A Government in Submission [the U.S. Government]

[Monte_RCMS]

americanthinker.com/blog/2011/12/a_government_in_submission.html

How real is this?

Is it merely bureaucracy?

Can it be reversed?

 

[sedonaman]

americanthinker.com/blog/2011/12/a_government_in_submission.html

How real is this?

Is it merely bureaucracy?

Can it be reversed?

This is often called “political correctness.” Saying certain things is not “politically correct” even though they might be true in fact. And what is “political correctness”?
A crusade to ignorance characterized by a rejection of truth that conflicts with ideology.

Political correctness is government censorship.

Censorship, or government suppression of individual speech, has taken many forms over the years. In times past, government censors banned certain books and movies. Today, the prominent form of censorship is popularly known as “political correctness.”

Traditional morality of a person used to be determined by his actions. Now it is judged by the political causes he supports. Political correctness is a secular dogma that defines as morally wrong any opposition to the myriad of politically “in” causes of the day. Political correctness often asserts itself in education in active discouragement of, or open hostility to, certain issues opposed by schools. This is clearly the antithesis of the “freedom of speech” protected by the First Amendment and is diametrically opposed to the pursuit of truth. Those in high positions, be they government or industry, are coerced into supporting causes they wouldn’t absent the coercion. Thus, they are prohibited from saying certain things, as stated in your referenced article.

Political correctness is not really a new phenomenon. Those familiar with Hans Christian Anderson’s The Emperor’s New Clothes will recognize it as the theme of the story.

Political correctness is self-censorship.

Since public schools were established to promote knowledge and seek truth and have authority behind them, anyone who disagrees with the current orthodoxy is naturally looked upon as unenlightened, uneducated, and an outcast – a defier of authority – especially when the subject involves the feelings of a favored group. Who wants that stigma? No one, so political correctness with the educational system behind it becomes a particularly insidious form of censorship because it forces the individual to pretend he doesn’t know something he that he really does, namely that the ideology being promoted is not true.

In politics, language is key, and he who controls the language controls – or at least better influences – the debate. Political correctness is a method of silencing the opposition by threatening ostracism. Socialist forces are winning the word war. And it’s imperative that they do, considering the poisonous snake oil they’re trying to sell to the electorate. As George Orwell wrote:

In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. … Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism., question-begging, and sheer cloudy vagueness. … Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them. Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, “I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so.” Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:
“While freely conceding that the Soviet regime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement.”