder'' by Michael Savage</ref>

Since the definition of liberalism often – but not always – means to advocate for and be open to change, its specific reference depends on specified context. For instance, American liberalism has changed drastically since the 1960s, with liberals then (see: John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr.) advocating for personal responsibility and true liberty, in sharp contrast to modern-day liberals, being very close to leftists, denounce and devalue.

United States

In the U.S. the word liberal is usually used to describe the platform espoused by the Democrat Party, that is, support of social welfare systems, redistribution of wealth, and government regulation of the economy - combined with a certain brand of individual libertarianism, emphasizing social equality, and (to a certain extent, these days increasingly radical) rejection of traditional Judeo-Christian standards of morality as a proper justification for law.

The economic aspects of this ideology are to a large extent a product of the New Deal policies of the Great Depression era, as well as Lyndon B. Johnson's “Great Society.” It also should be noted that a good portion of the Liberal economic philosophy has certain roots in the teachings of Karl Marx, such as the overall focus on social equality and the outrageous rejection of the Judeo-Christian morals. It should be noted, however, that Liberals are not pureblood Communists: Unlike their redder brethren, Liberals are far more insidious and dangerous, as they have successfully infiltrated the American society and now threaten the American way of life.

The Democrat Party's idea of social liberty and equality, though, came much later, partly as a result of the civil rights and counterculture movements of the late 20th century. It continues to be fueled by various youth movements and the interests of numerous special interest groups.

Europe and elsewhere

In Europe, liberalism refers to a political position that leans toward greater individual liberties and less government intervention in general. In short, this is the philosophy closest to classical liberalism, and is commonly referred to in the United States as libertarianism. In Europe and elsewhere, then, the opposite of liberalism is not conservatism, but authoritarianism.

Because of this, the terms “conservative liberalism” and “liberal conservatism”, which are seen as contradictory in the U.S., are not so in Europe. “Conservative liberalism” simply refers to a less radical libertarian philosophy, and is often referred to as “law-and-order liberalism.” Liberal conservatism is simply a variant of conservatism willing to allow for individual liberties, and, in a way, describes the ideology of the American Republican Party. Such examples of this obvious line of thought include the civil rights movement, when the Republican Party (and a few southern Democrats) just wanted to maintain the African American's right to have the choice of forced segregation.

The Liberal Party of Australia is the right-leaning party, in opposition to the liberal Labor Party, and is not to be confused with liberalism as an ideology.

Nazism and socialism

For more information please see: Nazism and socialism, Gun Control in Nazi Germany

was the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nazi Party), led by Social Darwinist Adolf Hitler.<ref></ref><ref></ref><ref></ref> ]] The Ludwig von Mises Institute declares:

There is debate about the similarities between Nazism and socialism. Despite whether Nazism is socialist or not, they, with the help of general improvement of economic conditions in Europe, helped propel Germany out of the Great Depression with their economic policy.<ref></ref>

Similarities between Communism, Nazism and liberalism

See also: Similarities between Communism, Nazism and liberalism

Communist Manifesto Nazi Party Platform Analysis
1 “Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.” “We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.” The stripping away of land from private owners. Liberalism today demands “eminent domain” on property.
2 “A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.” “We demand the nationalization of all trusts…profit-sharing in large industries…a generous increase in old-age pensions…by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor…and the creation of a national (folk) army.” The points raised in the Nazi platform demand an increase in taxes to support them. Liberalism today demands heavy progressive and graduated income taxes.
3 “Abolition of all rights of inheritance.” “That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.” Liberalism today demands a “death tax” on anyone inheriting an estate.
4 “Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.” “We demand the nationalization of all trusts.” Central control of the financial system.
5 “Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.” “We demand that there be a legal campaign against those who propagate deliberate political lies and disseminate them through the press…editors and their assistants on newspapers published in the German language shall be German citizens…Non-German newspapers shall only be published with the express permission of the State…the punishment for transgressing this law be the immediate suppression of the newspaper…” Central control of the press. Liberals today demand control or suppression of talk radio and Fox News.
6 “Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.” “In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State. ” Central control of education, with an emphasis on doing things their way. Liberals today are doing things their way in our schools.

