Is Politcal Correctness a Form of Persecution?

United States
October 24, 2006 8:50am CST
I’ve recently been asked in an email the question of whether or not political correctness is persecution? To begin to address this question, it must first be understood that the recent phenomenon of political correctness originates strictly within the overbearing and inherently non-democratic court of social opinion, at least in its current stage of development, generally speaking. However, it’s possible discern how it naturally devolves into an accepted concept of instilled social etiquette or even now, unwritten law, propagated by those who, obscurantly espouse its austere dictatorial tenants of intellectual constriction and will subsequently benefit from its installation into the malleable and often communal mind of the accepting mass population. The purpose of this emerging societal mechanism is to effectively marginalize and silence any dissident voices that run contrary to the official codex of what is deemed 'politically correct'. Kid yourself not that such a codified manifesto does exist in one form or another. Anything perceived as outside the ever narrowing parameters of the 'politically correct' is libeled as retrograde thinking, hate speech, or still worse. Those who practice “politically incorrect” activities are reviled as loathsome pariahs of the first order. In fact, this very analysis would be regard as a politically incorrect endeavor, as it seeks to challenge the very dogmatism and nefarious intent of that which is often marketed as so-called ‘progressive thinking’. The rather innocuous term itself, 'politically correct', is therefore a misnomer of sorts and ought not to be regarded as anything other than a artfully deceptive euphemism for a truly tyrannical yolk imposed upon the freedom of speech/thought without any kind of legislative basis to substantiate its actualization. However, without a legislative foundation, there exist no regulatory checks and balances other than what increments of infusion society will tolerate of it over the course of time. Thus, its possible encroachments upon personal freedom are conceivably without limits. The subsequent and more subversive element underpinning this ideal of 'political correctness' consists of the ultimate intention of exacting not only absolute control on what can be said, but also on what is even permissible to think. By existing and acting within this so-called court of social opinion, it deviously circumvents the necessity of becoming law or be restricted by law and yet possesses the same level of cultural influence, if not more since it's become so pervasive in the fabric of vogue cosmopolitan society. Over time, manifestations of the politically correct agenda do become apparent in laws, but only after its influence on society at large has sufficiently mobilized the proper governmental machinery to respond to these sweeping changes in the tide of social opinion. Although, not its most insidious attribute, political correctness is a by all means a manner of intellectual persecution. More importantly to recognize here though is its underlying purpose, which is to quietly subvert the very Constitution itself and the Bill of Rights, resulting in the systematic elimination of our freedoms in America; the endgame of the globally networked hard communist left and strangely allowed to promulgate under the gross complacency and ineptitude of the false right. Why this angle, you may ask? Why not a more direct assault on our basic liberties? It's simply far too difficult to destroy a nation like ours through external military and or economic forces but to putrefy one from within is quite another matter entirely. Therefore, the word persecution does not accurately capture the varied dynamics of political correctness. A more appropriate term would be, “politically adjusted thought treatment”. Political correctness is thus a form of preparation for the masses, such that, in time, they can be easily reigned in and ruled without any significant intellectual obstruction or resistance. Orwell comes to mind as the realization is made that this phenomenon constitutes the groundwork for the State itself to one day acquire the status of sole intellectual agency required by law. 1984 approaches.
1 person likes this
4 responses
• United States
20 Jan 07
I just wanted to say that I truly appreciated your posting. Most of the minds on here are far too dumbed down to begin to contemplate this. Thanks for the good read.
• United States
21 Feb 07
Thanks for your kind compliments. I actually posted this question prior to fully recognizing how idiotic this myLot forum truly is with its endless inane banality and mind numbing tedium. It took months before anyone bothered writing in response to this issue presented here.
@nw1911guy (1134)
• United States
7 Feb 07
Very very nicely put. I hadn't thought about that angle before but it makes a lot of sense. Again, one of the most masterfully written pieces I've seen on here.
2 people like this
@Netsbridge (3242)
• United States
7 Feb 07
Political correctnes is often an insecure person's way of addressing matters. This style is also employed when people fear for their lives because of political situations in their nations, since one can always allege that one actually meant such and such. I, however, prefer calling a spade a spade.
• United States
8 Feb 07
this is frightening stuff, and i do see it. already smokers are marginalized and picked on. who's next? fat people? the internet is probably the last chance for freedom's gas.