What were the first two posts in this series on the vile nature of political corectness?

• The Introduction — PART 1 (familyallianceonline.org)
• What Is The Effect Of Political Correctness Upon Our Education System? — PART 2 (familyallianceonline.org)

In Part 1, we considered examples of political correctness. In Part 2 we looked at the importance of the proper instruction of our young people. What is the topic of this post?

What Is The Definition And Origin Of Political Correctness?

What is political correctness? It is a special type of demonization. Political correctness is just a way intolerance masks itself as tolerance (see The Intolerance of Tolerance (townhall.com)).

Contemplate the modern dictionary definition of “politically correct.”

politically correct

: conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated

Definition of politically correct (merriam-webster.com)

Gobbledygook? Well, not quite, but perhaps the definition of the opposite, politically incorrect, is a bit more clear.

politically incorrect

: not avoiding language or behavior that could offend a particular group of people

Definition of politically incorrect (merriam-webster.com)

It is not gobbledygook, but how is it possible to avoid language or behavior that doesn’t offend at least one particular group of people? Consider all the particular groups of people. Consider identity politics and all the strange beliefs that various particular groups of people now advocate. How can anyone advocate their own beliefs without offending somebody? Of course, that is not possible. That is why political correctness is not about tolerance; it is about the intolerant shutting up their opponents.

Is shutting up the opposition the point of political correctness according to the dictionary? No. Of course not, but take the time to observe what actually happens. If what we believe does not conform to the beliefs of self-appointed elites, then if we say what we believe we are intolerant, that is, evil.

Where did the expression political correctness come from? The meaning and origin of the expression: Politically correct (phrases.org.uk) speaks to the origin of the phrase. The first recorded use of the phrase dates back “dates back to the 18th century; for example, J. Wilson’s comments in U.S. Republic, 1793.” However, the phrase became controversial when the Communists adopted it.

The term first appeared in Marxist-Leninist vocabulary following the Russian Revolution of 1917. At that time it was used to describe adherence to the policies and principles of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (that is, the party line).

Political correctness (britannica.com)

Instead of viewing the political spectrum from Extreme Left to Extreme Right, it actually makes more sense to view the political spectrum from the extreme of limited government, that is, anarchy, to the extreme of unlimited government power, that is, totalitarianism.

Instead of the Jews, Communists and Socialists have traditionally demonized the “rich.” Effectively, Communists and Socialists use the same techniques as the Nazis. They just targeted a different scapegoat. In fact, there is very little difference between Communists (the so-called Left) and Nazis (the so-called Right). Both represent forms of the same kind of totalitaranism.

How did Communists justify their intolerance? Academics like Karl Marx cooked up theories to use the ends to justify the means. Herbert Marcuse (see The Left and ‘Discriminating Tolerance’ (nationalreview.com)), in an essay entitled “Repressive Tolerance (marcuse.org),” provides a more modern example. Because of the way it is written, only an ivory towered, pretentious academic would want to read what Marcuse wrote. Nevertheless, here is how it begins.

THIS essay examines the idea of tolerance in our advanced industrial society. The conclusion reached is that the realization of the objective of tolerance would call for intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed. In other words, today tolerance appears again as what it was in its origins, at the beginning of the modern period–a partisan goal, a subversive liberating notion and practice. Conversely, what is proclaimed and practiced as tolerance today, is in many of its most effective manifestations serving the cause of oppression.

Continued => Repressive Tolerance (marcuse.org)

Think about that title. Think about the fact that Marcuse actually uses tolerance as an excuse for being intolerant. Who establishes what we should not tolerate?

The question, who is qualified to make all these distinctions, definitions, identifications for the society as a whole, has now one logical answer, namely, everyone ‘in the maturity of his faculties’ as a human being, everyone who has learned to think rationally and autonomously. The answer to Plato’s educational dictatorship is the democratic educational dictatorship of free men. John Stuart Mill’s conception of the res publica is not the opposite of Plato’s: the liberal too demands the authority of Reason not only as an intellectual but also as a political power. In Plato, rationality is confined to the small number of philosopher-kings; in Mill, every rational human being participates in the discussion and decision–but only as a rational being. Where society has entered the phase of total administration and indoctrination, this would be a small number indeed, and not necessarily that of the elected representatives of the people. The problem is not that of an educational dictatorship, but that of breaking the tyranny of public opinion and its makers in the closed society.

Repressive Tolerance (marcuse.org)

Is there anything new or actually innovative about political correctness, Communism, or Socialism? No. When the politically correct, the Communists, or the Socialists cannot win the debates on the merits of their argument, such people do what they have always done. They demonize their opponents, and they either use something like political correctness, imprisonment, or just plain murder to force anyone who disagrees to shut up. Political correctness is just one of the ways Communists, Socialists, and others who believe in tyranny to control what those they would enslave are allowed to say.