See also


<references /> Liberalism Anti-American

Political Terms Marxist terminology

Snippet from Wikipedia: Political correctness

Political correctness (adjectivally: politically correct; commonly abbreviated PC) is a term used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended to avoid offense or disadvantage to members of particular groups in society. In public discourse and the media, the term is generally used as a pejorative with an implication that these policies are excessive or unwarranted. Since the late 1980s, the term has been used to describe a preference for inclusive language and avoiding language or behavior that can be seen as excluding, marginalizing, or insulting groups of people disadvantaged or discriminated against, such as groups defined by ethnicity, sex and gender.

Early usage of the term politically correct by leftists in the 1970s and 1980s was as self-critical satire; usage was ironic, rather than a name for a serious political movement. It was considered an in-joke among leftists used to satirise those who were too rigid in their adherence to political orthodoxy.

The modern pejorative usage of the term emerged from conservative criticism of the New Left in the late 20th century. This usage was popularized by a number of articles in The New York Times and other media throughout the 1990s, and was widely used in the debate surrounding Allan Bloom's 1987 book The Closing of the American Mind. The term gained further currency in response to Roger Kimball's Tenured Radicals (1990), and conservative author Dinesh D'Souza's 1991 book Illiberal Education.

Commentators on the political left in the United States contend that conservatives use the concept of political correctness to downplay and divert attention from substantively discriminatory behavior against disadvantaged groups. They also argue that the political right enforces its own forms of political correctness to suppress criticism of its favored constituencies and ideologies. In the United States, the term has played a major role in the "culture war" between liberals and conservatives.


William Safire states that the first recorded use of the term politically correct in the typical modern sense is by Toni Cade Bambara in the 1970 anthology The Black Woman. The term probably entered modern use in the United Kingdom around 1975.

Early-to-mid 20th century

In the early-to-mid 20th century, the phrase politically correct was used to describe strict adherence to a range of ideological orthodoxies within politics.

Political correctness (adjectivally, politically correct; both forms commonly abbreviated to PC) is a term that refers to language, ideas, or policies that address perceived or actual discrimination against or alienation of politically, socially or economically disadvantaged groups. The term usually implies that these social considerations are excessive or of a purely “political” nature. These groups most prominently include those defined by gender, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation and disability.

Historically, the term was a colloquialism used in the early-to-mid 20th century by Communists and Socialists in political debates, referring pejoratively to the Communist “party line”, which provided for “correct” positions on many matters of politics. The term was adopted in the later 20th century by the New Left, applied with a certain humour to condemn sexist or racist conduct as “not politically correct”. By the early 1990s, the term was adopted by US conservatives as a pejorative term for all manner of attempts to promote multiculturalism and identity politics, particularly, attempts to introduce new terms that sought to leave behind discriminatory baggage attached to older ones, and conversely, to try to make older ones taboo. This phenomenon was driven by a combination of the linguistic turn in academia and the rise of identity politics both inside and outside it. These led to attempts to change social reality by changing language, with attempts at making language more culturally inclusive and gender-neutral. These attempts (associated with the political left) led to a backlash from the right, partly against the attempts to change language, and partly against the underlying identity politics itself.

In modern usage, the terms PC, politically correct, and political correctness are pejorative descriptors, whereas the term politically incorrect is used by opponents of PC as an implicitly positive self-description, as in the cases of the conservative, topical book-series The Politically Incorrect Guide, and the liberal, television talk-show program Politically Incorrect.

History of the term

The term politically correct did not occur much in the language and culture of the U.S. until the late 20th century, and its earlier occurrences were in contexts that did not communicate the social disapproval inherent to the contemporary terms political correctness and politically correct. In the 18th century, the term Politically Correct appeared in U.S. law, in a political-lawsuit judged and decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1793.<ref>In the 18th century, usage of the term “Politically Correct” occurs in the case of Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 419 (1793), wherein the term meant “in line with prevailing political thought or policy”. In that legal case, the term correct was applied literally, with no reference to socially offensive language; thus the comments of Associate Justice James Wilson, of the U.S. Supreme Court: “The states, rather than the People, for whose sakes the States exist, are frequently the objects which attract and arrest our principal attention…. Sentiments and expressions of this inaccurate kind prevail in our common, even in our convivial, language. Is a toast asked? ‘The United States’, instead of the ‘People of the United States’, is the toast given. This is not politically correct.” Chisholm v State of GA, 2 US 419 (1793) – Accessed 6 February 2007.</ref><ref>

