You are on page 1of 4

Political Correctness

by Philip Atkinson

What Is Political Correctness?

Political Correctness (PC) is the communal tyranny that erupted in the 1980s. It was a
spontaneous declaration that particular ideas, expressions and behaviour, which were
then legal, should be forbidden by law, and people who transgressed should be
punished. (see Newspeak) It started with a few voices but grew in popularity until it
became unwritten and written law within the community. With those who were publicly
declared as being not politically correct becoming the object of persecution by the mob,
if not prosecution by the state.

The Odious Nature Of Political Correctness

To attempt to point out the odious nature of Political Correctness is to restate the
crucial importance of plain speaking, freedom of choice and freedom of speech; these
are the community's safe-guards against the imposition of tyranny, indeed their
absence is tyranny (see "On Liberty", Chapter II, by J.S. Mill). Which is why any such
restrictions on expression such as those invoked by the laws of libel, slander and public
decency, are grave matters to be decided by common law methodology; not by the
dictates of the mob.

Clear Inspiration For Political Correctness

The declared rational of this tyranny is to prevent people being offended; to compel
everyone to avoid using words or behaviour that may upset homosexuals, women, non-
whites, the crippled, the stupid, the fat or the ugly. This reveals not only its absurdity
but its inspiration. The set of values that are detested are those held by the previous
generation (those who fought the Second World War), which is why the terms niggers,
coons, dagos, wogs, poofs, spastics and sheilas, have become heresy, for, in an act of
infantile rebellion, their subject have become revered by the new generation. Political
Correctness is merely the resentment of spoilt children directed against their parent's

The Origins Of Political Correctness

A community declines when the majority of its citizens become selfish, and under this
influence it slowly dismantles all the restraints upon self-indulgence established by
manners, customs, beliefs and law: tradition. (See the law of reverse civilization) As
each subsequent generation of selfish citizens inherits control of the community, it
takes its opportunity to abandon more of the irksome restraints that genius and wisdom
had installed. The proponents of this social demolition achieve their irrational purpose
by publicly embracing absurdity through slogans while vilifying any who do not support
their stance. The purpose of the slogan is to enshrine irrational fears, or fancies, as
truth through the use of presumptuous words, so public pronouncement:

 Dissembles the real nature of the claim

 Identifies any dissenters as enemies of the truth
 Acts as an excuse for any crimes committed in its name
For example the slogan Australia is Multicultural is a claim that:

 Different cultures are compatible.

 People who contradict this claim are blinded by prejudice against other cultures.
 People who contradict this claim are trouble-making bigots, which makes them
enemies of the community, if not humanity, and deserving persecution.

All of which is an attack upon truth, clear thinking and plain speaking.

From Bourgeois To Racist

Naturally as the restraints shrink the rebellion grows ever more extreme in nature.
When the author of Animal Farm wrote an article in 1946 about the pleasures of a rose
garden, he was criticised for being bourgeois. George Orwell mentions this in his essay
A Good Word For The Vicar Of Bray, published in the Tribune, 1946. The term
bourgeois was then a popular slogan meaning having humdrum middle class ideas—
The Oxford English Dictionary 3rd Edition, 1938 — which is just a blatant attack upon

Outright Assault Upon Tradition

Now, in the late 1990s, the results of being bourgeois (retaining traditional notions), is
being labelled racist, sexist etc. and risk losing your job, your reputation, being jostled
in the street, being subject to judicial penalty and death threats. And it is this very
extremity of reaction that has won media attention and the name Political Correctness,
though the reaction will become even more unpleasant with the next generation.

Parental Values Always Attacked

The inevitable scapegoat for people impatient of restraint must always be parents,
because these are society's agents for teaching private restraint. So the cherished
notions of the parents are always subject to attack by their maturing offspring. This
resentment of tradition was observed in his own civilization by Polybius (c. 200-118
BC), the Greek historian, who said:

"For every democracy which has enjoyed prosperity for a considerable period first
develops through its nature an attitude of discontent towards the existing order,.."

Tyranny Grows
Once a community embraces tyranny the penalties can only grow in severity. This
gradual increase is easily seen by the example of Toastmasters. As the members of the
club became more concerned about the delights of socializing and less concerned about
the disciplines of public speaking, they became more intolerant of citizens who were
earnest about learning the art of rhetoric. Once those members who did their duty by
truthfully pointing out the shortcomings in another member's performance were just
labeled as negative or discouraging; later this became a risk of being socially ostracized.
Now (since 1998) unpopularity can result in being permanently ejected from the club by
a majority vote.

