Political Correctness / Politically Correct

[softwareNerd]

Over the last decade, I've heard the use of the term "political correctness" (PC) as a negative label for certain types of actions. What does it refer to? Some aspects of an act that is labelled "PC":

1) The act is negative (i.e. the labeller considers the act to be wrong)
2) The actor acted primarily to please someone or to stop someone from being offended.

Is the term "PC" a valid one? If so, how would you define it?

Take this example of banned candy! Kraft was makiong candy in the shape of animal road-kill. I didn't know that -- I figure that it appealled to the sense of humor of kids who had gone beyond the "animal candy is cute" stage. Well, a group protested this, and Kraft has stopped making the candy. Would you label this action as "PC"? Is so, why? Is there a difference between "PC" and "tact"?

I am working on a definition... and if I do not find one, I'll conclude that the term is not valid.

Any ideas?

Edited June 8, 2015 by softwareNerd
Updated URL

[DavidOdden]

It originated from Chairman Mao's little Red book, which exhorted the masses to develop correct political thinking (which is therefore Maoist). Being PC means chosing actions because they conform to a particular political ideology (originally Maoism but now it has expanded some). The road kill candy decision was a business decision, but the group stirring up the trouble might have been motivated by good taste on the one hand (which does not count as being PC), vs. an unquestioned political belief that animals have the same rights as humans and exploiting animals is a sin.

Being called PC is a negative evaluation, and amounts to rejecting the validity of the reasons behind a choice. For example, I might mention to someone "They'll be serving PC food at the party", meaning that they will be serving third-world produced organic vegan slop, and they are doing so not because they like the "taste" of third-world produced organic vegan Satan (I can remember the correct spelling, but you know the stuff), but because it's vegan, and organic, and produced by people who suffer. One of these idiots could reply "But I like the "taste" of Satan, which is a feeble attempt to say that their motives were not strictly in service of Maoism and/or its descendants.

[BurgessLau]

Over the last decade, I've heard the use of the term "political correctness" (PC) as a negative label for certain types of actions. What does it refer to?

I have not made a special study of the idea of "political correctness." I do have a personal anecdote to offer as an observation. It might be one element in your search for the referents of PC. (Note that finding the referents, if any, of an idea, must precede defining the idea, in the formal sense of genus and differentia for a concept. See Rand, ITOE, Ch. 5, "Definitions.")

I first heard the term, "politically correct," from liberals not conservatives. The time was the early 1980s, during the Reagan years, I recall, but possibly later. Liberals were starting to use the term as a term of pride and as a label for a positive standard. It was an easy way to label a huge complex of ideas you were supposed to believe and actions you were supposed to take if you were liberal (or further left).

Political correctness, as a phrase, was a way of labeling diverse activities such as: "respecting the environment," protecting "animal companions," and supporting black politicians. (The term "black" has evolved into "African-American" today.)

Another function of the self-applied leftist term was, I noted through observation, not only unit economy, but separation of the good people from the bad by giving a label to the former. This was, I believe, just another symptom of leftist elitism -- that is, the belief that leftists are intrinsically superior.

The liberals I heard use the term used it in an arrogant manner. They were, they implied, morally superior. Conservatives, as they often do, reacted to the non-essential, the arrogance, instead of to the implied philosophy of Marxism that underlay "political correctness" at that time.

Conservatives have, however, been successful in throwing the term back at leftists. The term has now become one of derision, referring to anyone who toes the line and conforms -- not through conscientious belief, but through fear of disapproval by the liberal "public" -- to the set of beliefs leftists happen to approve this year.

I am working on a definition... and if I do not find one, I'll conclude that the term is not valid.

Is this a valid procedure? Is failure to formulate a definition evidence of illogical formation of an idea? Even invalid ideas have referents, usually. The thing that makes certain ideas invalid is that they are formed illogically. An example is an idea formed as a package deal. (See "Packaging-Dealing, Fallacy of," The Ayn Rand Lexicon.)

[Lemuel]

If I had to define the term "political correctness" or "politically correct", I would thus:

The strategic redefining of a word or phrase to suit a particular political agenda held by a person or party.

Yeah, liberals are great at it, but political correctness isn't just a liberal phenomenon; conservatives practice it constantly. Just recently, the term pro-life became culture of life, intending to soften a vigorous anti-abortion stance, while broadening pro-life to include the terminally ill.

Republican pundits will then turn around and invoke an accusation of "political correctness" whenever they feel liberals are attempting the same thing, like calling welfare a social program. (Welfare is a social program! Stop spraying your value-judgements all over me - I'm not an idiot!)

Anything can then become "political correctness" in a perjoritive sense:

- taking a popularly misused term and defining the reality of it (like democracy);

- euphemistic language (Islamic fundamentalist or terrorist, depending on the desired reaction);

- tact (using boy-crazy rather than slut);

- legal responibility (defendant rather than murderer, to avoid slander allegations); and many other things.

A good policy to adopt, in my opinion, is to constantly listen to a speaker and their language, and filter it through their agenda, especially if the speaker is charging another of being "politically correct". The term itself is intended to incite a particular response, so accusing someone of political correctness often is the best example of it's practice!

Edited April 8, 2005 by synthlord