</ref> The first recorded use of the term in the typical modern sense is stated in William Safire's Safire's Political Dictionary to be by Toni Cade in the 1970 anthology The Black Woman, where she wrote “A man cannot be politically correct and a chauvinist too”.<ref>William Safire, Safire's Political Dictionary, 2008 rvd. edn.,, p.556, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0195343344, 9780195343342, google books</ref> Conservatives also trace the concept to the writings of George Orwell, particularly his Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) and Politics and the English Language (1946), in which political control of society and freedom of thought is established partly through control of the language, extolling some concepts and banning the mention of others.

Early-to-mid 20th century

In the early-to-mid 20th century, contemporary uses of the phrase “Politically Correct” were associated with the dogmatic application of Stalinist doctrine, debated between formal Communists (members of the Communist Party) and Socialists. The phrase was a colloquialism referring to the Communist “party line”, which provided for “correct” positions on many matters of politics. According to American educator Herbert Kohl, writing about debates in New York in the late 1940s and early 1950s,


The French philosopher Michel Foucault wrote : « a political thought can be politically correct (“politiquement correcte”) only if it is scientifically painstaking » in the Quinzaine littéraire, N° 46, 1st-15th March 1968. In the 1970s, the New Left had adopted the term political correctness;<ref name=“Perry-1992a”/> hence, in the essay The Black Woman: An Anthology (1970), Toni Cade Bambara said that “a man cannot be politically correct and a [male] chauvinist, too.” In the event, the New Left then applied the term as self-critical satire, about which Debra Shultz said that “throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the New Left, feminists, and progressives … used their term politically correct ironically, as a guard against their own orthodoxy in social change efforts”.<ref name=“Perry-1992a”/><ref name=“Schultz-1993a”/><ref>Schultz citing Perry (1992) p.16</ref> As such, PC is a popular usage in the comic book Merton of the Movement, by Bobby London, which then was followed by the term ideologically sound, in the comic strips of Bart Dickon.<ref name=“Perry-1992a” /><ref>

</ref> In her essay “Toward a feminist Revolution” (1992) Ellen Willis said: “In the early eighties, when feminists used the term political correctness, it was used to refer sarcastically to the anti-pornography movement’s efforts to define a “feminist sexuality””<ref>Ellen Willis, “Toward a Feminist Revolution”, in No More Nice Girls: Countercultural Essays (1992) Wesleyan University Press, ISBN 0-8195-5250-X, p. 19.</ref>

Stuart Hall suggests one way in which the original use of the term may have developed into the modern one:


The term “political correctness” in its modern pejorative sense became part of the US public debate in the late 1980s, with its media use becoming widespread in 1991.<ref name=“Charles-Wartella”>

</ref> It became a key term encapsulating conservative concerns about the left in academia in particular, and in culture and political debate more broadly. Two articles on the topic in late 1990 in Forbes and Newsweek both used the term “Thought police” in their headlines, exemplifying the tone of the new usage, but it was Dinesh D'Souza's Illiberal Education: The Politics of Race and Sex on Campus (1991) which “captured the press's imagination”.<ref name=“Charles-Wartella”/> “Political correctness” here was a label for a range of policies in academia around supporting multiculturalism though affirmative action, sanctions against anti-minority “hate speech”, and revising curricula (sometimes referred to as “canon busting”).<ref name=“Charles-Wartella”/><ref>In The New York Times newspaper article “The Rising Hegemony of the Politically Correct”, the reporter Richard Bernstein said that:

}} Bernstein also reported about a meeting of the Western Humanities Conference in Berkeley, California, on the subject of “Political Correctness” and Cultural Studies that examined “what effect the pressure to conform to currently fashionable ideas is having on scholarship”. Western Humanities Conference</ref> These trends were at least in part a response to the rise of identity politics, with movements such as feminism, gay rights movements and ethnic minority movements. That response received significant direct and indirect funding from conservative foundations and think tanks, not least the John M. Olin Foundation, which funded D'Souza's book.<ref>Wilson, John. 1995. The Myth of Political Correctness: The Conservative Attack on High Education. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press. p26</ref>

