Your Opinion of Political Correctness

[Keyboard Warriors]

Can't we just all agree that Political Correctness is kinda shadowy, totalitarian indirect way, how limit opposition and indirectly control what people say and what they think?

When only one party controlled my fatherland, people knew that party limits their opinions. Now, with so called 'democracy', they are allowed to have own voice, on paper, but if you dare to say something a little more different in any way, your life is quickly harder, and you can quickly even end in jail for 'discrimination', 'racism' or 'insults'.

This 'Indirect way' is very efficient to control population, without permanent danger of coup or revolution.

No we cannot agree on that, because that's not what "political correctness" is.

[Socialist Czechia]

Can't we just all agree that Political Correctness is kinda shadowy, totalitarian indirect way, how limit opposition and indirectly control what people say and what they think?

When only one party controlled my fatherland, people knew that party limits their opinions. Now, with so called 'democracy', they are allowed to have own voice, on paper, but if you dare to say something a little more different in any way, your life is quickly harder, and you can quickly even end in jail for 'discrimination', 'racism' or 'insults'.

This 'Indirect way' is very efficient to control population, without permanent danger of coup or revolution.

No we cannot agree on that, because that's not what "political correctness" is.

Yes, it is. Some people goes even further, claiming that 'political correctness' is actual, real NEWSPEAK.

"Charges of Newspeak are sometimes advanced when a group tries to replace a word/phrase that is politically unsuitable (e.g. "civilian casualties") or offensive (e.g. "murder") with a politically correct or inoffensive one (e.g. "collateral damage"). Some maintain that to make certain words or phrases 'unspeakable' (thoughtcrime), restricts what ideas may be held (Newspeak) and is therefore tantamount to censorship. Others believe that expunging terms that have fallen out of favour or become insulting will make people less likely to hold outdated or offensive views. The intent to alter the minds of the public through changes made to language illustrates Newspeak perfectly."

[Patridam]

You do not define what is and isn't acceptable speech. No one has to cave in to any progress movement, and shouldn't be exiled from public view if they don't.

Even if the speech you express is inherently dehumanising and a call to reduce a whole section of the population to second-class citizenry? There is subjective progress where we can agree to disagree, but there's also equality, tolerance and basic human decency.

Yes. You shouldn't use censorship to enforce human decency, especially since the definition thereof is entirely subjective. The freedom of speech, even when used to say idiotic and indefensible thing, is, IMO, more important to human decency than the consideration of hurt feelings.

[Lleu llaw Gyffes]

To say "Let's murder some darkies." is the crime of Incitement to commit a Felony.

PCers assert that somehow it is better to say "Let's collaterally damage some African Americans."

It is not better. It is exactly the same crime with a government subsidy.

[The Floating Island of the Sleeping God]

To say "Let's murder some darkies." is the crime of Incitement to commit a Felony.

PCers assert that somehow it is better to say "Let's collaterally damage some African Americans."

It is not better. It is exactly the same crime with a government subsidy.

Uh...both of those are an incitement to commit a hate crime, yes. The PC thing would be to not incite a hate crime at all.

[Lleu llaw Gyffes]

To say "Let's murder some darkies." is the crime of Incitement to commit a Felony.

PCers assert that somehow it is better to say "Let's collaterally damage some African Americans."

It is not better. It is exactly the same crime with a government subsidy.

Uh...both of those are an incitement to commit a hate crime, yes. The PC thing would be to not incite a hate crime at all.

So why did PCers invent all these new words "ethnic cleansing", "collateral damage", "extraordinary rendition" if the crime is the same with the NewSpeak words

[The Floating Island of the Sleeping God]

Uh...both of those are an incitement to commit a hate crime, yes. The PC thing would be to not incite a hate crime at all.

So why did PCers invent all these new words "ethnic cleansing", "collateral damage", "extraordinary rendition" if the crime is the same with the NewSpeak words

Is "ethnic cleansing" a PC-ism? I assumed it was just a dumbed-down way of saying genocide. But the point is...well, I can't really see what point I'm responding to. Are you saying that by encouraging more polite speech PC people are somehow encouraging bad things? I mean, obviously you're against the concept, but I can't quite make out how. Might be a reading comprehension thing on my end, I'll admit, but I'd appreciate it if you'd clarify.

[Lleu llaw Gyffes]

So why did PCers invent all these new words "ethnic cleansing", "collateral damage", "extraordinary rendition" if the crime is the same with the NewSpeak words

Is "ethnic cleansing" a PC-ism? I assumed it was just a dumbed-down way of saying genocide. But the point is...well, I can't really see what point I'm responding to. Are you saying that by encouraging more polite speech PC people are somehow encouraging bad things? I mean, obviously you're against the concept, but I can't quite make out how. Might be a reading comprehension thing on my end, I'll admit, but I'd appreciate it if you'd clarify.

