Political Correctness: A conspiracy?
Political correctness, which has been a subject discussed between the political parties, has been labeled a conspiracy theory by the Washington Post. Concern has been raised as to whether there are too many restrictions in place and that we as a society are susceptible to losing freedom of speech.
In an article written in the Washington Times, Clifford D. May references George Orwell’s novel, “1984,” which references a dystopian future that invokes “Newspeak,” which in this case is an implied “correct” way of speaking in a political context and inhibits negative speech patterns.
“A future was predicted that a ruling party would develop ‘Newspeak’ as a way to limit freedom of expression and thought,” May quotes Orwell’s “1984”, “In other words, that which is not ‘goodspeak’ is ‘crimespeak.’”
The article further iterates that political correctness is not new, but has been used for centuries. In more recent times, there has been an ongoing battle between the liberal and conservative sides of government.
“The term had for some years been in use to communicate a kind of ‘correct’ attitude toward the problems of the world,” said Richard Bernstein, author of “Dictatorship of Virtue.” “The view that Western civilization is inherently unfair to minorities has been at the center of politically correct thinking on campuses.”
In an article by npr.org, a study was taken from Cornell University where a group of researchers brought together students to plan for an empty restaurant space. In the experiment, a guideline for political correctness was given to one group of students with no such instruction given to the other groups. The results showed the students using PC were able to generate more ideas than those who weren’t. This was accredited to the diversity of students feeling at ease and the fact they were able to express themselves freely.
However, this field of study has very little peer reviewed research, something that is currently being addressed, said Michelle Deguid, a professor of organization behavior at Washington University in St. Louis. The concern, however, is that PC is inhibiting our first amendment within the constitution. In other words, PC is drawing attention away from our ability to speak freely in an open exchange.
Recently in the Washington Post, commissioner for the Federal Communications Commission Ajit Pai, said the country was growing too politically correct for its own good.
“I think it’s dangerous, frankly, that we don’t see more often people espousing the First Amendment view that we should have a robust marketplace of ideas where everybody should be willing and able to participate,” Pai said.
He said people will not be able to speak their minds without being directly suppressed by someone who views their opinion as offensive. The majority of the country already believes there is too much sensitivity.
In an article written by Hannah Fingerhut for Pew Research Center, a poll found 59% of Americans say too many people are easily offended these days over language that others use regardless of the subject matter. Fewer than 39% believe people should be more careful of the language used to avoid offending people with different backgrounds, representing a divide in the American population.
In another article from the Washington Post, the left cries out against the right wing to stop accusing them of runaway political correctness. This is because Republicans have used political correctness in material or speech they deem appropriate. This has included books such as “Harry Potter,” “Twilight” and “Catcher in the Rye.”
What really seems to be the underlying theme in both arguments is what is valued in culture, the right to speak out or caution in speech? Is there a conspiracy to suppress freedom of speech or is PC just the evolution of society?
— jason.crummitt@aggiemail.usu.edu
@jcrummit