In the event, the previously obscure term became common-currency in the lexicon of the conservative social and political challenges against progressive teaching methods and curriculum changes in the secondary schools and universities (public and private) of the U.S.<ref>D’Souza 1991; Berman 1992; Schultz 1993; Messer Davidow 1993, 1994; Scatamburlo 1998</ref> Hence, in 1991, at a commencement ceremony for a graduating class of the University of Michigan, U.S. President George H.W. Bush (1989–93) spoke against: “… a movement [that would] declare certain topics ‘off-limits’, certain expressions ‘off-limits’, even certain gestures ‘off-limits’….”<ref>U.S. President H.W. Bush, at the University of Michigan (4 May 1991), Remarks at the University of Michigan Commencement Ceremony in Ann Arbor, 4 May 1991. George Bush Presidential Library.</ref>

Herbert Kohl (1992) pointed out that a number of neoconservatives who promoted the use of the term “politically correct” in the early 1990s were actually former Communist Party members, and as a result familiar with the original use of the phrase. He argued that in doing so, they intended “to insinuate that egalitarian democratic ideas are actually authoritarian, orthodox and Communist-influenced, when they oppose the right of people to be racist, sexist, and homophobic.”<ref name=“Kohl”/>

Mainstream usages of the term politically correct, and its adjectival derivatives – “political correctness” and “PC” – began in the 1990s, when right-wing politicians adopted the phrase as a pejorative descriptor of their ideologic enemies – especially in context of the Culture Wars about language and the content of public-school curricula. Generally, any policy, behavior, and speech code that the speaker or the writer regards as the imposition of a liberal orthodoxy about people and things, can be described and criticized as “politically correct”.<ref name=“isbn0-595-29797-8”>

</ref> Jan Narveson has written that “that phrase was born to live between scare-quotes: it suggests that the operative considerations in the area so called are merely political, steamrollering the genuine reasons of principle for which we ought to be acting…”<ref>Jan Narveson (1995), “Politics, Ethics, and Political Correctness”, in Friedman, Marilyn and Narveson, Jan (1995), Political correctness: for and against, Rowman & Littlefield. p47</ref>

Liberal commentators have argued that the conservatives and reactionaries who used the term did so in effort to divert political discussion away from the substantive matters of resolving societal discrimination – such as racial, social class, gender, and legal inequality – against people whom the right-wing do not consider part of the social mainstream.<ref>Messer–Davidow 1993, 1994; Schultz 1993; Lauter 1995; Scatamburlo 1998; and Glassner 1999.</ref>

In the course of the 1990s, the term was increasingly commonly used in the United Kingdom, with the expression “political correctness gone mad” becoming a catchphrase, usually associated with the politically conservative Daily Mail newspaper.<ref name=“urlMulticulturalism and citizenship: responses to Tariq Modood|openDemocracy”>

</ref> In The Abolition of Britain (1999), Peter Hitchens wrote that: “What Americans describe with the casual phrase … “political correctness” is the most intolerant system of thought to dominate the British Isles since the Reformation.”

In 2001 Will Hutton wrote:

Similarly Polly Toynbee, writing in 2001, said “the phrase is an empty, right-wing smear, designed only to elevate its user”,<ref>Polly Toynbee, “Religion Must be Removed from all Functions of State”, The Guardian, Sunday 12 December 2001 – Accessed 6 February 2007.</ref> and, in 2010 “…the phrase “political correctness” was born as a coded cover for all who still want to say Paki, spastic, or queer…”<ref>


History of the phenomenon

Whilst the label “politically correct” has its particular origins and history, it only partially overlaps with the history of the phenomenon to which the label is now applied. While the use of “politically correct” in the modern sense is a label dating to the early 1990s, the phenomenon so labelled developed from the 1960s onwards. This phenomenon was driven by a combination of the linguistic turn in academia and the rise of identity politics both inside and outside it. These led to attempts to change social reality by changing language, with attempts at making language more culturally inclusive and gender-neutral. This meant introducing new terms that sought to leave behind discriminatory baggage attached to older ones, and conversely to try to make older ones taboo, sometimes through labelling them “hate speech”. These attempts (associated with the political left) led to a backlash from the right, partly against the attempts to change language, and partly against the underlying identity politics itself. “Political correctness” became a convenient rightwing label for both of these things it rejected.

