To think "politically correct" is one of the most over-used and misused terms around?

[Nennypops]

I keep seeing the term 'politically correct' being used all over the place as a catch-all terms of abuse by people who clearly have no idea what the term means but want to convey that whatever it is that they disapprove is in some way unnecessary, wet, lentil-knitting, left-wing, or even positively harmful.

For the sake of convenience, I'll adopt the definition of political correctness given in Wikipedia - "a term that refers to language, ideas, or policies that address perceived or actual discrimination against or alienation of politically, socially or economically disadvantaged groups. The term usually implies that these social considerations are excessive or of a purely "political" nature. These groups most prominently include those defined by gender, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation and disability."

I accept that it can be valid to criticise over-sensitive concerns about discrimination, but I've seen the term used in defence when someone is called out for blatant racism/sexism/homophobia etc and richly deserves it. It usually signals to me, frankly, that the person in question is even more of an a*hole than their original conduct suggested - they are trying to suggest that they are in some way justified and that complaining is ludicrously over-sensitive.

If I see the term incorrectly used in support of what otherwise might be a valid argument, it instantly annoys me and changes the way I view the person using the term. It tends to be used in relation to things which seem to me to be self-evidently beneficial - e.g. breastfeeding, the right to a fair trial, the right of children not to be left with abusive parents, etc. It is also quite often used for things that have no conceivable element of political correctness at all; I once saw it used in relation to the suggestion that it would be an idea to take an umbrella out when it's raining.

Seems to me that it's time to make the term completely redundant. If you find yourself about to use the term "politically correct" just stop, and find some other way of expressing your views.

'Claig, I've heard it all now. You seriously think that Hitler, Stalin and Catholics like Mary I were politically correct.'

They were different to what we now call political correctness since our orthodoxy is different.

But, yes political correctness started with the communists and they locked up dissidents with politically incorrect thoughts that challengd their orthodoxy and said that they were "philosophically intoxicated" which I believe is similar in meaning to being termed as "politically incorrect" in holding views that oppose the orthodoxy, whatever that orthodoxy is.

I go right back to my first post which quoted from your wikipedia article using the words of the former US Presidential Candidate, Pat Buchanan

"Political Correctness is Cultural Marxism, a régime to punish dissent, and to stigmatize social heresy, as the Inquisition punished religious heresy. Its trademark is intolerance"

"Despite the fact that she very carefully chose to refer to linguistic fascism, not fascism?"

P D James ses political correctness as "linguistic fascism", she sees it as a negative and I think that her "linguistic" means speech as in free speech and that is why she sees it as negative and as being fascistic in the sense that it is totalitarian and does not allow for dissent. She doesn't see it as a good thing that prevents discrimination by restricting offensive speech.

'You think political correctness is a good thing.

Do have a look at my original post and tell me where I said that.'

Sorry, so do you believe like me, Doris Lessing and P D James that it is a bad thing or do you think it is neutral?

There are obviously differences of opinion on what the term means.

I suppose if the same term is used to cover non-competitive school sports, as is used to cover imprisonment of regime critics in the Soviet Union, excommunications by the Catholic church, the oppression of gays in Nigeria or the McCarthy witch hunts in the US, the term becomes to wide to be meaningful.

"the term becomes too wide to be meaningful."

That is why it is necessary to discuss it in the context of the society and orthodoxy that one is dealing with. Orthodoxies change over time, but in our time in our society, our orthodoxy is the one that has the global warming myth as well as other politically correct views.

And the reason it should concern all of us - left and right - just as it concerned Doris Lessing and P D James is because it stifles freedom and tomorrow's orthodoxy may be different to today's.

I think that her "linguistic" means speech as in free speech

Look at the context. She is referring to political correctness in the sense of condemnation of objectionable terms such as yid, Paki, nigger etc. In an interview about it, she said "You've got to just watch your words a bit otherwise you might be called a racist or something of that sort when you were not, you know." In a speech she gave, she said "If in speaking to minorities we have to weigh every word in advance in case inadvertently we give offence, how can we be at ease with each other, how celebrate our common humanity, our shared anxieties and aspirations, both for ourselves and for those whom we love?"

So she's referring it in essentially the way I quoted in the original post.

