Political correctness: Difference between revisions
Harrystein (talk | contribs) (Restructuring; Broad rewriting) |
m (→Far-right) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Political correctness''' is the avoidance of speech that could be construed as insensitive to a certain demographic, including the changing of established language because of real or perceived connotations. The term in its current sense became common in the early 1990s.<ref>Richard Bernstein (OCT. 28, 1990), [https://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/28/weekinreview/ideas-trends-the-rising-hegemony-of-the-politically-correct.html?pagewanted=all "IDEAS & TRENDS; The Rising Hegemony of the Politically Correct"], ''The New York Times''</ref> | '''Political correctness''' is the avoidance of speech that could be construed as insensitive to a certain demographic, including the changing of established language because of real or perceived connotations. The term in its current sense became common in the early 1990s.<ref>Richard Bernstein (OCT. 28, 1990), [https://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/28/weekinreview/ideas-trends-the-rising-hegemony-of-the-politically-correct.html?pagewanted=all "IDEAS & TRENDS; The Rising Hegemony of the Politically Correct"], ''The New York Times''</ref> | ||
The movement towards politically correct language can be traced back to the academic [[New Left]] in the United States and its focus on language and the [[humanities]] as a means of social change after the | The movement towards politically correct language can be traced back to the academic [[New Left]] in the United States and its focus on language and the [[humanities]] as a means of social change after the decline of "[[Old Left]]" organisations in the 1970s. {{cn}} The lever of broad-based social struggle was therefore abandoned in favor of [[idealist]] means of social change like sociolinguistics and [[critical theory]] combined with the social analysis of [[identity politics]]. {{cn}} This synthesis of identity politics with language is approaching hegemonic status within the [[liberal bourgeoisie]]s of several developed nations, such as the finance, business, advertising, and technology sectors, and has been transposed into languages like Spanish<ref>''[https://www.fundeu.es/lenguaje-inclusivo/[email protected] La x, la @, la -e.]'' ("The 'x', the '@', the '-e'".) ''Fundación del Español Urgente'' (in Spanish).</ref><ref>[https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https://elpais.com/ideas/2020-06-19/decir-negro-no-es-racismo.html ''Decir “negro” no es racismo''.] ("Saying 'Black' [''negro''] is not racism"), ''El País'' (in Spanish).</ref> and German<ref>''[https://www.derstandard.de/story/2000125170707/sternchen-gender-gap-oder-binnen-i-wie-gendert-mensch-richtig Sternchen, Gender-Gap oder Binnen-I: Wie gendert mensch richtig?]'' ("Asterisk, gender gap or internal 'I': What is the right way to gender?"), ''Der Standard'' (in German).</ref><ref>''[https://www.thelocal.de/20191101/from-frulein-to-the-gender-star-germanys-language-revolution From Fräulein to the gender star: Germany's language revolution.]'', thelocal.de.</ref>. | ||
==History== | ==History== | ||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
==Right-wing political correctness== | ==Right-wing political correctness== | ||
===Far-right=== | ===Far-right=== | ||
Despite their seeming opposition to political correctness, the [[alt-right]] uses a lot of it. This is especially true in the words they use to identify themselves. "[[Scientific racist]]" becomes "race realist," and "[[white supremacy|white supremacist]]" becomes | Despite their seeming opposition to political correctness, the [[alt-right]] uses a lot of it. This is especially true in the words they use to identify themselves. "[[Scientific racist]]" becomes "race realist," and "[[white supremacy|white supremacist]]" becomes “white nationalist” or “identitarian,” “online neo-Nazis” becomes “alternative right.” People know what the former is. They don't like it. As such, new language has to be found. | ||
This effect can be enhanced by being more pedantic about the meaning of words than the average person. "[[Fascist]]s" are members of the Italian Fascist Party, being a "neo-reactionary" is something entirely different. A “Nazi” is a member of the German National Socialist Workers' Party during the Weimar period, or not even that, since they never called actually themselves | This effect can be enhanced by being more pedantic about the meaning of words than the average person. "[[Fascist]]s" are members of the Italian Fascist Party, being a "neo-reactionary" is something entirely different. A “Nazi” is a member of the German National Socialist Workers' Party during the Weimar period, or not even that, since they never called actually themselves “Nazis” in an official sense. In this way they'll try to avoid any epithet that's applied to them. | ||
In order to seem more respectable, far-right propagandists are happy to go along with the euphemistic language of the day. For instance, instead of using their favourite racist pejorative, or simply saying "non-whites", they will likely go for the euphemism "people of colour." {{cn}} | In order to seem more respectable, far-right propagandists are happy to go along with the euphemistic language of the day. For instance, instead of using their favourite racist pejorative, or simply saying "non-whites", they will likely go for the euphemism "people of colour." {{cn}} | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
[[category:ideas]] | [[category:ideas]] | ||
[[category:issues]] | [[category:issues]] | ||
<references /> | |||
Revision as of 04:08, 17 April 2023
Political correctness is the avoidance of speech that could be construed as insensitive to a certain demographic, including the changing of established language because of real or perceived connotations. The term in its current sense became common in the early 1990s.[1]
The movement towards politically correct language can be traced back to the academic New Left in the United States and its focus on language and the humanities as a means of social change after the decline of "Old Left" organisations in the 1970s. [citation needed] The lever of broad-based social struggle was therefore abandoned in favor of idealist means of social change like sociolinguistics and critical theory combined with the social analysis of identity politics. [citation needed] This synthesis of identity politics with language is approaching hegemonic status within the liberal bourgeoisies of several developed nations, such as the finance, business, advertising, and technology sectors, and has been transposed into languages like Spanish[2][3] and German[4][5].
