Monday, October 22, 2007

The Dangers Of Political Correctness

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”…Voltaire

Political correctness is a new philosophy of sorts that was begun back in the 90’s. It stemmed from the over-sensitive nature of Americans and their fear of offending others. People today do not like to face reality and hear how things really are. They dislike it when someone talks in a straightforward manner, and they especially dislike it when opinions, contrary to their own, are expressed. If anyone says anything even remotely controversial with even a slim chance of offending someone else, then they are demonized and regarded as heartless, hateful, and inconsiderate. Yet, look at the response of those who get affronted! Often times these people will go to extreme lengths to silence their opposition, and act in ways so unethical that they would make Bill Clinton wince. Usually these overly sensitive types become so irate, and act so uncivilly that they ultimately end up proving the point of the person they are angered at and thus defeat him or herself. Their infantile behavior would embarrass the most classless and mindless buffoon.

Anytime an ‘opinion’ is expressed there is a chance of offense; this needs to be understood. So rather than promote this ludicrous philosophy of emotional tiptoeing, I intentionally do not make any special attempt to alter my true meaning for fear that it would become so bland that it would have no meaning.

We are not only overrun with a ‘politically correct’ way to speak, but also in which to think. Look at how an elderly person is described these days. They say that he or she is “eighty years young.” When the antonym is used to describe something, then an attempt is being made, by the user, to change the true nature of the definition, the way it is looked at and thought of, and reality itself. This entire new age philosophy is very dangerous because it masks truth and conceals reality. Sadly, more and more people are adopting this ‘politically correct’ way of doing things, and so are easily angered by those who have not and still ‘say it like it is’. It seems that these overly sensitive types want everything to be sugarcoated. Do not get me wrong. I am not condoning the act of being blunt and crude when speaking. Then we would all be like Howard Stern who is to class like Clinton is to morality. Tact must be used, of course.

It is very difficult to find someone plain speaking and who uses (or used) straightforward language. Socrates was a good example of this. He said controversial things in an attempt to get people to think. He never worried about offending anyone because that was a secondary concern to him. Once again, however, he was victimized because of his plainspoken attitude and was killed because of it. Try to look at it as ‘tough love’. Some comments may sting a bit, but it is only in an attempt to stimulate thought. Only the truly primal lose their temper, refuse to listen, and act immorally. By the way, if you think I am comparing myself in any way, shape, or form to Socrates, then you are mistaken.

I realize that I am probably perceived as a right wing conservative crackpot, but there are actually many aspects of the Republican Party, which I do not favor. As I have said before, neither party has all of the answers; I have merely chosen the lesser of two evils. I honestly believe that most democrats have their hearts in the right places and have only the best of intentions. Good intentions, however, can backfire. Democrats want to hand needy people a fish everyday and thereby create dependence. Republicans want to teach people how to fish for themselves and thereby allow for independence (once again, look at it as ‘tough love’). Which philosophy seems crueler? The democrat philosophy may initially sound better, but look at the long-term effects; dependency is at an all-time high and the entitlement mentality in this country is chilling.

Too often shameless tactics are employed in a woeful and desperate attempt to forward an agenda. When people’s ideals are inept and lack merit, then they often resort to being overly vociferous, making exaggerated claims and false accusations regarding their opponents, and even threats and violence! To these sad people I say use logic rather than threats, and attempt civil debate as opposed to childish name-calling, vulgar and threatening notes, and lying. Also, try to remember what country you live in, read the first amendment, and if you have strong feelings about something that has upset you, then handle it in a mature and dignified manner. When you act ridiculously idiotic you embarrass the entire human collective, and you may disprove Darwin by showing that we, as a species, are in fact devolving.

No comments: