An Assault on Political Correctness

1 comment


Let’s start with some terminology.

assault

1. Noun – a sudden, violent attack; onslaught: “an assault on tradition”

2. Verb (used with object) – to make an assault upon; attack, assail.

3. Law – an instance in which a person demonstrates the intent to hurt another and the victim believes that he/she will be hurt.  There is no requirement of actual contact or physical injury, which is why the legal definition is so different than the common English meaning.  There is a subjective element, i.e., that the victim believes that he/she is in danger of immediate harm.

political correctness – “marked by or adhering to a typically progressive orthodoxy on issues especially race, gender, sexual affinity, or ecology. (Dictionary.com).    Or, “Showing an effort to make broad social and political changes to redress injustices caused by prejudice.  It often involves changing or avoiding language that might offend anyone, especially with respect to gender, race, or ethnic background.”

Examples filter across the news seemingly each day of someone or some institution failing the test of political correctness.  As usual, I can’t think of something as I write.  But two come to mind:

1) The revision of any and all instructional materials used to train agents in counter-terrorism, specifically removing any linkage of Islam and terrorism.  It’s true that terrorists act for many reasons.  But, if Muslims are offended at any linkage between the two in recent events, they should look within their faith for solutions.

2) A Catholic student being told to remove the cross pendant she was wearing for fear that it might offend someone.

I don’t need to bore with more examples, I hope.  On the one hand, no one should seek to…

Oh, heck. We interrupt this paragraph for yet another definition:

offendcause to feel upset, annoyed, or resentful.

…deliberately offend others.  And, on the other hand we find tolerance, this Age’s queen of ethical conduct, which demands that people not be offended.  Insert your own Charlie Hebdo opinion here as to which side was wrong and which caused the greater harm in societal terms.  I’m not going there.

Tolerancethe ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.

Toleration is the cure for offending behaviors.  They’re complementary.  They’re both sides of the Coin of Peaceful Coexistence among civilized people/persons/races/etc. who find occasion to disagree.  But, it doesn’t work that way.  Tolerance is not practiced by the movers and shakers of the world, and offenses are not tolerated by the unmoved and unshaken.

There’s a quote I’ve mentioned before, author unknown: “Tolerance is a virtue to those without convictions.”  As pithy as that is, I don’t fully agree with it, but political correctness has hammered into a more observable phrase: “Intolerance is a virtue when others have opposing convictions.” 

It’s really the conviction that’s the problem, isn’t it? 

conviction a firmly held belief or opinion, a feeling of being sure that what you believe or say is true.

I’ll remain focused on religious political correctness, because, I suppose, it’s the least offensive subject that might test the reader’s, eh, tolerance.

God bless America.  Christmas.  One nation, under God.  These archaic terms of an unnecessary or laughable belief system that is endured by the new age masses and sustained only to enrich its leaders and placate the most dimwitted of homo sapiens are on their way out.  Right?

Why? Because both sides have convictions, which is a claim to truth, which, by definition, excludes.  And the seesaw between competing views favors those who by hook, crook, might, judicial appointments, or vocal amplitude and reach claim the opposite pole from meekness, humility, and tolerance.

Okay, folks, lighten up!

All of this is just a preface to some pictures which entertained me on the way to Nashville, TN this week.  I am convicted that these billboards are an assault on political correctness which may offend a subset of those who claim tolerance as their guiding virtue. 

iPhoneJan2015-474-2-2

iPhoneJan2015-471

iPhoneJan2015-491-2

If I needed a gun and lived in Tennessee, I’d buy from these guys, who not only advertise their wares effectively for their target audience but also raise a (very prominent) middle finger, repeatedly, to those who will hate them for it.  No offense.

1 comment :

  1. Nice, BUT, the definition of political correctness does not address the fact that it varies by locale and people factor. For example, those signs in TN do not offend as much as they would on Highway 1 in Kali. Just like a caricature of the pope, any pope, does not offend Catholics to violence as one of mohammed (caps off on purpose) offends muslims.

    I could go on, but it seems to me that it is getting close to the time where we beat plowshares back into swords. If you live in a civilized society, well, you may want to act civilized or face the consequences.

    ReplyDelete