Australian Experience Of PC Tyranny

In my country the tyranny erupted with the persecution of public figures such as Arthur
Tunstall for uttering truths that had become unpopular, either directly in a speech, or
indirectly by telling jokes. The maiden speech of the Federal Member of Parliament for
Ipswich contained so many disliked truths that the rabble escalated the ferocity of their
attack and extended them to her supporters, introducing terror into Australian politics.
Anyone who watched the TV coverage (1997/8) of Pauline Hanson's political campaign
will have seen the nature of her opponents; a throng who looked and behaved more
like barbarians than citizens of a civilized community. And any mob that chants "Burn
the witch" (when she spoke outside an Ipswich hall after she had been refused entry)
leaves no doubt as to their intent or character.

Widespread Throughout The Community

Revealing the extent of the mob's support, their sentiments (suitably refined) were
enthusiastically echoed by the media and the administration. And in an unprecedented
act of cooperation, all the political parties conspired to eject Ms Hanson from the
federal parliament in the election of October 3rd 1998. This was revealed by the how-
to-vote cards of the parties contesting the seat of Blaire, which all placed Ms Hanson
last. This was a public admission by both the major parties that they would rather risk
losing the election than allow this forthright woman to keep her seat in parliament.

International Experience Of PC Tyranny

And it is not just in Australia but in every western democratic country popular demands
have been made for restrictions on expression. Bowing to the clamour of the electorate,
politicians in these countries have enacted absurd laws. The Australian community wide
declaration of irrational hatred displayed by the persecution of Pauline Hanson,
paralleled the Canadian experience of Paul Fromm, director of the Canadian Association
for Free Expression Inc., and the examples of the national soccer coach of England and
a prominent public servant in Washington, USA confirm that the hysteria is everywhere.

The Inevitable Result Of Political Correctness

By using the excuse of not upsetting anyone, the politically correct are demanding that
people behave like the fool who would please everyone; that everyone must become
such a fool! All must accept the notions of the Politically Correct as truth, or else! This is
the same mentality that inspired the Inquisition and forced Galileo to recant; the same
mentality that inspired the Nazis and obtained the Holocaust. Once expression gets
placed in a straitjacket of official truth, then the madness that occurs in all totalitarian
states is obtained. Life, in private and public, becomes a meaningless charade where
delusion thrives and terror rules.

Examples Of Denying Freedom Of Speech

Evidence of this effect is amply demonstrated by the Soviets, who embraced Political
Correctness with the Communist Revolution. The lumbering, pompous, impoverished,
humourless monster this Nation became is now History. And it should be remembered
that in 1914 Tsarist Russia was considered by Edmund Cars, a French economist who
then published a book about the subject, to be an economic giant set to overshadow
Europe. The SBS television program "What Ever Happened To Russia", which was
broadcast at 8.30 pm on 25th August 1994, detailed the terrible effect the Bolshevik's
oppression had on their empire. And SBS further detailed the terrible crimes inflicted
upon the Russians by their leader Stalin, in the series "Blood On The Snow" broadcast
in March 1999.
An Old Witness
Helen, a member of Parramatta writers club in 1992, was a citizen of Kiev during the
Red Terror, and described living with official truth and the constant threat of arrest.
Knowing the content of the latest party newspaper was critical to avoiding
internment, as public contradiction, either directly or indirectly, meant
denouncement to the KGB. If you complained about being hungry when food
shortages were not officially recognized, then you became an enemy of the state. If you
failed to praise a Soviet hero, or praised an ex-hero, then again your fate was sealed.
The need to be politically correct dominated all conversation and behaviour, as failure
meant drastic penalty. Uncertainty and fear pervaded everything, nobody could be sure
that an official request to visit Party headquarters meant imprisonment, torture, death,
public reward or nothing important.

Living with such a terrible handicap naturally destroyed all spontaneity of thought or
action, rendering the whole community mad. The awful effect this had upon Helen's
sanity was made clear when she escaped to Australia. Here she encountered the free
press, which had an unpleasant impact upon her. One day she read The Australian
newspaper which happened to carry two separate articles about Patrick White, one
praising, the other denigrating, this well known writer. Poor Helen found herself turning
from one to the other, which was she to repeat as correct? She nearly had a nervous

Political Correctness Is Social Dementia

Unless plain speaking is allowed, clear thinking is denied. There can be no good reason
for denying freedom of expression, there is no case to rebut, only the empty slogans of
people inspired by selfishness and unrestrained by morality. The proponents of this
nonsense neither understand the implications of what they say, nor why they are saying
it: they are insane.

Social Decline Grows Worse With Each Generation

Political Correctness is part of the social decline that generation by generation makes
public behaviour less restrained and less rational.