Claig is of course entirely wrong to assert that "political correctness started with the communists"

That is why it is necessary to discuss it in the context of the society and orthodoxy that one is dealing with.

No, it isn't. . It is necessary to discuss it in the context of its actual meaning, not the meaning you have unilaterally decided to attribute to it. And I mean unilaterally - even James and Lessing don't support you on that.

'So she's referring it in essentially the way I quoted in the original post.'

I hadn't read P D James's article on it. Have you got a link to it?

If that is how she is referring to it then I am surprised because it seems that she is arguing for the right to be offensive, which is not what I believe it is, since I believe that it is more to do with holding views that are incorrect politically in a broader sense than socially.

' It is necessary to discuss it in the context of its actual meaning'

Now we are back to what does it mean. I think it is about more than avoiding offensive language. I won't use P D james as a reference anymore, because from what you said, it seems she may believe that is what it is about. I will go back to Doris Lessing instead

“Political correctness is the natural continuum from the party line. What we are seeing once again is a self-appointed group of vigilantes imposing their views on others. It is a heritage of communism, but they don't seem to see this.”

As far as i understand that quote, Doris Lessing's view is close to my view about what it really is.

'Claig is of course entirely wrong to assert that "political correctness started with the communists"'

PigletJohn, don't listen to me, listen to Doris Lessing

"It is a heritage of communism, but they don't seem to see this.”

I hadn't read P D James's article on it.

I rest my case. You are seeking to interpret her meaning and claim that it supports you without bothering to find out what she was actually saying.

In relation to Lessing, as I pointed out you are assuming she agrees with your interpretation purely because you are utilising a blatant logical fallacy.

He was not politically correct in the sense that we use the term.

Being politically correct is holding views that correctly follow the party line (as Lessing says) or orthodoxy.

A Dily Mail article about MichaelHoward which talks about non-competitive sports and politicl correctness.

"Has Britain gone mad with political correctness?

Tory leader Michael Howard today attacked the culture of "political correctness" that he says is undermining British values.

Ordinary people were being "driven crazy" by the Government's PC meddling, the Conservative leader told an audience in Stafford.

The phenomenon "offends" rather than strengthened the country's tolerance, he said.

His address was pre-empted in part by the Government's call for a return to competitive games in schools .

However, Mr Howard maintained: "In Britain today, political correctness has gone mad. And it is driving people crazy.

"There are so many examples of political correctness, it's hard to know where to start.

"In 2000, a Government-backed booklet warned nursery teachers that playing 'musical chairs' encouraged aggressive behaviour.

" In 2002, the Government advised schools to replace traditional sports days with group 'problem-solving' exercises .

"Of course everyone should be treated fairly and equally before the law. But a culture which fails to distinguish between right and wrong, in the name of equal 'rights' for all, is a distorted culture.

"Political correctness is a culture that offends our nation's sense of tolerance, our sense of honesty, our sense of balance.

"Whenever there is a conflict between political correctness and common sense, let me tell you where I stand. I stand firmly on the side of common sense.

"Common sense, decency, humanity are qualities which the British people have in abundance.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-315533/Has-Britain-gone-mad-political-correctness.html

Shall we use the definition that was used at the outset of this thread (see top of page) or shall we use a definition created by claig?

'I think other people have a different meaning of politically correct to you.'

Yes. I have tried to explain what I believe it is. I agree with Doris Lessing and Pat Buchanan. I think it is about much more than avoiding discriminative and offensive speech.

"Political Correctness is Cultural Marxism, a régime to punish dissent, and to stigmatize social heresy, as the Inquisition punished religious heresy. Its trademark is intolerance"

I think we are going round in circles. My understanding of it is different to yours and nennys.

'So UKIP supporters are politically correct because they hold views that follow the party line.'

No I have already explained that several times. When Lessing refers to the party line she means the communist party line in a totalitarian state i.e. the political orthodoxy.

I think it is the political orthodoxy in society, not at party level

Some people agreed with me. I agree with Lessing and Pat Buchanan too.

I believe that it is about more than your view of it which sems to be about non-discriminatory and offensive language

Global warming, competitive sports days and musical chairs
"In 2000, a Government-backed booklet warned nursery teachers that playing 'musical chairs' encouraged aggressive behaviour."

are nothing to do with discriminatory or offensive language.

I agree with you amicissimma