“Political correctness is the military wing of progressive politics”

There are no coincidences. I was just watching Logan’s Run on TV & this was the dialogue:

Jessica: Why do you kill people?

Logan: I don’t kill people, I terminate runners.

And then I ran across this very important article from The Spectator:

Why has political correctness proved so enduring? This is the subject of cover pieces in The Spectator by Brendan O’Neill and Damian Thompson, which follow an article by American liberal columnist Jonathan Chait on the subject.

We tend to think of political correctness as something from the late 1980s and early 1990s but in the internet age it has become more powerful than ever. Chait’s point is that – as Gerry Adams might put it – it hasn’t gone away you know.

This is puzzling because much of the ideology is quite extreme, hysterical or absurd (microaggressions?) and extreme movements tend to burn themselves out or become ridiculed out of existence. The reason for PC’s survival and expansion is curious.

PC is a puzzling term because it describes both a set of views and a mindset for dealing with bad-thinkers. Political correctness is the military wing of progressive politics; sometimes it’s a source of embarrassment to the Left and sometimes its adherents go too far, but in the broader scheme of things they’re all fighting for the same cause. Those with opposing views should be ‘shown the door’ (that is, removed from their jobs, like Brendan Eich).

One way to understand the success of political correctness might be to view it in terms of inclusive fitness: if holding politically-correct views gives an individual an advantage, then more people will come to hold that opinion; even if the benefit is very small, then like a variation of a gene that gives a small advantage, it will spread.

Expressing mildly PC views is most certainly an advantage in academia and the broadcast/broadsheet media on both sides of the Atlantic; having even extreme PC views would not be a disadvantage, while opposing the ideology certainly would be. No one is likely to have to resign for arguing a PC point, in the way that Jason Richwine or James Watson did for making arguments that upset politically-correct dogma.

Read the rest of this article HERE.

(1654 Posts)

THOMAS is an Editor at Conservatives4Palin, and Chairman of the Board for American Grizzlies United. Mr. Schmitz is a Southern California native based in Hollywood. Thomas’ controversial pop culture approach to modern politics delights supporters and offends critics. Mr. Schmitz has been described as, “culturally rebellious”, and a “rebel with a cause”.

Leave a Reply