Paul Krugman picks up on a trend that's quietly becoming more common: "right-wing political correctness." As Krugman explained it, the goal is "to make it impossible to talk, and possibly even think, about ideas that challenge the established order."
Thus, even talking about "the wealthy" brings angry denunciations; we're supposed to call them "job creators." Even talking about inequality is "class warfare."
And then there's the teaching of history. Eric Rauchway has a great post about attacks on the history curriculum, in which even talking about "immigration and ethnicity" or "environmental history" becomes part of a left-wing conspiracy. As he says, he'll name his new course "US History: The Awesomeness of Awesome Americans." That, after all, seems to be the only safe kind of thing to say.
Looking back at political correctness and its impact on the public discourse, it's probably safe to say those on the left were far more heavily invested in the cause -- the point was to make language more respectful and tolerant of diversity, while discouraging use of bigoted slurs.
But Krugman has a point when he says there's new strand of political correctness that urges Americans not to avoid saying things that might hurt conservatives' feelings, but to choose the phrasing that the right prefers. Even the "fat cat" label apparently makes the very wealthy feel put upon, so we're not supposed to say it.
Mitt Romney has gone so far as to say we're allowed to mention economic inequality, but the discussions must be limited to "quiet rooms" -- where, presumably, rich people won't be offended.
Perhaps the most dramatic example of conservative political correctness came about three years ago.
A few months into the Obama presidency, the Department of Homeland Security released reports about ideological extremists, alerting officials to potentially violent groups and organizations. Republicans and conservative activists were apoplectic -- even though the report was commissioned by the Bush administration, mainstream conservatives decided concerns about violent radicals attacking Americans may have been referencing them. Analysis of domestic threats was ultimately curtailed as a result.
It seemed hard to imagine 20 years ago that political correctness would shift like this, but here we are.
Leave a Comment:
I think i am done. Time to turn in my USA card and move. I cant believe that people can not only be this idiotic but that politicians are so spinless as to follow just because they want money. Romney of all should know now taht he is the GOP's guy that he can tell them to go jump off a bridge and run a campaign he believes in because i garauntee that they will vote Romney over Obama so not like he will lose thier votes.
That's true, I haven't thought of it that way.
I just went along with the notion that he had to please the base and that he'd continue his crazy extreme pandering.
But he COULD run a regular, non-crazy campaign, couldn't he? What else are they going to do? Stay home? Vote Obama (yeah right) so either there's two civilized, honest, useful campaigns that can add ideas to fix this country's woes or Obama wins in a landslide... either would be better than this.
Ah please stay. After all we have the best Government money can buy. Just ask the wealthy owners of the GOP.
I understand politicians and journalists that want to not appear partisan, and want to appear and sane not using derogatory language like: "Romney is lying!" "the Tea Party is a bunch of wackos" "Birthers are racist"
maybe, JUST MAYBE one of those people aren't crazy, evil, liars and then the whole sound argument is lost because of the "leftist bias"
But to not be able to identify lone wolf extremists, to not refer to rich investment bankers (who don't create jobs) as anything other than "rich people" to point out that the stuff Romney is saying isn't true... that's just ridiculous.
I'm glad Obama and some more mainstream journalists are starting to state as much. When liberals got mad at Obama for not flaming the awful GOP congress I let it slide, "he has to be the adult in the room" I told myself, but to walk on eggshells for them is unacceptable.
Please don't feel like you need to walk on eggshells. Conservatives are happiest when the left gives full throated voice to fallen soldiers not being heroic, or "Republicans See Blacks Like Hitler Saw Jews"
http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2012/05/al-sharpton-friends-republicans-see.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2012/05/msnbc-host-chris-hayes-apologizes-for-troop-comments.html
Haven't you been guest of honor at a single car fatality yet, you worthless piece of something I scrape off my shoes?
@shooter242 - That's why the GOP helped create the NAACP and several black universities and colleges in America. Any more clueless assumptions from the left here??
As Usuall the wrong-wing and their commie supporters are bass-akwards !!! Typical !! How Typical !!