In the American Speech journal article “Cultural Sensitivity and Political Correctness: The Linguistic Problem of Naming” (1996), Edna Andrews said that the usage of culturally inclusive and gender-neutral language is based upon the concept that “language represents thought, and may even control thought”.<ref name=“cs”>Cultural Sensitivity and Political Correctness: The Linguistic Problem of Naming, Edna Andrews, American Speech, Vol. 71, No. 4 (Winter, 1996), pp.389–404.</ref> Andrews’s proposition is conceptually derived from the Sapir–Whorf Hypothesis, which proposes that the grammatical categories of a language shape the ideas, thoughts, and actions of the speaker. Moreover, Andrews said that politically moderate conceptions of the language–thought relationship suffice to support the “reasonable deduction … [of] cultural change via linguistic change” reported in the Sex Roles journal article “Development and Validation of an Instrument to Measure Attitudes Toward Sexist/Nonsexist Language” (2000), by Janet B. Parks and Mary Ann Robinson.<ref>“Development and Validation of an Instrument to Measure Attitudes Toward Sexist/Nonsexist Language”, Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, March 2000, by Janet B. Parks and Mary Ann Roberton ://</ref>

Moreover, other cognitive psychology and cognitive linguistics works, such as the articles “Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction: An Example of the Interaction between Language and Memory” (1974) in the Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, and “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice” (1981) in the journal Science indicated that a person’s word-choice has significant framing effects upon the perceptions, memories, and attitudes of the speaker and of the listener.<ref>Loftus, E. and Palmer, J. 1974. “Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction: An Example of the Interaction between Language and Memory”, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13, pp. 585–9</ref><ref>Kahneman, D. and Amos Tversky. 1981. “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice”, Science, 211, pp. 453–8</ref>

Consequently, the advocates of culturally inclusive language and of gender-neutral language have proposed that such locutions are necessary, because:

  1. The rights, opportunities, and freedoms of discriminated people are restricted when they are reduced to racial and sexual stereotypes.
  2. Stereotyping is implicit, unconscious, and facilitated by the availability and acceptability of pejorative labels and terms.
  3. Rendering pejorative labels and terms socially unacceptable, the prejudiced users of such language then must consciously think about how they describe someone unlike him- or herself.
  4. Labelling is a conscious action, and the elimination of a stereotype then shows the labelled person’s individual identity as a man or a woman who is unlike the prejudiced speaker.

In the event, the critics of cultural diversity and of inclusive language, commonly oppose the identification of such social power disparities by dismissing the matter as superficial political correctness.<ref>


A common criticism is that terms chosen by an identity group, as acceptable descriptors of themselves, then pass into common usage, including usage by the racists and sexists whose racism and sexism, et cetera, the new terms mean to supersede. Alternatively put, the new terms gradually acquire the same disparaging connotations as the old terms. The new terms are thus devalued, and another set of words must be coined, giving rise to lengthy progressions such as Negro, Colored, Black, Afro-American, African-American, and so on, (cf. Euphemism treadmill).

Practical application

The principal applications of political correctness concern the practices of awareness and toleration of the sociologic differences among people of different races and genders; of physical and mental disabilities; of ethnic group and sexual orientation; of religious background, and of ideological worldview. Specifically, the praxis of political correctness is in the descriptive vocabulary that the speaker and the writer use in effort to eliminate the prejudices inherent to cultural, sexual and racist stereotypes with culturally neutral terms, such as the locutions, circumlocutions, and euphemisms presented in the Official Politically Correct Dictionary and Handbook (1993) such as:<ref name=“”>