Demonization is closely related to political correctness. Consider this definition.

Demonization is when a demagogue, or group of demagogues, paints their ideological enemies or scapegoats in terms intended to render them as irredeemably evil and fit only for destruction, which is usually presented as ‘self-defense’. Possibly the best-known example of demonization in the 20th century was the Nazis’ demonization of Jews, which played off of existing antisemitism for political gain and eventually led to the Holocaust.

Demonization – Conservapedia

Political correctness is a type of demonization, and much of the news media, Big Tech, and our educational establishment demonizes those they deem politically incorrect as intolerant. Consider some examples.

• They portrayed Tea Party activists as racists. Their object? To make it politically incorrect to either support or belong to the Tea Party.
• To make it politically incorrect to support him, the news media continually tried to portray candidate and latter President Donald Trump as some kind of monster: a racist, sexist, selfish rich guy, Putin puppet, tyrannical, insurrectionist, and so forth. For the most frivolous reasons Democrats impeached the man TWICE. Yet no one can point to anything that Trump did that justified a continual stream of accusations, often based upon unsourced leaks. In fact, Trump did a good job as president in spite of all the partisan attacks in the news media.
• They demonized those who attended the Trump rally on January 6, 2021. Supposedly the rally was an armed insurrection of extremist bigots, but the only person who was shot was an unarmed demonstrator. How obvious was the news media’s partisanship? The news media either lied about or ignored all the violence and property damage associated with the numerous riots that took place during the summer of 2020. They ignored the fact that Black Lives Matter was started by self-proclaimed Marxists. They also ignored the fact that Antifa both approved of and participated in violence as part of its so-called anti-facist agenda.
• They demonized the people who refuse to get injected with one of the COVID-19 vaccines as not caring about the unvaccinated. This has gotten so rediculous that our government now wants to fire people from their jobs who have already had COVID-19 and are already immune to COVID-19.

Where is this sort of political correctness/demonization headed? Consider just how important controlling our schools has become. In his last debate with his opponent, gubenatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe argued that parents should not have any control over the public school curriculum (see McAuliffe Argues Parents Shouldn’t Have Control over Public School Curriculum | National Review). The National School Boards Association did McAuliffe one better (see National School Boards Association declares conservative parents to be domestic terrorists – Washington Times) by trying to demonize the parents who have complained about Critical Race Theory at school board meetings. They sent President Joe Biden a letter (nsba-letter-to-president-biden-concerning-threats-to-public-schools-and-school-board-members-92921.pdf) requesting that Biden treat their objections as domestic terrorism under the Patriot Act.

Well, Attorney General Merrick Garland is not about to let rogue school boards lose their grasp on the control of the future, the minds of our children. Check out Merrick Garland directs FBI to target school board threats – Washington Times and Merrick Garland calls in FBI to counter threats against school staffers (nypost.com). Read Garland’s memo, Partnership Among Federal, State, Local, Tribal and Territorial Law Enforcement to Address Threats Against School Administrators, Board Members, Teachers, and Staff (justice.gov). Then ask yourself this question. We live at ground zero in the protests against rogue school boards. Who is threatening whom? Parents alarmed by the trash politicians want taught our children, parents trying to use legal procedures to remove lawless school board members, or school board members trying to trash the education of our children with their hate filled ideologies.

Our children have become the big prize. As we observed in the last post in this series: “Whoever has the youth has the future.”

So, what is political correctness? Political correctness is part of technique used by the tyrannical to demonized the opposition. Demonization leads to harrassment and violence. We do not separate words and deeds. We cannot.

One last thought. Even in the days leading up to the American Civil War Americans did not demonize each other. Those who fought the Civil War did not deliberately tell outright lies about their neighbors. The war was bloody, but everyone knew what it was about. But now the so-called mainstream news media makes up stuff about those who oppose their agenda and call that news. What kind of future will our children have if we let others teach them to hate each other based upon lies?

What will the rest of this series discuss?

• What Is The Relationship Between Political Correctness And Sin
• What Is The Character Of Those Who Promote Political Correctness
• What Should Our Response To Poltical Correctness?“““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““`

• The Importance of Language: Georgene Rice with Michael Knowles | The Christian Outlook
• What Is Political Correctness? Definition, Pros, and Cons (thoughtco.com)
• The Historical Origin of ‘Political Correctness’ | Intellectual Takeout
• The Effect of Political Correctness on Politics (americanthinker.com)
• Political Correctness | The First Amendment Encyclopedia (mtsu.edu)
• Politically correct – Conservapedia
• ‘Politically Correct’: The Phrase Has Gone From Wisdom To Weapon : Code Switch : NPR