• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Political Correctness: A Problem?

A Problem?

  • Political Correctness is opressive.

    Votes: 35 87.5%
  • Political Correctness is only suggestive.

    Votes: 5 12.5%

  • Total voters
    40

grip

Light △ Bender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
26,705
Reaction score
10,334
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I just heard on FOX News that people are taking Trump's anti-political correctness too far. Anyone agree?

I understand social values but this 'speech control' seems like a way of oppressing others. What say you?
 

RJApple

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Messages
111
Reaction score
102
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I just heard on FOX News that people are taking Trump's anti-political correctness too far. Anyone agree?

I understand social values but this 'speech control' seems like a way of oppressing others. What say you?

Free speech covers all speech, save that which amounts to a direct incitation to criminal action; everything else is and should be fair game, regardless of whether or not someone is offended or insulted by said speech. "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." - George Orwell
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
122,648
Reaction score
36,539
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism. PC opposes actions that are harmful to society. If one considers objecting to the use of the word 'nigger' as a pejorative to be oppressive to white people, one is a moron.
 

grip

Light △ Bender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
26,705
Reaction score
10,334
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism. PC opposes actions that are harmful to society.

I had an apartment manager tell me I couldn't use the term 'hoarder', because it wasn't acceptable. This woman has the power to deny me a place to live in the complex if I don't acquiesce to her suggestions. Is that 'free' or 'criticism?'
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
122,648
Reaction score
36,539
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I had an apartment manager tell me I couldn't use the term 'hoarder', because it wasn't acceptable. This woman has the power to deny me a place to live in the complex if I don't acquiesce to her suggestions. Is that 'free' or 'criticism?'

She is breaking the law and that has nothing to do with PC, it's a personal problem of hers. If your best argument is transposing lawlessness with PC, you've no position.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Moderator
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
31,802
Reaction score
35,485
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
"Speech Controls" imply this is some sort of government tyranny, and to that, that doesn't appear to be the case.

Sometimes people don't really understand rights, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from criticism or that you'll be necessarily protected from private repercussions.

Political correctness has been around forever, it's societal norms, and those change and I think it's very uncomfortable for a lot of people right now who suddenly find themselves on the wrong side of whats considered acceptable.

It's a clash and the complainers are simply those on the short end of it.

It's free speech to say you disapprove of homosexuality, and it's equally free speech to suggest someone should be fired from their job for taking that position, as an example, both are totally stupid, but they're both examples of free speech.

But if you think about all the people, due to, say for example, the political correctness of the 1950's and before, who had to suffer and sometimes die, either through external violence or suicide, because they couldn't admit who they were and they could not be with the people they truly loved... It's all about how you want to see this situation.

In 1950, it was totally unacceptable, under threat of violence and social castigation, to say you were gay.

Today, it's not really cool to call someone a faggot.

If that's the new social norm... I can live with that.
 

grip

Light △ Bender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
26,705
Reaction score
10,334
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
She is breaking the law and that has nothing to do with PC, it's a personal problem of hers. If your best argument is transposing lawlessness with PC, you've no position.

If she doesn't tell the truth why she's denied me a lease renewal, where's the evidence of proof for law breaking? You're being naive.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
122,648
Reaction score
36,539
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If she doesn't tell the truth why she's denied me a lease renewal, where's the evidence of proof for law breaking? You're being naive.

So if she denied you housing because you were black, that'd be PC too?
 

grip

Light △ Bender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
26,705
Reaction score
10,334
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
"Speech Controls" imply this is some sort of government tyranny, and to that, that doesn't appear to be the case.

Sometimes people don't really understand rights, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from criticism or that you'll be necessarily protected from private repercussions.

Political correctness has been around forever, it's societal norms, and those change and I think it's very uncomfortable for a lot of people right now who suddenly find themselves on the wrong side of whats considered acceptable.

It's a clash and the complainers are simply those on the short end of it.

It's free speech to say you disapprove of homosexuality, and it's equally free speech to suggest someone should be fired from their job for taking that position, as an example, both are totally stupid, but they're both examples of free speech.

But if you think about all the people, due to, say for example, the political correctness of the 1950's and before, who had to suffer and sometimes die, either through external violence or suicide, because they couldn't admit who they were and they could not be with the people they truly loved... It's all about how you want to see this situation.

In 1950, it was totally unacceptable, under threat of violence and social castigation, to say you were gay.

Today, it's not really cool to call someone a faggot.

If that's the new social norm... I can live with that.

Very eloquent explanation. There are rules of social governance that the majority have adhered to throughout the ages, though I personally prefer more of those from the 1980's, where we seemed to have that fine balance between the differences of the absurd and obscene down pat. Before and since though, we've struggled to find that happy medium as well.
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I just heard on FOX News that people are taking Trump's anti-political correctness too far. Anyone agree?