  • Intellectually disabled” in place of mentally retarded
  • African American” in place of Black and Negro, in the United States
  • Native American” in place of Indian, in the United States
  • First Nations” in place of Indian, in Canada
  • Gender-neutral terms such as “firefighter” in place of fireman and firewoman, “police officer” in place of policeman and policewoman
  • Value-free terms describing physical disabilities, such as “visually impaired” in place of blind and “hearing impaired” in place of deaf
  • Value-free cultural terms, such as “Holiday season” and “Winter holiday”, in place of Christmas

In the event, opponents of such compound-descriptor words and prolix usages, apply the terms politically correct, political correctness, and PC as pejorative and obscurantist criticism, denoting, and connoting apparently excessive deference to particular social sensibilities, at the expense of common-sense considerations of language, thought, and action. Conversely, opponents of political correctness then employed the term politically incorrect to communicate that they were unafraid to ignore the social constraints inherent to politically-correct speech. From such opposition emerged the culturally liberal television talk-show program Politically Incorrect (1993–2002) and the culturally conservative book series of The Politically Incorrect Guide to a given subject, such as the U.S. Constitution, capitalism, and the Bible.<ref name=“marji ross”>

</ref> In these cultural and sociological matters, the term denotes and connotes that the speaker and the writer use language and proffer ideas, and practice behaviors that are unconstrained by a perceived “liberal” orthodoxy, and by over-sensitive concerns about expressing political biases that might offend people who do not share such cultural perspectives.<ref name=“Perry-1992a”>Ruth Perry, (1992), “A Short History of the Term 'Politically Correct' ”, in Beyond PC: Toward a Politics of Understanding, by Patricia Aufderheide, 1992</ref><ref name=“Schultz-1993a”>Debra L. Schultz (1993) “To Reclaim a Legacy of Diversity: Analyzing the 'Political Correctness' Debates in Higher Education”. New York: National Council for Research on Women. ://</ref>


Exclusion of certain groups

An article by Larry Elder in FrontPage Magazine referred to an incident on Bill Maher's Politically Incorrect where the term “white trash” was used in reference to guests on the Jerry Springer Show and asked 'Why Is It Okay to Say “White Trash?”'.<ref name=“urlFrontPage Magazine – Why Is It Okay to Say White Trash?”>

</ref> Commenting on this, and citing an instance of the term in a glossy magazine, blogger Ed Driscoll asked “Why Is “White Trash” An Acceptable Phrase In PC America?”.<ref name=“urlEd Why Is White Trash An Acceptable Phrase In PC America?”>


In the Civitas think tank pamphlet, The Retreat of Reason: Political Correctness and the Corruption of Public Debate in Modern Britain (2006), the British politician Anthony Browne said that “the most overt racism, sexism and homophobia in Britain is now among the weakest groups, in ethnic minority communities, because their views are rarely challenged, as challenging them equates to oppressing them.<ref name=“bbc”>"PC thinking 'is harming society'". BBC News]. 4 January 2006.</ref><ref>Anthony Browne (2006). ”The Retreat of Reason: Political Correctness and the Corruption of Public Debate in Modern Britain“. Civitas. ISBN 1903386500</ref> Inayat Bunglawala, media secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain, said that the opinions of Anthony Browne were misleading and ludicrous about the societal realities of the peoples who are contemporary Britain.<ref name=“bbc”/>

Right-wing political correctness

“Political correctness” is a label normally used for left-wing terms and actions, but not for equivalent attempts to mould language and behaviour on the right. However the term “right-wing political correctness” is sometimes applied by commentators drawing parallels; one author used the term “conservative correctness”, arguing in 1995 (in relation to higher education) that “critics of political correctness show a curious blindness when it comes to examples of conservative correctness. Most often, the case is entirely ignored or censorship of the Left is justified as a positive virtue. … A balanced perspective was lost, and everyone missed the fact that people on all sides were sometimes censored.”<ref>“Conservative Correctness” chapter, in Wilson, John. 1995. The Myth of Political Correctness: The Conservative Attack on High Education. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press. p. 57</ref>

