I can’t say I’m particularly impressed with this article. It’s basically just a regurgitation of the standard liberal-left line that criticisms of political correctness are merely a case of right-wingers protecting their vested interests by spinning tall tales in order to divide the commoners and distract them from their supposed true interests (meaning liberalism or socialism). In fact, this is the standard response that the Left has always offered to ANY criticisms of leftist authoritarianism (e..g anti-Communists were really just apologists for Western imperialism and capitalist vested interests).
Reasonable people can disagree on how pervasive PC actually is when compared to competing philosophies (like neoconservatism, Christian fundamentalism, the alt-right or whatever). But it’s clear that PC has a very commanding presence in many institutions, particularly academia, most the mainstream media, self-style progressive corporations like Mozilla or Starbucks, mainline religion, etc. Of course, there’s also hard PC (the kind you find among lunatic SJWs on campuses) and soft PC (the kind Joe Biden or Tim Kaine probably believe in).
As a reviewer of my book on this topic recently said:
“Mr. Preston prefers the term “totalitarian humanism” over “political correctness,” though he explains it is not original to him. Its totalitarian nature is clear to anyone who, because of it, has had to face a threat to his job or a demand by a homeowners’ association to remove a Christmas tree, or certainly to anyone who has ever refused to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding.”
We could add to this many other examples such as the treatment of James Watson, Lawrence Summers, Kevin MacDonald, Norman Finkelstein, Brendan Eich, Tim Hunt, Ayaan Hirsa Ali, etc, etc. as well as the fact that alt right groups have to meet in public facilities under police protection. Or the banning of Chick-fil-A in Boston (an irony given the historic meaning of the phrase “Banned in Boston”). Not to mention actual violence carried out by antifa groups.
All of this is not equivalent to Stalinist or Nazi repression, but it’s an indication PC actually exists.
By Moira Weigel
Categories: Left and Right, Uncategorized
This is an interesting article on PC from a right-wing perspective by Angelo Codevilla: http://www.claremont.org/download_pdf.php?file_name=1106Codevilla.pdf
To invert the saying, the best defense is a good offense. When your ideology is based on deceit and a false representation of human nature, it’s in its adherents or opportunists strategic interest not to try to defend it, or defend it only to the extent that the arguments can give the illusion of being sound. Most of the arguments are likely to be refuted since they will mainly be logically unsound from being built upon a poor foundation. It’s best to shift the blame to the opposing arguer, shine the spotlight on their flaws and off of your own. I don’t know if there’s a name for this debating technique. It’s sort of a verbal deflection. Then, opponents of PC have to spend time defending themselves instead of being critical of PC.