I understand social values but this 'speech control' seems like a way of oppressing others. What say you?

Political correctness is the process of finding out that what we once thought was perfectly fine and normal is actually quite offensive to certain demographics.

For instance, time was that many - and perhaps most - whites thought the n-word was perfectly normal and acceptable...until we learned that no, it wasn't. Time was that most of us didn't realize that "redskin" was indeed a racial slur and used as such. Time was that it was normal for us men to assume that if a woman was in a really bad mood, it must be "that time of the month". Time was that if a man was homosexual, it was normal to assume that he was a pervert and should be tossed in jail.

The backlash against political correctness is by those who can't get used to the fact that they are no longer the final arbiters of what is and is not acceptable in the public eye. But - to borrow a phrase from the Borg - resistance is futile. Change has come and is continuing like a slow-moving tidal wave, and the only choice one has is whether to surf it...or to sink beneath it.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
16,141
Reaction score
21,231
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism. PC opposes actions that are harmful to society. If one considers objecting to the use of the word 'nigger' as a pejorative to be oppressive to white people, one is a moron.

True.

But as I've argued over and over, words can only harm you if you allow them to. (Or if other's allow such words to galvanize them into wrongful actions.)

Take the "N" word you cite. You do realize that many Black citizens still use it as a pejorative amongst each other and have no problem using it that way in mixed company.

If it were truly so offensive in-and-of itself then no one should be allowed to use it without being charged with a hate crime.

No, society has encouraged Black citizens to react in rage by identifying the term as "fighting words" which allows them to act out with near-impunity if anyone other than a Black citizen uses the term. This thanks to one of the worst assaults on free expression the SCOTUS has every passed: Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942).

That ruling allows all sorts of "justifiable outrage" when hearing something which can be labeled hate speech.

That's how words can hurt you; getting beat up for merely saying them. :roll:

What ever happened to ignoring, debating rationally, or simply waking away?
 
Last edited:

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
122,648
Reaction score
36,539
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Who says she'd offer her real reason?

So, is the problem that she doesn't like the word 'hoarder', which I've never been told is not-PC, or her breaking the law and hiding that? People use every reason to rationalize breaking the law, is everything a problem? You're conflating lawlessness with a movement in order to demonize that movement. Tripe.
 

grip

Light △ Bender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
26,705
Reaction score
10,334
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Political correctness is the process of finding out that what we once thought was perfectly fine and normal is actually quite offensive to certain demographics.

For instance, time was that many - and perhaps most - whites thought the n-word was perfectly normal and acceptable...until we learned that no, it wasn't. Time was that most of us didn't realize that "redskin" was indeed a racial slur and used as such. Time was that it was normal for us men to assume that if a woman was in a really bad mood, it must be "that time of the month". Time was that if a man was homosexual, it was normal to assume that he was a pervert and should be tossed in jail.

The backlash against political correctness is by those who can't get used to the fact that they are no longer the final arbiters of what is and is not acceptable in the public eye. But - to borrow a phrase from the Borg - resistance is futile. Change has come and is continuing like a slow-moving tidal wave, and the only choice one has is whether to surf it...or to sink beneath it.

My problem with *mob think* is that it stomps out individuality and free expression.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Moderator
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
31,802
Reaction score
35,485
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
My problem with *mob think* is that it stomps out individuality and free expression.

If you think Americans have a problem with free expression... I don't know what to tell you mate.
 

grip

Light △ Bender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
26,705
Reaction score
10,334
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So, is the problem that she doesn't like the word 'hoarder', which I've never been told is not-PC, or her breaking the law and hiding that? People use every reason to rationalize breaking the law, is everything a problem?



That's actually a good point and 'no' we can't regulate PC anymore than 'free expression' from the hoards...lol

It's a catch-22 the way you describe it.
 

grip

Light △ Bender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
26,705
Reaction score
10,334
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If you think Americans have a problem with free expression... I don't know what to tell you mate.

Not a problem with allowance as much as suppression from opposing groups.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
122,648
Reaction score
36,539
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
True.

But as I've argued over and over, words can only harm you if you allow them to. (Or if other's allow such words to galvanize them into wrongful actions.)

Don't reduce the social to the personal. Using innocent groups as a pejorative is harmful to society even if an individual can choose to ignore them.

Take the "N" word you cite. You do realize that many Black citizens still use it as a pejorative amongst each other and have no problem using it that way in mixed company.

If it were truly so offensive in-and-of itself then no one should be allowed to use it without being charged with a hate crime.

First, it's about using the word as a pejorative. When blacks use the words regarding each other, they are inherently not using the term as a pejorative against all black people or else they would be insulting themselves.

Second, I don't think you have the slightest clue regarding hate crime in the US. In order for someone to be prosecuted for a hate crime, they must have committed a crime with the motive being to bring terror to the targeted group. Merely yelling 'nigger' while committing battery does not constitute a hate crime. The word could have been used to anger the victim. In order for it to be a hate crime, the crime must have been committed because the target was black.