Exactly and perfectly so. PC-ism is changing the language.
Genocide is evil. PCers say "ethnic cleansing" is appropriate.
Torture is evil. PCers say "extraordinary rendition" is appropriate.
Cheating at elections is evil. PCers say "hanging chads" is appropriate.

[Des-Bal]

Exactly and perfectly so. PC-ism is changing the language.
Genocide is evil. PCers say "ethnic cleansing" is appropriate.
Torture is evil. PCers say "extraordinary rendition" is appropriate.
Cheating at elections is evil. PCers say "hanging chads" is appropriate.

I'm not sure you understand what PC is.

Ethnic Cleansing isn't a synonym for genocide, if you push an ethnic group out of a territory that's not genocide but it is ethnic cleansing.
Extraordinary Rendition doesn't mean torture, it means taking someone from one country to another illegally and in some contexts doing so for the purpose of torturing them in a setting where torture is legal.
Hanging Chads aren't a form of election fixing they're little bits of paper that brought ballot counting into question.


You didn't use it in this particular quote but collateral damage means hitting something you didn't mean to not killing someone.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Is "ethnic cleansing" a PC-ism? I assumed it was just a dumbed-down way of saying genocide. But the point is...well, I can't really see what point I'm responding to. Are you saying that by encouraging more polite speech PC people are somehow encouraging bad things? I mean, obviously you're against the concept, but I can't quite make out how. Might be a reading comprehension thing on my end, I'll admit, but I'd appreciate it if you'd clarify.

Exactly and perfectly so. PC-ism is changing the language.
Genocide is evil. PCers say "ethnic cleansing" is appropriate.
Torture is evil. PCers say "extraordinary rendition" is appropriate.
Cheating at elections is evil. PCers say "hanging chads" is appropriate.

Erm... I have never heard anyone go "it's ethnic cleansing, not genocide".

Sure, the proper definition of genocide is ethnic cleansing because that is what you're doing, but I don't think one is more politically correct than the other in the examples you have given if we go as far as to say them in order to instill violence.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Is "ethnic cleansing" a PC-ism? I assumed it was just a dumbed-down way of saying genocide. But the point is...well, I can't really see what point I'm responding to. Are you saying that by encouraging more polite speech PC people are somehow encouraging bad things? I mean, obviously you're against the concept, but I can't quite make out how. Might be a reading comprehension thing on my end, I'll admit, but I'd appreciate it if you'd clarify.

Exactly and perfectly so. PC-ism is changing the language.
Genocide is evil. PCers say "ethnic cleansing" is appropriate.
Torture is evil. PCers say "extraordinary rendition" is appropriate.
Cheating at elections is evil. PCers say "hanging chads" is appropriate.

I'm not sure about ethnic cleansing, but "extraordinary rendition" was created by the intelligence community, "Hanging chads" were a description of a controversy regarding what votes could be counted, not election fraud itself, and "collateral damage" is a term created by the military. Unless you are stating that each and every shift in terminology is politically correct, which makes the definition so broad as to be effectively useless, you're simply wrong.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Exactly and perfectly so. PC-ism is changing the language.
Genocide is evil. PCers say "ethnic cleansing" is appropriate.
Torture is evil. PCers say "extraordinary rendition" is appropriate.
Cheating at elections is evil. PCers say "hanging chads" is appropriate.

I'm not sure about ethnic cleansing, but "extraordinary rendition" was created by the intelligence community, "Hanging chads" were a description of a controversy regarding what votes could be counted, not election fraud itself, and "collateral damage" is a term created by the military. Unless you are stating that each and every shift in terminology is politically correct, which makes the definition so broad as to be effectively useless, you're simply wrong.

From where I'm standing it seems more like complaining about terms of discussion that have been well established in academia rather than actual points.

Sure, saying genocide in academia is not the most accurate way to describe the ethnic cleansing that happened in Africa, Europe, and other parts of the world; but nobody has ever argued that it isn't correct to say it, just that it is more accurate to say ethnic cleansing instead of genocide.

[Lleu llaw Gyffes]

Unless you are stating that each and every shift in terminology is politically correct,

I do indeed define PC as each and every change of language with the intention of achieving NewSpeak.

Have you got a better definition of PC

Are you applying no true Scotsman[b][/b] = language changes you approve of qualify as PC, but language changes you disapprove of are suddenly NOT PC

[The Floating Island of the Sleeping God]

Unless you are stating that each and every shift in terminology is politically correct,

I do indeed define PC as each and every change of language with the intention of achieving NewSpeak.