The day I ever worry about what some moron stupid enough to flunk the IQ test low enough to be a Republican has to say about anything will be never. In fact, I prefer sticking those scummy little traitors in the eye with a sharp stick whenever I can. I write stuff at a non-political website devoted to a hobby that attracts a lot of older white male wingers, and I always love putting in accurate history in the presentation that I know will give them indigestion when they read it. I remember doing a piece about the 761st Armored Battalion, the tanker's version of the Tuskegee Airmen, and having the idiots flock to the discussion group to say none of what I wrote ever happened, only to have Recognized Experts that even they respected tell them they had their heads where the sun never shines.
Just remember what good fighting Democrats always used to know (taught to me by my great-grand-uncle who worked for Harry Truman): "the only 'good Republicans' are pushing up daisies."
Here we have a good example of why the right is more conscious of how language is used. Is it any wonder the right is a little prickly about labeling? You get what you give.
The right, sensitive to language? Only when it's used against them. Otherwise, it's all about killing, shooting, violence, and any slur they can throw. The GOP is so conscious of others' language because they've patented the nasty slanderous attack, and they don't like others horning in on their territory.
Shooter 242: And you've given enough to be thrown off every other blog you've ever been at, you worthless wingnut scumbag. Even your "tag" shows what you are.
Yeah, those poor old conservatives wanting more civil discourse! When did they become so prissy about the rhetoric used in public? Why it seems just a few moments ago some of them were calling one part of the ACA "death panels" and President Obama was "palling around with terrorists" and President Obama is "not American" and the president is "a socialist with secret plans for after reelection."
Yeah, our loved ones in the far right aisle have been drinking too much Bush-laden koolaid where Dick Cheney is God, voting is reserved for true Americans, and questioning the wealth and business practices of the top 1% is unpatriotic!
The 1%ers seem to be a bit insecure, and I don't know why since they can afford to hire the private militias they seem so much to want! -Kevo
I'm not surprised they want to control the language.
But this South Side Chicago boy ain't having none of it. I'll use the words that are accurate.
And when they challenge me, like Class Warfare, I'll say "you bet your butt it's class warfare. You guys started it and I'm finishing it.
I don't give a rats patootdy what the Righties reaction is.
I learned long ago that Righties are just like alcoholics.
And here's my phone number, in case you've got the family jewels to call me. (773) 206-0008. Which I doubt. Cause you're all a bunch of Spineless Cowards.
And btw, everyone who votes Republican is going to Hell. Jesus told me so.
Not that I believe in Hell, mind you. But I know they do. And that will freak them out.
The fat cat hoarders of wealth, promoters of ethnic and racial discrimination, women hating extremists, science denying and nature raping 1%ers are feeling picked on. Oh the poor babies. I guess I won't be on their mailing list.
Best comment evah! Is this a quiet room?
Shhhhhhh! Smart people are thinking here. Writing, too; thank heavens!
My perspective of political correctness (as one who was in college when it came into vogue) is a little different. I don't think it was ever very useful for the left -- it was already the case back in the pre-Reagan era that national politicians who got caught using racial slurs or telling bigoted ethnic jokes actually resigned, so that was not a product of political correctness. The thought-police attitude of saying not that certain things were offensive and inappropriate, but that only right-thinking statements were "correct", made being "politically incorrect" a badge of honor, rather than just being a bigot.
It was far more useful to conservatives, who have kept the concept alive for decades. When was the last time you heard someone talk about something being "politically correct" except to mock it and rebel against it?
The authoritarian right has always put much more into making it impossible to even say anything against them. Referring to this as "political correctness" gives undeserved credence to their myths about that misguided liberal idea.
One should avoid talking about what Mitt Romney actually did and didn't do at Bain Capital because such talk is now considered to be an unjust attack upon the Free Market. And any mention of his unpopular one-term governorship is deemed below the belt, so one shouldn't talk about that either. And reminding voters of Romney's countless shifting of positions is seen as a personal attack, so that's out of bounds as well. And pointing out Romney's questionable and offensive behavior throughout his life is considered to be historic issues that should be left for history to decide. And no one should raise the issue that Romney received several deferments for a war and a draft that he supported, allowing others to serve and to sacrifice instead, because that would be a deplorable attack upon his patriotism. And no one should mention Romney's taxes or his off-shore accounts or his Swiss bank accounts because that's all regarded as unappealing attacks of envy. And it's considered reprehensible to raise the issue of Romney's Morman faith, even though he has claimed that every decision that he makes is influenced by his faith. And one should avoid pointing out that Romney has said that the Supreme Court should overturn Roe v. Wade, that he wants to get rid of Planned Parenthood, that he supports the Blunt/Rubio ammendment, that he supports a constitutional ammendment to establish the definition of life at conception, endorsed the Ryan budget that ends Medicare as we know it, opposes the Dream Act, and opposes economic equality and marriage equality, because raising those issues would divert attention from the "real issues."