No, society has encouraged Black citizens to react in rage by identifying the term as "fighting words" which allows them to act out with near-impunity if anyone other than a Black citizen uses the term. This thanks to one of the worst assaults on free expression the Scotus has every passed: Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942).

That ruling allows all sorts of "justifiable outrage" when hearing something which can be labeled hate speech.

You have no idea what legally constitutes hate speech in the US. In order for something to be hate speech there must be a specific threat and a realistic chance of the threat being carried out by others.

Perhaps you should hold off on citing cases until you have some idea what legally constitutes 'hate crime' and 'hate speech' in the US.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
122,648
Reaction score
36,539
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
That's actually a good point and 'no' we can't regulate PC anymore than 'free expression' from the hoards...lol

It's a catch-22 the way you describe it.

The bottom line is, the problem in your described scenario is lawlessness and not PC. A conflating of the two is small-minded rhetoric. As I pointed out, your method of "discovering a problem" could be applied to anything.
 

grip

Light △ Bender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
26,705
Reaction score
10,334
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The bottom line is, the problem in your described scenario is lawlessness and not PC.

No, my bottom line is that PC can be lawlessness, when it's out of control and cloistered. Urgent suggestions from others for me to think different are acceptable but using your influence to punish me for free expression is a 'problem.'
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
122,648
Reaction score
36,539
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
No, my bottom line is that PC can be lawlessness, when it's out of control and cloistered.

Nonsense. Anything can be lawlessness and thereby everything is a "problem". I can't believe you'd buy this small-minded rhetoric.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
16,141
Reaction score
21,231
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Don't reduce the social to the personal. Using innocent groups as a pejorative is harmful to society even if an individual can choose to ignore them.

So you argue. I believe differently. :shrug:

First, it's about using the word as a pejorative. When blacks use the words regarding each other, they are inherently not using the term as a pejorative against all black people or else they would be insulting themselves.

Complete B/S. The use of the word by Black citizens has the same connotation for members of the race as it does were other's to use it...Identifying members as less than worthy of equal respect. Which is why it is used as a pejorative freely amongst the group.

Second, I don't think you have the slightest clue regarding hate crime in the US. In order for someone to be prosecuted for a hate crime, they must have committed a crime with the motive being to bring terror to the targeted group. Merely yelling 'nigger' while committing battery does not constitute a hate crime. The word could have been used to anger the victim. In order for it to be a hate crime, the crime must have been committed because the target was black.

You have no idea what legally constitutes hate speech in the US. In order for something to be hate speech there must be a specific threat and a realistic chance of the threat being carried out by others.

Perhaps you should hold off on citing cases until you have some idea what legally constitutes 'hate crime' and 'hate speech' in the US.

Sorry, but you don't think a group of Black gang members kicking the crap out of a Black citizen while using the "N" word aren't trying to spread terror in their own community? Perhaps it's you who don't understand hate crime, because there is PLENTY of hate involved in such activity. :roll:

I reiterate, if the word is so evilly inciting in-and-of itself, then no one should be allowed to use it. Instead members of the Black community continue to perpetuate it. How about exercising a little self-regulation?
 

grip

Light △ Bender
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
26,705
Reaction score
10,334
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Nonsense. Anything can be lawlessness and thereby everything is a "problem". I can't believe you'd buy this small-minded rhetoric.

I simply believe we should be more inclusive of all opinions, how is that small minded?
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
122,648
Reaction score
36,539
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So you argue. I believe differently. :shrug:

Your reduction of the social to the personal is a clear intellectual flaw, no matter what you believe.

Complete B/S. The use of the word by Black citizens has the same connotation for members of the race as it does were other's to use it...Identifying members as less than worthy of equal respect. Which is why it is used as a pejorative freely amongst the group.

Ignorance. The word 'nigger', when used by others, is the use of 'black person' as a pejorative. If you cannot understand that, perhaps I'm not the person to help you.

Sorry, but you don't think a group of Black gang members kicking the crap out of a Black citizen while using the "N" word aren't trying to spread terror in their own community? Perhaps it's you who don't understand hate crime, because there is PLENTY of hate involved in such activity. :roll:

Terror against a community is not the same as terror against and entire category of people everywhere.

I reiterate, if the word is so evilly inciting in-and-of itself, then no one should be allowed to use it. Instead members of the Black community perpetuate it.

Using the word is not the problem. Using the word as a pejorative against all black people is the problem. Do try to grasp that.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
122,648
Reaction score
36,539
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I simply believe we should be more inclusive of all opinions, how is that small minded?

The rhetoric is small-minded:

1. Person that believes X commits a crime.
2. X is a problem.

Can you honestly see this "logic" and not feel pity for those that ascribe to such?
 
Top Bottom