The Inherent Dishonesty of
Politically Correct Thought
I feel a great disturbance in
the force – as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror – and were
deliberately silenced
It is just one example of politically correct behaviour on the part of our
judiciary, and like all the others will be forgotten in a matter of weeks. Our capacity to forget it and “Move on”
is a sign of a deeper malaise that infests every strata of our society and
affects our capacity to make informed judgments about the true state of human
relations both nationally and internationally. Political correctness is not
new. It has a deceitful history
and has helped some of history’s most despicable tyrants to enforce their
particular brand of social engineering.
One must wonder at our amazing capacity to allow
people with certain political agendas to look us straight in the eye and lie,
-- through their teeth. Every day
our politicians hurl accusations of “political correctness gone mad” at each
other and others simply respond with a “scoff.” It all makes no difference, it just goes on. If you object
to a politically correct decision or proposal you are labelled a “racist,” a
“redneck,” or a “bigot” or just plain prejudiced, and the people in power will
scoff at you.
“Politically correct” is a definition of correctness,
not accuracy. Correct means: to
remove errors or defects from, to blame or punish for defects of character or
bring into conformity with an accepted standard.
Accuracy on the other hand, has no definitions. Accuracy means accuracy, no
compromise. To define something as
“politically” correct is to define it as not necessarily accurate but as
“acceptable” to people with a certain view. You need to think in a predetermined way and avoid any
thoughts that contradict the “politically correct” view. Think about this.
“Politically” correct is always a belief, a political view or a dogma, -- never
“factual.”
To me, politically correct thought and dogma means
that the politically correct person must propagate a lie. It is usually a lie that they perceive
as supporting a moral, ethical or political position or dogma that they believe
supports the greater good, or at least their particular good. Other people may disagree but they are
usually called “racists” “sexists” or the more all encompassing “rednecks,” or
“bigots.” You’d think we would be sophisticated enough to be above
name-calling, but we are not. These names, which are in fact non-provable
accusations, serve to isolate and denigrate the dissenter and allow the “politically
correct” person to deal with any debate with the “scoff,” sending the
dissenting opinion off as unworthy of debate. The scoff is in fact an
accusation of thinking in a “defective” way. Although you may try, you cannot prove what another person
is thinking, hence the frequent reference to the “Thought Police” by people
being scoffed at for their opinions. If you can scoff at the opposing view you don’t need
to have considered it, or have cogent arguments at your finger tips.
Another way to look at this, is that political
correctness supports the promulgator’s particular “positive prejudice,” which
may manifest itself as a belief that habitat of "Spirits" must be respected or
that all men are rapists. Before you dismiss this, have a
look at the actual meaning of the word “prejudice”. The usual attitude of the politically correct person is that
anyone who disagrees with their particular politically correct view, is in fact
“prejudiced.” The “Scoff” is often
used to identify a “prejudiced” or “stupid” person. To accuse someone who
disagrees with you of being “prejudiced” means that you don’t believe that they
have anything of value to say on the subject because their disagreement means
that they are either racist, sexist, bigoted or stupid. This means that you have pre judged
them. Look at the meaning of
prejudice again and think about whether you have any “positive prejudices.”
All this has serious social implications for us as
citizens and as members of the "Global European Civilisation." That
title is in itself politically incorrect because it contains the word
“European.” See how it makes you feel a bit uncomfortable, even though
today’s Global Civilisation did in fact grow out of Europe?
An obvious case in point for us in New Zealand is our
amazing acquiescence to the spiritual and cultural gobbledygook offered as
reasons why the dominant European culture should submit to, and commit vast
recourses to appeasing the wildest flights of fancy of the indigenous Maori
people, people who in fact enjoy every day of their lives all the benefits of
the “dominant” culture, provided for them as a matter of right and in many
cases in disproportionate amounts to that given the people of the culture that
provides it. They blithely collect these benefits as citizens in a modern
technological democracy while demanding a second tier of benefits as
“indigenous” people. Those extraordinary benefits always include the most
modern technologies which of course never existed when the two cultures came
into partnership. Most of us object, but it is politically incorrect to hold a
dissenting opinion on the subject, - so we shut up. – We lie by omission.
The European acquiescence that allows this is
attributed to some kind of collective guilt that we all must bear for bringing
civilisation and the global culture with it’s phenomenal range of benefits, to the
stone age cannibals we found living in these cold isles without so much as a
decent blanket to keep them warm, let alone a glass window or waterproof
clothes and a good pair of socks, -- and shoes.