One example is the Dixie Chicks political controversy, where a US country music group criticized U.S. President G.W. Bush for launching a pre-emptive war against Iraq in 2003;<ref>At a concert in London, on 10 March 2003, they introduced the song “Travelin' Soldier”, they said: “Just so you know, we’re on the good side with y’all. We do not want this war, this violence, and we’re ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas.” {{"'}}Shut Up And Sing': Dixie Chicks' Big Grammy Win Caps Comeback From Backlash Over Anti-War Stance". Democracy Now!. February 15, 2007. Retrieved 24 February 2007.</ref> the remarks were labelled “treasonous” by some rightwing commentators (including Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly).<ref name=DonWilliams/> The newspaper columnist Don Williams said that such criticism is the price for speaking freely about one’s disapproval of the Iraq War, and that “the ugliest form of political correctness occurs whenever there’s a war on. Then you’d better watch what you say”.<ref name=DonWilliams>


Paul Krugman in 2012 wrote that “the big threat to our discourse is right-wing political correctness, which – unlike the liberal version – has lots of power and money behind it. And the goal is very much the kind of thing Orwell tried to convey with his notion of Newspeak: to make it impossible to talk, and possibly even think, about ideas that challenge the established order”.<ref>


Examples of politically correct right-wing language included the U.S. Congress voting to rename its cafeteria's French friesFreedom fries”.<ref>

</ref> In 2004, then Australian Labour leader Mark Latham described conservative calls for “civility” in politics as “The New Political Correctness”.<ref>


Identity politics

The post-structuralist philosopher Julia Kristeva was one of the early proponents of promoting feminism and multiculturalism through analysis of language, arguing (in the word of the New York Times, 2001) “that it was not enough simply to dissect the structure of language in order to find its hidden meaning. Language should also be viewed through the prisms of history and of individual psychic and sexual experiences. … this approach in turn enabled specific social groups to trace the source of their oppression to the very language they used.” However in 2001 Kristeva said that these views had been simplified and caricatured by many in the United States, and that (in the words of the Times) “political assertion of sexual, ethnic and religious identities eventually erodes democracy.”<ref>Riding, Alan, Correcting Her Idea of Politically Correct. New York Times. 14 June 2001.</ref>

Some conservatives argue that the true purpose of “political correctness” and multiculturalism is undermining the values of the Western World, attributing both to what they describe as “Cultural Marxism” (which has only a tenuous link to the Cultural Marxism recognised in mainstream academia). This use is popular among some right-wing English-speaking political pundits, who see themselves in a cultural war with Marxists they believe to have subverted Western institutions like schools, universities, media, entertainment industry and religion. This approach elides the significant philosophical and political differences between the thinkers associated with cultural Marxism (many associated with the Frankfurt School) and proposes that cultural change is brought about by a covert conspiracy of academics rather than, as cultural Marxists argue, by deep-rooted social, political and economic forces. This usage originates with a 1992 essay in a Lyndon LaRouche movement journal, and is covered in Frankfurt School conspiracy theory.

Examples include Patrick Buchanan, writing in the book The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Culture and Civilization (2001) that “Political Correctness is Cultural Marxism, a régime to punish dissent, and to stigmatize social heresy, as the Inquisition punished religious heresy. Its trademark is intolerance.”<ref>Buchanan, Patrick The Death of the West, p. 89</ref> Similarly, University of Pennsylvania professor Alan Charles Kors and lawyer Harvey A. Silverglate connect political correctness to Marxist Frankfurt School philosopher Herbert Marcuse. They claim that liberal ideas of free speech are repressive, arguing that such “Marcusean logic” is the base of speech codes, which are seen by some as censorship, in US universities. Kors and Silvergate later established the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which campaigns against PC speech codes.<ref>Kors, A.C. and Silvergate, H, "Codes of silence – who's silencing free speech on campus – and why" Reason Magazine (online), November 1998 – Accessed February 6, 2007.</ref>


A conservative criticism of higher education in the United States is that the political views of the faculty are much more liberal than the general population, and that this situation contributes to an atmosphere of political correctness.<ref>The Politically Correct University Problems, Scope, and Reforms, Edited By Frederick M. Hess, Robert Maranto, Richard E. Redding, AEI Press, September 2009.</ref>