Ah. So when Americans started calling biscuits 'cookies' and chips 'fries', that was an example of NewSpeak PC right? I mean, unless you're being illogical or inconsistent.

[Liriena]

Uh...both of those are an incitement to commit a hate crime, yes. The PC thing would be to not incite a hate crime at all.

So why did PCers invent all these new words "ethnic cleansing", "collateral damage", "extraordinary rendition" if the crime is the same with the NewSpeak words

I'm pretty sure it wasn't "PCers" who invented those words, and "collateral damage" in particular is certainly not a "NewSpeak" word.

[Liriena]

Unless you are stating that each and every shift in terminology is politically correct,

I do indeed define PC as each and every change of language with the intention of achieving NewSpeak.

In other words, anything to suit your self-victimizing reactionary narrative.

[The Floating Island of the Sleeping God]

So why did PCers invent all these new words "ethnic cleansing", "collateral damage", "extraordinary rendition" if the crime is the same with the NewSpeak words

I'm pretty sure it wasn't "PCers" who invented those words, and "collateral damage" in particular is certainly not a "NewSpeak" word.

Yeah. I'm pretty much positive that collateral damage has a meaning unique to it, not just the meaning of a more inflammatory word or phrase. "Accidental murder" would be the closest analogue, but that's far too broad, and "unintended physical damage to noncombatant targets during a military operation" is a bit wordy.

[Lleu llaw Gyffes]

I do indeed define PC as each and every change of language with the intention of achieving NewSpeak.

Ah. So when Americans started calling biscuits 'cookies' and chips 'fries', that was an example of NewSpeak PC right? I mean, unless you're being illogical or inconsistent.

Indeed. They started with apparently innocent Language changes. Nobody gets hurt with biscuits > cookies nor chips > Freedom fries. Then they brought in ethnic cleansing to make genocide look not so bad etc etc etc

[Des-Bal]

I do indeed define PC as each and every change of language with the intention of achieving NewSpeak.

Have you got a better definition of PC

Are you applying no true Scotsman[b][/b] = language changes you approve of qualify as PC, but language changes you disapprove of are suddenly NOT PC

That's the problem, the words your citing aren't being invented to achieve "newspeak" they're being created to describe unique situations.

[Des-Bal]

Indeed. They started with apparently innocent Language changes. Nobody gets hurt with biscuits > cookies nor chips > Freedom fries. Then they brought in ethnic cleansing to make genocide look not so bad etc etc etc

And I feel comfortable no longer taking you seriously.

[Des-Bal]

Indeed. They started with apparently innocent Language changes. Nobody gets hurt with biscuits > cookies nor chips > Freedom fries. Then they brought in ethnic cleansing to make genocide look not so bad etc etc etc

And I feel comfortable no longer taking you seriously.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Ah. So when Americans started calling biscuits 'cookies' and chips 'fries', that was an example of NewSpeak PC right? I mean, unless you're being illogical or inconsistent.

Indeed. They started with apparently innocent Language changes. Nobody gets hurt with biscuits > cookies nor chips > Freedom fries. Then they brought in ethnic cleansing to make genocide look not so bad etc etc etc

By that logic we should still be stuck in Beowulf's English.

[Liriena]

Ah. So when Americans started calling biscuits 'cookies' and chips 'fries', that was an example of NewSpeak PC right? I mean, unless you're being illogical or inconsistent.

Indeed. They started with apparently innocent Language changes. Nobody gets hurt with biscuits > cookies nor chips > Freedom fries. Then they brought in ethnic cleansing to make genocide look not so bad etc etc etc

[citation needed]

[The Floating Island of the Sleeping God]

Ah. So when Americans started calling biscuits 'cookies' and chips 'fries', that was an example of NewSpeak PC right? I mean, unless you're being illogical or inconsistent.

Indeed. They started with apparently innocent Language changes. Nobody gets hurt with biscuits > cookies nor chips > Freedom fries. Then they brought in ethnic cleansing to make genocide look not so bad etc etc etc

See, ethnic cleansing (to me) sounds exactly as bad as genocide (that is, if we're using it in the colloquial sense where it's interchangeable with genocide). If it were replaced with something like, say, "categorical vitality reassignment" then you might have a point, but as of now it's just a technical term.

[Liriena]

Indeed. They started with apparently innocent Language changes. Nobody gets hurt with biscuits > cookies nor chips > Freedom fries. Then they brought in ethnic cleansing to make genocide look not so bad etc etc etc

By that logic we should still be stuck in Beowulf's English.

Could be worse. Could be Welsh.