It is also recommended not to mention President Obama's successful mission of taking out Bin Laden, or asking the relevant question of what would Romney have done, because that's considered "despicable.” One should also refrain from talking about how under President Obama's leadership we have seen 26 straight months (and counting) of private sector job growth, because any positive talk about the economy is truly upsetting for many on the right. And one should avoid mentioning that President Obama saved the American auto industry, because on further review, that's what Romney wanted to happen all along when he argued to "Let Detroit go bankrupt." It's advisable to avoid talking about any of the many accomplishments achieved by President Obama and his administration because that is now considered to be divisive partisan politics. And it's also suggested not to remind voters of the historic mess that the Bush administration left behind because that would be playing the blame game.
It's probably best if one just talks about how Romney wonderously "saved" the Olympics. You know, the real issue of the campaign. But by all means, do not delve too deep into the issue, otherwise the uncomfortable inconvenient truths will be considered unfair partisan attacks upon Romney's character.
Woo-hoo - one great comment! Perfecto.
There's now mandatory behavior now that's been going on for far too long. Like mandatory wearing of the American flap pin by anyone that even discusses politics in the media and especially for politicians. It really demeans the flag.
@ DisgustedWithItAlll
Can we assume that by "American flap pin" you mean flag pin?
Yes, I mistyped and didn't check it.
steve, I kind of like "flap."
However, I really can't wait for Colbert to wear one that's 8 1/2" x 11"
Political Correctness was ALWAYS right wing, even when it masqueraded as 'leftist' -- after all, didn't it seem to be a conservative's wet dream: it seemed designed to get all the conservatives' backs up allowing them to denounce whole areas of legitimate inquiry as merely 'PC" making them appear illegitimate (like ethnic studies in Arizona).
Like the New Criticism that Richard Nixon embraces as terrific political tool (it eschewed history, cultural context, biographical context, etc., denigrating narrative and reducing texts to the play of just words, words, words) political correctness has been a major tool of the right wing. And I for one am sick of them.
Here's another phrase that keeps them awake at night:
Eat the Rich.
I vote for the "truth." In my view, nothing is more PC than the Truth. So why play the semantics game.
A rose would smell as sweet by any other name . . . . and it's still a rose even if you call it a weed!
I never liked "Political Correctness".
I always said, "If you add a word like "political" to the word "correct" do you get closer to "truth", I think NOT."
Galileo was politically incorrect. Thing is, he was CORRECT! The Church was wrong.
Is it political correctness or bullying? After all, if you dare to criticize any conservative idea, action or "wrongness," the chorus trying to shout you down, threaten you, intimidate and harass you is overwhelming. That's not political correctness. It's bullying. Everything they say and do is right and woe to those who disagree. It's the ultimate tool of the status quo being challenged.
They, and they alone, are entitled to free speech. The rest of us are out of luck. Look at the plethora of laws that have popped up which have a religious or moral exemption when it comes to harassment, intimidation and bullying in schools. What these laws are saying is: "As long as I say I have a religious or moral objection to ________, I can say or do anything I want -- including physical violence."
Political correctness is about showing sensitivity and tact. What the Right is doing is bullying and intimidation in order to oppress.
It goes further than that, unfortunately. In a real history classroom, an instructor makes an effort to show sensitivity and tact--as you say here-- by contrasting different viewpoints about nearly every subject, whether it's European colonization vs. American Indians losing land and lives; religious theocracy in America under the Puritans vs. comparative freedom under Roger Williams; or military objectives during World War I compared to lingering national responsibilities (like the creation of a tiny country called Kuwait). Even in an environment where it's possible to talk about conservative "like buttons," right-wing students consistently express outrage at "anti-American" viewpoints or at anything that seems "unfair" or "critical" of the wealthy, the religious, or those who oppress the poor.
