Political Correctness, An Example…
In as much writing as we’ve done; moreover, the study and research and in particular the case studies regarding political correctness, we have always proffered that the entire notion (of political correctness…) has as its origins the machination of the language that inevitability evolves into a change of the native language. Political correctness is running rampant, and it is absolutely destroying this nation.
If this is the right connection it should be easy to find immediate and at times, extreme examples of what language wise — is acceptable or not socially correct. Therefore we present to you some differences in the primary cultures’ native language which at the behest of the liberal left becomes acceptable. If you say the “wrong thing” in America today, you could be penalized, fired or even taken to court.
Such matters as is one handicapped, challenged, or disabled is anyone’s guess; consequently, we have situations of mass confusion or the inability for people to openly discuss what is on their minds for fear of making a mistake.
So given our first example of one being handicapped, challenged, or disabled here is the breakdown of how this should be construed.
Given a human being who is disabled, many, many accommodations must be made to facilitate their ability to live a life as normal as possible. Therefore these accommodations or handicapped spots are expressly designed to meet their needs. So where does that leave us? Being mentally, physically, or emotionally challenged. In this case “challenged” is designated as a “offensive term.”
In his novel 1984, George Orwell imagined a future world where speech was greatly restricted. He called that the language that the totalitarian state in his novel created “Newspeak”, and it bears a striking resemblance to the political correctness that we see in America right now.
According to Wikipedia, Newspeak is “a reduced language created by the totalitarian state as a tool to limit free thought, and concepts that pose a threat to the regime such as freedom, self-expression, individuality, peace, etc. Any form of thought alternative to the party’s construct is classified as a thoughtcrime.
A thoughtcrime is an occurrence or instance of controversial or socially unacceptable thoughts. The term is also used to describe some theological concepts such as disbelief or idolatry, or a rejection of strong social or philosophical principles.
This process of effectuating language would not be so bad or even destructive if those assisting in the change were held accountable for what it is that they say. Please consider the following true ideologies:
Government workers in Seattle have been told that they should no longer use the words “citizen” and “brown bag” because they are potentially offensive.
A Florida police officer recently lost his job for calling Trayvon Martin a “thug” on Facebook.
U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer is called on athletes marching in the opening ceremonies at the Winter Olympics in Sochi to “embarrass” Russian President Vladimir Putin by protesting for gay rights.
Chaplains in the U.S. military are being forced to perform gay marriages, even if it goes against their personal religious beliefs. The few chaplains that have refused to follow orders know that it means the end of their careers.
The Obama administration has banned all U.S. government agencies from producing any training materials that link Islam with terrorism. In fact, the FBI has gone back and purged references to Islam and terrorism from hundreds of old documents.
Do you think that Hillary Clinton after egregiously breaking the law — clearing her server during an investigation — will ever be held accountable?