History
Origins
Theory
Political correctness is theoretically rooted in the field of sociolinguistics as well as in the identity politics concepts of microaggressions and marginalization.
Adoption
"Corporate speak"
Carefully manipulated language is a hallmark of corporate publications. In order to appeal to as broad a marketable audience as possible, companies have to choose words in a way that minimises the risk of putting anyone off. Virtue signalling, or the association of a group or brand with a certain cause in order to improve their public image, is another obvious goal. Obvious examples of virtue signalling occurred in the United States during the 2020 George Floyd movement.
Debate
Leftists
Support
Liberals, usually rightists, allege that Marxists and anarchists are responsible for the spread of political correctness. Prominent reactionaries such as Jordan Peterson, himself infamously ignorant of Marxist theory, only contribute to this conflation. In fact, by far the largest proponents of politically correct language are corporations, political institutions, and liberal academics.
Leaving aside this conflation, many leftists do join in supporting the use of politically correct language. It can be argued that simple changes in vocabulary can meaningfully reduce the day-to-day marginalisation of oppressed demographics, such non-white and LGBT people, which is seen to be a worthwhile goal. [citation needed]
Criticism
Critics argue that politically correct language is a veneer which hides real oppression or makes it palatable to the liberal establishment.
Liberals
Anti-PC liberals
As a right-wing talking point
The conflation of far-left politics with politically correct language is a common tactic the right wing uses to delegitimize them both.
Right-wing political correctness
Far-right
Despite their seeming opposition to political correctness, the alt-right uses a lot of it. This is especially true in the words they use to identify themselves. "Scientific racist" becomes "race realist," and "white supremacist" becomes “white nationalist” or “identitarian,” “online neo-Nazis” becomes “alternative right.” People know what the former is. They don't like it. As such, new language has to be found.
This effect can be enhanced by being more pedantic about the meaning of words than the average person. "Fascists" are members of the Italian Fascist Party, being a "neo-reactionary" is something entirely different. A “Nazi” is a member of the German National Socialist Workers' Party during the Weimar period, or not even that, since they never called actually themselves “Nazis” in an official sense. In this way they'll try to avoid any epithet that's applied to them.
In order to seem more respectable, far-right propagandists are happy to go along with the euphemistic language of the day. For instance, instead of using their favourite racist pejorative, or simply saying "non-whites", they will likely go for the euphemism "people of colour." [citation needed]
Right- and left-liberals
Right-wing rhetoric has become refined since the Cold War era, and used to be derided by liberal and progressive journalists; in the 2020s, however, left-liberals have come to adapt right-wing rhetoric for their uses, especially concerning Western foreign policy. Examples of right-wing political correctness include:
- The use of euphemisms when discussing foreign wars: "intervention"; "Saudi-led coalition"; "moderate rebels"; "War on Terror"
- Legitimation, and de-legitimation, of foreign states: "democratic governments"; "Axis of Evil"; "rogue state"; "rules-based order"
- Euphemisms for torture: "enhanced interrogation techniques"; "sleep management" (sleep deprivation); "special renditions" (kidnapping) [6]
- Biased language to refer to contested issues: "war of Russian aggression"; "disinformation"; "conspiracy theory"
- Virtue-signalling language: "Kyiv" for Kiev, and "Kyiv mule" instead of "Moscow mule"[7]
References
- ↑ Richard Bernstein (OCT. 28, 1990), "IDEAS & TRENDS; The Rising Hegemony of the Politically Correct", The New York Times
- ↑ La x, la @, la -e. ("The 'x', the '@', the '-e'".) Fundación del Español Urgente (in Spanish).
- ↑ Decir “negro” no es racismo. ("Saying 'Black' [negro] is not racism"), El País (in Spanish).
- ↑ Sternchen, Gender-Gap oder Binnen-I: Wie gendert mensch richtig? ("Asterisk, gender gap or internal 'I': What is the right way to gender?"), Der Standard (in German).
- ↑ From Fräulein to the gender star: Germany's language revolution., thelocal.de.
- ↑ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/dec/13/usa.humanrights
- ↑ https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/04/business/moscow-mule-kyiv-mule/index.html