Those with moral objections to Vietnam war and gathered to protest had the National Guard called on them and as the song to witness that goes "Four Dead in Ohio". Wow, two days prior, the ROTC was burned down, yes, extreme, but National Guard shooting them from a distance after the fact…really? http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-05-03-kent-state_N.htm
Moral objections to racial inequality, people were sprayed with fire hoses and dogs set upon them to terrorize. http://library.thinkquest.org/C0126872/main.php?pic=rtm&left=rtm¢er=alabama&right=rtm
Let's not forget this one:http://blogs.sacbee.com/crime/archives/2012/04/report-uc-davis-pepper-spray-incident-should-and-could-have-been-prevented.html
Those (me) holding signs with No on Prop 8 get hit with bottles thrown from trucks full of teenagers shouting obscenities at them.
No, those exercising free speech are targets for more than a few "free speech" taunts or signs.
Those with other moral objections to abortion or animal cruelty go way beyond free speech to make a major point of repugnant extremist actions, pushing it to bomb and kill.
Conservatives PROUDLY wear the badge of Shallowness.
Don't get much easier for shallow people than : The language of the message is MORE important than the message. Any EXCUSE not to read and hopefully(yeah, right) understand important messages that aren't written in what I call the language of VICTORIAN WIMPY
Form over substance? As long as the form is built right you can use mud instead of concrete?
Letting Republicans pick our choice of words only gives them more reason to think progressives are pushovers. If Obama had used the words "Bush Depression" since day 1, Frank Luntz and the Republicans would have been apoplectic, but unable to get the attention of the voters. It would have set the stage for Obama to move a huge stimulus of infrastructure improvements since voters would see the economic downturn as a major factor that would justify "large scale emergency spending" to put people back to work. Obama minimized the effects when he should have brought a sense of urgency to a jobs bill.
Progressives need to stop battling Republicans with their own words; it is time for progressives to set a new vocabulary. Progressive ideas need to be expressed in their own words. Stop letting the Republicans dictate how an issue is discussed and Luntz loses his battle as a PR man.
I'd like to add to that - please, read or re-read George Lakoff's "Don't Think of an Elephant." I'm sometimes guilty of it myself, but one way the Frank Luntz frame is helpfully perpetuated is when we endlessly repeat the actual deragatory/insane words conservatives use ourselves - jokingly, in rebuttals, casually, in public, in private - see: "job creators," "death panels," "Obamacare," etc. That's helpful to conservatives to have as many out here as possible repeating it, but we don't do our own selves any favors.
Are the Republicans whinning again because the POTUS called Romney's platform "cow pie"? How shocking!
There is a play where the right says you are attacking my rights to discriminate as my heart wishes to put the "other" aside and they must be subjected to my entitlement to be privileged. In other words, my rights trump your rights.
Crying victim while they victimize.
ALL of this could have been avoided if Obama had not done what Pres Gerald Ford did to what happened to "Tricky-Dicky" in being framed for Watergate. If Obama had IMMEDIATELY opened a look into the PAST of why Bldg 7 was NEVER mentioned in 911 report, why Bldgs 3,4,5 and 6 (B5 was 22 Story hotel that remained standing) which were MORE damaged than 7 did NOT "Free-Fall Acceleration" (acc to NIST now) but REMAINED standing...damaged from towers 1&2 being Controlled Explosively demolished in Free Fall Acceleration on top of them, and also where the FRACK where IRAQ's WMDs??? No...he gave Bush-Cheney a "Get-out-of-Accountability" card and the of course the MEANSTREM media ... let ALL that slide AGAIN. Remember what happened to Ford...Goddess I hope that does NOT happen this time...but the BLAME and a NEW investigation should happen when, SenLieberman, Rumsfeld and other politicians and administration officials, even media people...when asked about bldg 7..."I don't recall a Building 7 from 911"...well there was....FLAT FACT BRUTAL TRUTH and not a single sentence in the flea-ridden 911 "Official Conspiracy" and Obama used Bush's own words: "Lets not consider outlandish Conspiracy Theories"... the ONLY conspiracy here is the Government's. PERIOD.
I dare ANY media people ask ANY politician, running, serving, or exiting about what happened to Bldg 7.
I won't hold my breath...and the LEFT...well... all you folks really did just LEFT back then and STILL are gone from the REALITY of FLAT FACTS caught up in the word-play manipulation straight out of another thing besides "The Eagle" tall-ship we took from the Nazi's...proper propaganda.