For me and many like me it simply represents the
living of a thousand lies and giving pandering reverence to stupidity and
dishonesty, every day. I am one of
many New Zealanders who are feeling very resentful at the government (and
social) compliance with the never ending demanding and complaining from the
Maori establishment, and the total lack of recognition of the huge benefits brought
to them by European culture.
Aspects of Maori culture are enshrined in law and must be treated with
embarrassing deference and respect while European culture is denigrated daily
by any idiot who wants to slag it off. It is politically OK to do that but politically incorrect to
do the same to Maori culture.
The recognition of my culture and heritage is every
bit as important to me as Maori culture is to any Maori, and it is my culture,
European culture, that provides primary sustenance to both. I want my European
Heritage and culture respected and recognised for the fact that it brings
civilisation to the planet, for the fact that it is the only functioning font
of modern civilisation and for the fact that among other things it has almost doubled
the lifespan of Maori over these last 163 or so years. What greater gift than longer life? Respecting Maori culture is one
thing. Bowing down to it as something
superior is quite another. Now there’s
a politically incorrect statement if ever there was one.
Now, as we enter the twenty first century, it seems
that a new minefield of politically correct thought is making it’s insidious
way into our lives. It is the
notion that no matter what they do, the United States government and the
philosophies and values of Western civilisation are always wrong. To me and millions of people like me in
dozens of nations all over the planet, the United States and Great Britain, and
to a lesser extent greater Europe, represent the cradle of, and the only
defender of, modern global civilised culture. I see Canada joined at the hip with the United States, and Australia,
New Zealand as distant outposts of that global culture. To me these five nations represent an
“Axis of freedom” which I absolutely want to remain part of. I instil in my children the importance
of their European heritage and culture and fervently wish to see them able to
raise their children in the type of environment, and with the values
promulgated in the West.
As I write these words it feels to me, that here in
New Zealand we are letting Western values slip away as we wend our way to a
probable place in the Third World.
As a new member in the Third World cartel of basket case countries, we
will not be regarded with respect by our new contemporaries. They will be suspicious of our recent
membership in the group of nations that they perceive as blameworthy for the
fact that they cannot achieve in the modern world. At the same time we will be regarded with contempt by the
people who lead the First World because they will perceive our decent to Third
World status as an indictment of our pathetic politically correct and
sanctimonious, greenworld cultural policies. If you think that this scenario is extreme you need to look
at our steady decent over the last 3 decades and then extrapolate that trend
into the future. In thirty more years we will be way off the bottom of the
O.E.C.D. scale and our impact on world affairs will be zero except by wining.
As each day goes by we seem to move further and
further away from the values and civilisation of the U.S.A., Britain and
Australia and closer and closer to the tribal stone-age mumbo-jumbo and
disruptive and dangerous ambiance of Zimbabwe, Kenya and South Africa. We
insist on allowing race activists and tribal leaders to wield enormous
influence over all aspects of our economy, social structure and future, even
when almost daily being confronted by their foolishness, contradictions, incompetence
and down right dishonesty. Why is it
that Third World leaders and Indigenous leaders in New Zealand and elsewhere
don’t need to meet the same standards as European or “White” leaders?
In the face of all this there is a new politically
correct dynamic of ambiguity that will have much more far reaching
repercussions. When we talk about
the actions of and events in the Western nations we criticise and apparently
take responsibility in the same breath, by referring to a collective “we.” “We shouldn’t attack Afghanistan.” “We shouldn’t use so much fossil
fuel.” “We should oppose the World
Trade Organisation.” “We shouldn’t
attack Iraq.” “We brought
terrorism on ourselves.” --- We brought terrorism on ourselves??? Isn’t it interesting how we identified
that strongly with the U.S.A. when they were the victims then in the next
breath “We brought terrorism on ourselves?” We (the West) didn’t do something we didn’t know about for
some Islamic killers and they chose to kill 3000 innocent people and destroy
one of mankind’s engineering wonders, terrorise the Western world and “we”
brought it on ourselves??? - then in the next breath, “Terrorism is encouraged
by the policies of American greed.”
Why are we so inconsistent with the collective “we?” Is it reasonable to opt in and then out
of the collective in one statement?
I wonder if the Americans, Australians and British think of us as part
of their collective “We?’
When we make the politically correct statement “We
need to do more for the third world.” What we really seem to mean is that the
United States should do more for the third world because they are the richest,
the strongest, the most generous and the easiest to criticise. We will stand
and watch and pass sanctimonious judgment on the amount given, the way it is
given, how quickly after we think it should be given that it is in fact given,
and if there is any bad outcome as a result of what is given and where, -- and
who was in charge and what negative effect it has on the local economy,
culture, dietary habits, religious beliefs and regional conflicts as a result of well fed third world soldiers
trying to make money out of what is given, and whether the USA was in fact
deliberately trying to bring all these possible negatives about as part of a
giant global conspiracy.
