Is Political Correctness Correct?

Is Political Correctness Correct?
         The phrase “political correctness” has been around a lot longer than most people realize.  Today the phrase is applied in everything we do, say, or act upon.  In 1793, the phrase was used in the US Supreme Court “to describe something that was not literally accurate, but correct in the political field.”  The definition was changed in the 1970s to include political incorrectness.  In 1991, George Bush senior famously defined political correctness as “a tendency to declare certain topics off-limits, certain expressions off-limits, even certain gestures off-limits.”    The 1991 definition has been taken to extremes.  Today, many people use the phrase to refer to anything they feel offended by hearing.  The real irony is that people who throw the phrase around loosely use it as a crutch to strike out against other people through name calling.

The definition of a bigot is a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion .  When a person uses the wrong “politically correct” word to describe someone or something, the person who is offended claims the speaker is a “bigot.”  Using an offensive word in a negative connotation makes them the “bigot,” because of their intolerant behavior that differs from their belief of what is politically correct or not.

         In order to be politically correct is to slavishly adhere to language that is neutral of any sexist, racist, ageist, or any other “ist” connotations.    Their correct speech is very specific, and to fail to use it is to be a bigot.    Calling an individual white is incorrect, for “Caucasian” is the correct word today.  This does not mean it will be the correct word tomorrow.  The irony here is calling someone a bigot for being politically incorrect.  In other words, if you do not adhere to these rules, others are going to call you a politically incorrect name.  People are expected to be robots and speak only in neutral terminology.  There lies the real secret.  What is neutral terminology and who decides?

         People said what they meant years ago.  If a person was a criminal, he/she was called a “criminal.”  In Mississippi the prisoners want to be classified as inmates.  This does not mean all people in all prisons want to be classified as inmates, just in Mississippi.  People must understand a murderer is sensitive about what he/she is called and we would not want to offend him/her.  We wear our sensitivity on our sleeves and worry about offending anyone and everyone.  Today, “political correctness can mean racism, discrimination, cultural insensitivity, or many other things.”   
Have Americans gone too far by abusing the phrase, giving it more meaning than originally intended?  In short, if someone is offended by anything said, then, the speaker is deemed politically incorrect.  Everything must be said and done to not offend anyone at any time.  Keeping a room of 25 students happy is hard enough.  Now, we are expected to keep 10 million people happy!  If someone wants to discredit a well thought out argument, all he/she has to do is claim the argument is offensive and not politically correct. No matter how logical an argument for or against something is, it will be discarded and thought of as prejudice if someone deems it politically incorrect. 

         Today, many people with hidden agendas use the phrase to rid the world of any idea or thought they do not like or are against.  A huge problem is the prejudice is flowing into our literature of today, and more importantly, of the past.  A book written sixty years ago might use words many people feel are offensive today.  Authors such as Mark Twain have been considered wonderful authors of great literature for years.  These books are written in the style that is correct for their era.  The books are treated as if they are politically incorrect in today’s society.  Therefore, some people want them banned from schools, libraries, literature classes, college classes, book stores, and other public places.  Now, people are against the past and say the past is politically incorrect.  How can the past respond?  It is done and gone.

         “Huckleberry Finn” is one of the most challenged books in American history.  People have tried to sanitize the book of any negative connotations.  Another book is recognized as a popular television show that still airs re-runs; “Little House on the Prairie” by Laura Ingalls Wilder is considered politically incorrect because of its treatment of American Indians.  The book is an autobiography of a place and time in history and the actual events that took place; and even the author did not believe some of the things that happened to people were correct.  Ironically, the people who deem this book incorrect probably do not have problems with these Indians still living on reservations.

         Great literature is not necessarily politically correct; it provokes thought and destroys preconceptions.”… It stirs the mud of our prejudices and forces us to reconsider and reflect, and it does so in a language that stings and delights and exhibits for us the human imagination at full stretch.”    Past literature works are not meant to be changed to accommodate the current reader.  The truth of literature and history can be lost in a pretentious world of words with no real meaning. The truth can be lost forever in a jumble of jargon if people are not careful what they wish for.  The past can be dark and disturbing, but hiding it in flowery words will not change the past. The flowery words will make the past harder to read and understand.  What right does anyone have to rewrite an author’s work because he/she is offended?  Many people feel since the authors of these works are dead and cannot put up a fight it is acceptable to destroy what they created.  Have people gotten that self-centered and conceited?  Yes, people hide the conceit in politically correct words such as translation and rewriting of literary fame.

         Ray Bradbury’s book Fahrenheit 451 has been attacked for being politically incorrect many times.  In the back of the book Mr. Bradbury talks about political correctness.  I believe he sums up politically correctness best with this statement:

There is more than one way to burn a book.  And the world is full of people running about with lit matches.  Every minority, be it Baptist/Unitarian/Irish/Italian/…Four Square Gospel feels it has the will, the right, the duty to douse the kerosene, light the fuse.  Every dimwit editor who sees himself as the source of all dreary blanc-manage plain porridge unleavened literature, licks his guillotine and eyes the neck of any author who dares to speak above a whisper or write above a nursery rhyme….. I will not go gently onto a shelf, degutted, to become a non-book.
Many of the groups Mr. Bradbury mentions would deem this statement politically incorrect because it offends their beliefs.  According to the definition these groups would be the “bigots” because his beliefs are not the same as theirs. 

         America is a land of immigrants from all over the world.  The great thing about America is our freedom to believe and write different things.  I am talking about America’s First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 

I believe there is some good in trying to be politically correct, but there is a fine line. Where we draw the line claiming what is and is not politically correct is the real question.  We all need to remember this is this is the land of freedom.  The thing most people forget is we are ALL free to choose different ideas.