Now...go back to your popcorn and TV because the LEFT is not "FIGHTING" for "Truth, Justice and the American Way"...
Bob
What the right are doing is nothing new. George Orwell called it Newspeak: deliberately dumbed-down language tweaked to make it impossible to utter or even contemplate 'wrong' thoughts. And the American right has been framing the terms of all political debates for decades, and everyone else falls into line. They say "Life begins at conception!" in order frame an abortion debate, and we respond within that framing by arguing about when life begins. They say that health-insurance reform is socialism, and we respond by arguing about the definition of socialism. They decry class-warfare, and we declare our ardent love for capitalism.
We shouldn't do that. Instead, we should burn their script and dance on the ashes. For instance, just accept the 'life begins at conception' line and flip the question to one of who possesses the competence to make decisions about the course of a pregnancy. Is it the fetus? State legislators? Then who? Or if they want you to run whenever they utter the word socialism, embrace the word and watch their brains seize up.
Whatever the situation, we should also find the response that they will like or expect the least. Whatever trips them up the most. And if their overarching goal is to prevent us from 'offending' them, then just resolve to be offensive. Their poutrage is your friend. Whatever game they want to play, start playing some other game. I've tried it and it works, at least to the extent of escaping the trap they try to set and freeing yourself to argue on your terms instead of theirs.
Hey just ask ANY Republicon...what happened to Bldg 7 of 911 when it was only minor hit and collapsed in 'Free-Fall acceleration" at 5:20 in afternoon EST but BBC reported it falling, with it STILL remaining in the background a full 2o minutes before it collapsed...blaming it on a script screw up does NOT answer the question who WROTE that script ? Were they psychic? Bldg 3, 4, 5 (22 story hotel) and 6 were much more damaged, had greater fires...yet all FOUR of these buildings remained standing and ABOVE ground level. Bldg 5 only lost 2 top floors...so why didn't the same mechanism the Government Conspiracy say happen to these FOUR heavily damaged building?
Ask ANY Republicon or Democrack what the FRACK happened to Building 7...likely as has been shown on video tape...they cannot remember that there even WAS a 3rd SKYSCRAPER that fell on September 11, 2001.
I again won't be holding my breathe for ANYONE to ask those Joker Pokers the question ON VIDEO much less them actually coming up with an answer than the one others have already given.
Bob....:(
They also get in a twist when their Mt. Olympus, (wall street), is correctly called a casino. And a very shoddily run casino it is.
Its called Corpwhoration Crapititialism Control Complex ...
Remember "Mickey's Rules of Three" : Global Domination, Global Reach, & Global Interventionalism EVERY President since the middle of Word War Two when "Washington" grounded these rules into National Security Policy has gone along with this policy in actions, regardless of what they originally, or even in office, may say or have said. They ALL have carried out the will set forth back then.
As I've stated many times, what we have is : Elite Exceptionalist Extitremists ( E^3 ) = Milititary Manipulated Media * Industitrialized Imperial Intitelligence * Corpwhorational Crapititalistic Control Complex.
E^3 = M^3 * I^3 * C^4 ... aka ... “Mickey ... They'll Eat Everything before you knew there was something. Then tell you there was nothing...move along.”
Corpwhorational Crapititalistic Control Complex the new C ^ 4
and as for replying to your direct comment I repeany an Anonymous slogan I saw in a picture at street protest down there and is on-line somewhere:
Wall Street IS War Sreet
Also remember Andrea Mitchell's husband ex-fed chair Allen Greenspan who testified before Congress he's only been right 30% of the time in his career in doing his JOB of creating JOBS while keeping Inflation down.
This company for a bigger 'No-Bid" contract than Haliburton, Blackwater and rest of the War Machine Corpworational name changers in ANY country's histroy and has NEVER...EVER...been audited...it IS a orivate bank and SHOULD be paying taxes...but it NEVER EVERE fets audited...like the Pentacon (no misspelling there on that one).
Good Luck to us all.
Bob
I just love to see Maddow's ratings continue to decline. It wont be long until MSNBC fires her and replaces her with a less angry and shrill commentator.
Yeah, since you're completely wrong and she's one of their best rated people, just go ahead and hold your breath for that.
Paul Krugman is a progressive liberal and an Obammy shill for the White House. No one should take him seriously.