As flippant as these comments may seem they do serve
to illustrate a woolly headed dynamic in our country that we will one day
regret.
Another platitude that we hear every day from
commentators both here and all over the world is “The whole world changed after
September the eleventh.” I believe
that the world had well and truly changed some time before September the
Eleventh, most of us had simply not noticed or maybe even turned a politically
correct blind eye to the events and trends leading up to it that didn’t support
our particular prejudices.
September the Eleventh was simply a defining moment that brought many of
us to the realisation that all was not what we wanted it to be. We now know
that we are all vulnerable and it is interesting how many of our own people
think we deserve to be. Many
people said “America deserved this.” And some even more deluded said “We,”- the
collective “We” again, “We deserved this.” Politically correct stupidity.
September the Eleventh horrified me like nothing else,
but I have to say that I had been expecting it or something like it. What I wasn’t expecting was the same old
politically correct muddled view of it that has emerged in this country and the
world in the wake of it.
I must add here that I felt the attack on the World
Trade Centre in a very personal way as a direct assault on my world, my
European culture and my values. I
felt as a victim of Islamic militancy. I have watched the growth of Islamic
militancy and I have read a lot about it.
One thing that becomes obvious is that within Islamic communities both in
the West and the East there is another form of political correctness at
work. They may not agree with the
militants in their midst but they won’t dob them in or openly criticise them
either. This cloak of politically
correct secrecy provides cover for extremism that is proving a problem to
authorities trying to fight the war on terrorism. I have to say that I have
heard members of the Iraqi community here in New Zealand express the view that
America got what it deserved on September the Eleventh. I would not rely on these people to
expose a terrorist supporter in our midst. Many people are of the view that American policy in the
Middle East is the reason for this hatred but I believe that it is simply annoyance
that the American society works very well and the Middle Eastern Islamic one
doesn’t. Another politically
incorrect statement but there is plenty of evidence to support it.
It seems now that it has almost become
politically incorrect to show support for anything American and many people like
me find that disturbing. My school
age children come home with stories about how George Bush is a war-mongering
maniac who wants to take over the world, and they have developed a hatred for
him and a general prejudice about anything he does and many things
American. They must be getting
this stuff at school and that is a problem that many parents won’t bother
dealing with. I tell my children
about what life was like for us when we lived in California in the late
eighties and try to inform them of the muddled thinking behind some of the
twisted stuff they are bringing home from school.
People who denigrate the U.S. like this are aiming at
a big target. That’s easy. They
should spend some time educating themselves about the realities of life in some
of the smaller targets, individual African nations for example, where the daily
grind of violence, hunger and poverty is amplified by the incredible corruption
of their black (therefore politically correct) politicians. They should read about the dreadful Sharia
and Wahabibi punishments given for very minor offences in places like Saudi
Arabia, Yemen and Iran. They
should ask themselves what is going on in these countries that has created the
massive global migration out of them into the amazingly tolerant nations of the
West.
The politically correct argument is that they have a
right to the freedom and lifestyle available in the West. That’s all very well but the probable
result of it will be decades of social disruption followed by draconian Right Wing
governments coming to power in the West that will bring in a new (and opposite)
political correctness to help preserve their indigenous European cultures.
Anyone who has bothered to turn a non politically correct eye to recent events
in Europe will have seen the move towards new cultural laws designed to enforce
Western cultural standards on the immigrants. This is just the first step. Some of the others in time to come will be less savoury.
In the meantime some of the very positive forces at
work on the planet come from the generosity of both pocket and spirit in the
U.S. People need to be reminded that many of the very good things that they
enjoy every day originate there. National
Geographic, Animal Planet, the Discovery Channel are easy examples of the
American ethos and its view of the planet.
Our children need to know about the Peace Corps,
American aid to impoverished countries, and the fact that the only thing that
guarantees the freedom of millions of people in dozens of countries is the
restraining influence of the U.S. military on ambitious, corrupt and aggressive
regimes. Try to imagine a world
without that restraint.
I have
international students staying with me and some of what they believe about
America is disturbing to say the very least. “America is the enemy and wants to dominate all the people in
the world.” “America steals the
oil and oppresses people in the third world.” “The only thing stopping the U.S. from invading China is the
might of the Chinese military.” “America is trying to impose its culture on the whole world.”