         The movie industry does not have to follow these same rules.  A movie can use discriminating terms, make fun of racial profiling, and poke fun at people with disabilities.  The movies are classified as comedies.  Blazing Saddles, There’s Something About Mary, Bad Santa, and Airplane! are examples of politically incorrect comedy movies that were very successful at the box office.  A movie classified as politically incorrect can be a good thing for the box office.  The more offensive the movie, the better it does at the box office.  Does this mean that people want to really act this way?  If the language and behavior in such movies are offensive in everyday life, should it be considered politically incorrect to go to the theatre to watch these movies?  When the movies are released to DVD format, should the stores selling them be classified as politically incorrect?  I feel there is a double standard.  Why are movies different than literature and speech?

         Even if I try to remain politically correct with my speech, how long will it last?  About a month ago I was watching the news and found out the term “disabled” is politically incorrect.  I have disabilities and did not know I was supposed to be offended by the terminology used here at UALR to describe my disabilities. UALR has a Disability Resource Center and they have not made any changes to their forms.  Am I supposed to be offended if someone says I am disabled?  Instead, people are to address my situation as; I am “a person with disabilities.”  Who sets these rules anyway?  I was not consulted about these new changes. Why are my “disabilities” not significant?  Where is the discussion board for such changes, and do they have regular meetings?  The language today is malleable to what some people think it should become and these people have no concern for other people’s feelings during their rants and rages.  Their agendas are more of a personal attack against one thing at a time.

         People are not robots. Why are we expected to speak in such a way?  There needs to be a sense of checks and balances before things get out of control.  If a group of people does not follow the definition of political correctness, they are considered “bigots”  or worse.  At the same time the maturity of name calling is considered politically incorrect.  In other words, we fight about something being politically incorrect, by acting politically incorrect ourselves.  I am offended if someone considers me a bigot.  People do not have to be politically correct, instead people just need to have manners and know how to be polite.  Opening doors, standing when a lady comes into a room, the words “please” and “thank you” were once commonplace.  Now, if you say something that offends me, you are a bigot.  Which system works better for you?

         Not everybody has the intellectual ability to express their thoughts in politically correct words.  Does this mean their ideas are inferior and we should not listen to them?  Since many people do not have an Ivy League education, should we call them a “bigot” or worse?  If we resort to name calling, then, we are no better than the system we have implemented as Politically Correct. 

Many leaders banned books and people’s rights to decide for themselves.  Some of these leaders still rule countries today, and we deem them politically incorrect. Yet, we are trying to do some of the same things here in America.  We learn from our past, but we want to rewrite the past because it offends us today.  We can rewrite history to make it neutral and unrealistic,  but we are lying to ourselves when we do.  Plus, rewriting history to our version we never experienced is called fiction, not history.  Should we learn from it, or rewrite it?  You decide.



Works Cited
Bauer, Winifred. "A Linguist's View of Correctness." HeinOnline 191 (2011): 187 - 200. Citation. 19 October 2012. <https://www.copyright.com/ccc/basicSearch.do?>.

Berrin Aksoy, Ph. D. "Translation as Rewriting: The Concept and Its Implications on the Emergence of a National Literature." Translation Journal 5.3 (2001): 1 - 10. Journal. 02 November 2012.

Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine Books, 1979. Book.

Curtler, Hugh Mercer. "Political Correctness and the Attack on Great Literature." Modern Age (2009): 272 - 279. Document. 19 October 2012.

Dictionary.com. bigot.Dictionary.com. 01 December 2012. web site. 1 December 2012. <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bigot>.

Farley, Christopher John. "African Americans -- Relations with Jews." Enforcing Correctness 143.6 (1994): 37 - 39. Article. 19 October 2012. <A href="http://0-search.ebscohost.com.iii-server.ualr.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,uid&db=afh&AN=9401317743&site=src-live&scope=site">Enforcing correctnes>.

Frith, Simon. "Political Correctness." Critical Quarterly, vol. 35, no.4 35.4 (2011): 15. Document. 19 October 2012.

Gordesch, Johannes & Dretzke, Burkhard. "Correctness in Language: A Formal Theory." Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 5.1 - 2 (1998): 13 - 26. Journal. 19 October 2012.

Lazere, Donald. "Political Correctness Left and Right." College English 54.3 (1992): 333 - 342. Journal. 19 October 2012. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/378074?origin=JSTOR-pdf>.

McGrail, Mary Ann. "Milton and Political Correctness." The Johns Hopkins University Press 27.2 (1997): 98 - 105. Journal. 19 October 2012. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1566354?origin=JSTOR-pdf>.

National Archives. Bill sof Right. 1 October 2012. Web Site. 30 October 2012. <http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html>.

National Review. "National Review." Medical Correctness (1993): 19 - 20. Document. October 2012.
Regeneration and Renewal. "It's Political correctness gone mad!" Regeneration and Renewal (2007): 1 - 3. Document. 19 October 2012.

Reinelt, Janellee. "The Performance of Political Correctness." Theatre Research Internation 36.02 (2011): 134 - 147. Journal. 19 October 2012. <http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0307883311000216>.
Shafer, Gregory. "Reforming Writing Instruction." Reforming Writing and Rethinking Correctness 94.1 (2004): 66 - 71. Journal. October 2012.

University of Oradea. "Communicative Language Teaching." The Public Administration of Social Policies Review 4.1(8) (2012): 94 - 98. Article.

Vinoski, Steve. "Convenience Over Correctness." Toward Integration (2008): 89 - 92. Document.

Wetering, John E. "Political Correctness THe Insult and the Injury." Vital Speeches of the Day (1991): 100 - 103. Document. 19 October 2012.