False accusations

In the United States, left forces of “political correctness” have been blamed for actions largely carried out by right-wing groups, with Time citing campaigns against violence on network television as contributing to a “mainstream culture [which] has become cautious, sanitized, scared of its own shadow” because of “the watchful eye of the p.c. police” – yet it was largely Christian Right groups which campaigned against violence (and sex, and depictions of homosexuality) on television.<ref>Wilson, John. 1995. The Myth of Political Correctness: The Conservative Attack on High Education. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press. p7</ref>

In the United Kingdom, some newspapers reported that a school had altered the nursery rhyme “Baa Baa Black Sheep” to read “Baa Baa Rainbow Sheep”.<ref>

</ref> But it is also reported that a better description is that the Parents and Children Together (PACT) nursery had the children “turn the song into an action rhyme…. They sing happy, sad, bouncing, hopping, pink, blue, black and white sheep etc.”<ref>

</ref> That nursery rhyme story was circulated and later extended to suggest that like language bans applied to the terms “black coffee” and “blackboard”.<ref>

</ref> The ''Private Eye'' magazine reported that like stories, all baseless, ran in the British press since The Sun first published them in 1986.<ref name = “BaaBaa-Bollocks”>

</ref> See also Baa Baa White Sheep.


Among scientists, the correctness of procedure, result, and consequent scientific data derives from the factual truth of the matter, and from the soundness of the reasoning by which it can be deduced from observations, first principles, and quantifiable results. When the publication, teaching, and public funding of science is decided by peer committees, academic standards, and either an elected or an appointed board, the conservative allegation can arise that the acceptability of a scientific work was assessed politically. As such, in What is Political Correctness (1999), the physicist Jonathan I. Katz applies the term PC as censure, characterized by emotional discourse rather than by rational discourse.<ref name=“Katz”>


Conservative and reactionary groups who oppose certain generally accepted scientific views about evolution, second-hand tobacco smoke, AIDS, global warming, and other politically contentious scientific matters, said that PC liberal orthodoxy of academia is the reason why their perspectives of those matters fail to receive a fair public hearing; thus, in Lamarck's Signature: How Retrogenes are Changing Darwin's Natural Selection Paradigm (1999), Prof. Edward J. Steele said:


In The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science (2005), Tom Bethell said that mainstream science is dominated by politically-correct thinking. He argues that many scientists are motivated more by passionate emotion than by dispassionate reason.<ref>


In the book Race, Intelligence, and the Future of America (1995), liberal opponents of the racially-determined-I.Q.-theory proposed in The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life (1994) argued against the conservative and reactionary propositions that genetic determinism explains the statistical intelligence-test-score differences between black people and white people, and thus explained and justified the socio-economic inequality inherent to U.S. society. Moreover, in that matter, the conservatives said that criticism of their racialist and mono-cultural perspectives is unfair, because it is based upon the political correctness derived from a liberal and humanist worldview.<ref name=“urlThe Bell Curve Wars”>


Satirical use

Political correctness often is satirized, for example in the Politically Correct Manifesto (1992), by Saul Jerushalmy and Rens Zbignieuw X,<ref>

</ref> and Politically Correct Bedtime Stories (1994), by James Finn Garner, presenting fairy tales re-written from an exaggerated politically correct perspective. In 1994, the comedy film PCU took a look at political correctness on a college campus.

Other examples include the television program Politically Incorrect, George Carlin’s “Euphemisms” routine, and The Politically Correct Scrapbook.<ref>

</ref> The popularity of the South Park cartoon program led to the creation of the term South Park Republican by Andrew Sullivan, and later the book South Park Conservatives by Brian C. Anderson.<ref name = “anderson”>


Replying to the “Freedom Fries” matter, wits suggested that the Fama-French model used in corporate finance be renamed the “Fama-Freedom” model.<ref>


British comedian Stewart Lee satirised the oft-used phrase “it's political correctness gone mad”. Lee criticised people for overusing this expression without understanding the concept of political correctness (including many people's confusion of it with Health and Safety laws). He in particular criticised ''Daily Mail'' columnist Richard Littlejohn for his overzealous use of the phrase.<ref>


See also


Further reading

External links

Political correctness Etiquette Satire Sociolinguistics Pejoratives

political_correctness.txt · Last modified: 2019/12/05 08:23 (external edit)