--- They could do worse. -- It fascinates me that they stand before me making
these pronouncements while smelling of McDonalds, dressed in Nike shoes,
wearing Levi jeans and a baseball cap on back-to-front, - all personal choices. These young people have been educated
with politically correct slogans and do not feel the need to back up their
opinions with anything other than the “Scoff.” I tell them that their fashionable need to wear Nike shoes
and Levis is in conflict with their politically correct cultural views. They look at me blankly and I realise
again that a slogan is much more important to some students than actual thought
and experience. I suppose that’s
why the Hippies of the sixties eventually cut their hair.
The upshot of all of this is the disturbing fact that
political correct sloganism is depriving the youth of our Western culture of
the ability to make informed judgments about where we are going. To my jaundiced eye it seems that there
are two new and dangerous forces emerging in world affairs and we mustn’t allow
political correctness to blind us to the realities.
The one that will most surely succeed in the long term
is rampant Chinese (and Asian) economic colonisation and consumerism. It is growing at a rate that is
phenomenal even in modern history.
Note well that approximately 100,000 Chinese and Asians will study English
in New Zealand this year while our children are being taught to speak Maori - a stone age language with a constant supply of made up words emanating out of the politically correct language nest in our universities. What is not growing in proportion to all
this is an Asian ethos that cares for the environment or other cultures. A visit to Taiwan in the nineties
showed me a contempt for the environment that astonished me.
(I wrote this in 2003 - before I travelled to china and discovered that in fact the Chinese were beginning to put a lot of effort into cleaning up their environment - and I assume the same is happening in Taiwan now.)
The other more menacing and far more dangerous force is the
rise of Islamic militancy world wide.
The paradox here is that it has become politically incorrect in the West
to criticise Islam and in fact the Islamic movement is not asked to take any
responsibility for the excesses of some of its adherents. Isn’t it interesting that
Western politicians will stand up and say Islam is a religion of peace when all
the evidence points to the contrary, and in the same breath will label the
Americans as warmongers. I can’t
help but wonder if the population of 9,000,000 Muslims, mostly Middle Eastern,
living in France, and similar populations in Germany, Holland, Britain, Italy,
Austria, Holland and Belgium, instils a fear among Europeans that causes them
to resort to sloganism rather than to speak out honestly. I imagine that some would consider that
speaking out might endanger their lives. Shades of Pim Fortain.
The
appalling record of human rights abuses by Middle Eastern governments has
become something no-one wants to mention, even in the face of citizens of these
nations daily abusing and threatening our Western way of life in our Western
homelands. In England there is an
Islamic Parliament and it is the stated aim of many British Muslims that the
future for England must be Islamic. Polls show that British Muslims will not
fight for England but that they will for El-Qaeda. These Islamics, like the
Maori in New Zealand don’t allow the dynamic of politically correct politeness
to stand in the way of their vitriolic criticism and denigration of European
culture, even as they claim all the benefits of it.
We all need to understand that political correctness
in various forms in the past has been well and truly discredited. It played a vital role in the growth of
McCarthyism in the U.S. in the fifties.
It condemned millions of Jews in Germany in the thirties and forties
when Nazism made it politically incorrect to treat the Jews as equals. Remember
when Chamberlain didn’t want to criticise Hitler and Nazi expansionism?
In Russia in the early part of last century communism
would have never succeeded without the dynamic of politically correct
denunciations of non-believers.
Stalin and Chairman Mao used it with deadly effect to retain control of
their population for most of the twentieth century. During the French Revolution it condemned many
Frenchmen to death at the guillotine for politically incorrect sympathy with
royalty. The Catholic Church used it as the primary weapon to subjugate
populations during the centuries of the Inquisition. The un-provable accusation over the centuries has had many names.
There were Papists, Heretics, Royalists, Tsarists, Jew Lovers then Commies,
sexists and racists. I suppose in
our turn sexist, racist and bigot seem innocuous by comparison, but I believe
that the dynamic, however apparently innocuous, prevents people from reaching a
proper understanding of what is going on around them.
Think about it.
In all these times past people knew they were supporting lies and deceit,
and of course far worse, -- but political correctness guaranteed their silence.
Aside from its basic dishonesty, it is being used to educate our youth with
slogans, and those of us who were around will remember the sloganism that
supported communism. There
will be a price to pay for all this, and as the world moves
towards a
dangerous future, that price will likely be more than we might expect.
Politically correct people hold a prejudice toward
non-believers and believe that they in fact are the doyens of free speech, but
I believe the opposite is the case.
It is a clear case. If you
can’t say it because it isn’t politically correct, then speech is definitely
not free.
No comments:
Post a Comment