Written byÂ (@shackgeneral)
If you are easily offended, DO NOT KEEP READING!
The cult of PC is the crown jewel of Leftist rhetoric and does nothing but complicate language. Even such a nuanced language as English can often fail to illustrate thoughts properly. This naturally tepid connection between thought and language is exactly why fascists and communist are infamous; their propaganda techniques tend to always work to shut people up. Even worse, they encourage us to filter our thoughts through a paradigm that is irrational and unfamiliar. Why implement censorship â€œlawsâ€ if citizens can be easily bullied into censoring themselves through libel and public shaming? Observe how anything patriotic is a micro-aggression towards non-white people. The rhetoric is so deeply ingrained that it is rotting the ties that bind Americans together.
For example, in a fruitless effort to â€œstave tensions,â€ Leftists continue to metamorphose and elongate the proper way to refer to things. To refer to someone as â€œBlackâ€ is no longer allowed. â€œPerson of colorâ€ is the proper way the refer to a black person. In the Leftist language, there is no black and white â€“ not in race nor in reality. Itâ€™s just a big grey blurb with no clear definition â€“ a moving target whereby commonly accepted cultural norms change from day to day. This is not to say that flawed cultural norms shouldnâ€™t be done away with; they should (and ARE, by and large by Conservatives) â€“ but the Left isnâ€™t concerned with fixing flawed systems, they are concerned with deconstructionism at the core. Political Correctness is a ballistic missile in the war to obliterate meaningful discourse. Since we think in terms of words, rhetoric and discourse, they also short circuit our thought processes.
Do I lack pigment? Am I not a â€œPerson of Color?â€
Iâ€™m all for stigmatizing (not censoring) truly offensive language, but for the life of me, I canâ€™t figure out what is so offensive about the easy-to-say, one syllable, â€œBlack.â€ How is â€œPerson Of Color,â€ a 5-syllable phrase that is no less offensive than â€œblack,â€ worse than saying â€œblack?â€ â€œPerson of Colorâ€ is highly offensive in several ways. Itâ€™s actually quite racist. Iâ€™m white. Do I lack pigment? Am I not a â€œPerson of Color?â€ In 2015, with the proliferation of Critical Race Theory, â€œperson of colorâ€ has been expanded to refer to anyone who is â€œnot white.â€ CRT suggests that white is â€œinherently badâ€ while a â€œperson of colorâ€ is inherently good. Do folks not see how racist this approach to humanity actually is? Do CRT folks not see how they are re-institutionalizing racism? Do CRT folks really believe that â€œreversingâ€ racism and guilting all white folks into self-hatred is the way to heal societies ills?
Most Millennials had FULLY INTEGRATED upbringings, myself included. In fact, I have â€œMinority Credentials.â€ Minority Credentials are what goes through the mind of non-bigots as they are accused of being bigoted. â€œI had an integrated upbringing. I have black friends. Iâ€™m colorblind. Have gay friends. Iâ€™m for Women Rights.â€ Donâ€™t even bother. To people of the Critical Theory variety â€“ those who frequent BLM events and basically all other â€œsocial justiceâ€ events â€“ claiming Minority Credentials is just another sign that youâ€™re minority hating bigot. You really canâ€™t win.
When it comes to identifying distinctions between races, I wouldnâ€™t mind being more accurate. We could use â€œtanâ€ and â€œbrown.â€ Itâ€™s economical, accurate and it leaves some wiggle room for my â€œoliveâ€ colored friends. No. Leave it to the Regressive Left to choose the most passive aggressive, cumbersome rhetoric to impose â€“ Person Of Color. If these people had their way, we would no longer allowed to refer to our coffee as â€œblack.â€ â€œCoffee of Colorâ€ would be far more PC.
Race is not the only sacredly elongated subject. In order rectify the â€œoppression of disabled people by systems that marginalize atypical bodies/minds,â€ people who are disabled must now be referred to as â€œdifferently abled.â€ To others on the Left, and for the exact same reason, referring to someone as â€œdifferently abledâ€ is equally offensive! Itâ€™s as though the Left has defied any semblance of a â€œnormal human being.â€ The linked article is clear, she isnâ€™t calling for an end to political correctness when referring to the disabled, sheâ€™s trying to impose a reversal on underlying premise by which the word â€œdisabledâ€ derives its meaning. A disability isnâ€™t a condition that one suffers; itâ€™s just â€œdifferent.â€ Being born with Downs Syndrome is no better or no worse than having an IQ of 200 and both should be treated the same â€“ neither is different â€“ neither is normal. How, though? They want to tell you what you can and canâ€™t say.Â Thatâ€™s how.
Further, asserting that someone is â€œdifferentâ€ is interpreted as being just as offensive as asserting that someone is â€œnormal.â€ This is one of the disturbing facets of the Black Lives Matter Movement. To proponents of BLM, youâ€™re a racist if you â€œsee color,â€ and youâ€™re a racist if youâ€™re â€œcolorblind.â€ Youâ€™re damned if you do, and damned if you donâ€™t. Confused yet?
Speaking of confused. Gender issues have become a literal joke.
Speaking of confused. Gender issues have become a literal joke. The dictionary of genders has past the point of absurdity. There is gender identification for every sexual appetite under the sun: Androgynous, bigender, Binary Gender, Cisgender, Cis-man, Cis-Woman, Genderless, Gynsexual, Intersexual, Hypersexual, Pansexual, Queer, Questioning, GenderQueer, Skoliosexual, Transgender, Trans-Woman, Trans-Manâ€¦The list goes on and my spell-checker cannot keep up.For those that arenâ€™t hip to the lingo, Cisgender is the PC way to say heterosexual.
Apparently, the root word of heterosexual (hetero â€“ different) is offensive to the Left. The root word of homosexual (homo â€“ the same) is also offensive to the Left. Any word that could be indirectly associated with the idea that ANY of the gender identities isnâ€™t perfectly normal is automatically discarded as intolerant hate-speech. Paradoxically, recognizing diversity is just as offensive as recognizing normalcy.
Sending Homosexuals to populate a colony on Mars: a very bad idea.
I happen to support the Gay community and believe that however anomalous, we all deserve the same rights. However, biologically and categorically speaking, being a homosexual IS anomalous. If the whole world decided it was gay, the countdown would begin: the end of humanity. Speaking of which, should the entire world become gay and humanity were to die out, we would miss First Contact with an alien species. When they scan the Earth for life forms, all they will find is skeletons â€“ male and female skeletons. They wonâ€™t find Questioning Skeletons or Skiliosexual Skeletons. Is that PC to say? You bet your Cis-Ass itâ€™s not!
More realistically, one of these days, a person is going to be charged with the task of manning a one-way trip to Mars for the purposes of populating Mars. That is going to be an expensive trip and could possibly save humanity from extinction. Every person on board must have a purpose to be on board and must take part in the procreation that is bound to take place. I cannot underscore the absurdity of sending even one Homosexual to populate Mars on the first trip. Yes, perhaps once Mars is amply populated, it may be sensible to send homosexuals to Mars. It would be a monumental mistake to risk humanity because a person refused to be â€œpolitically incorrect.â€
You may find it as offensive as I do sensical, but unless you are willing to copulate and rear children with a person of the opposite sex, you have no business on such a mission. You can bet your power-bottom dollar that there would be some Leftist out there that would disagree and cry â€œHomophobe.â€ Itâ€™s not homophobic! Stop being a baby. Mars will offer you no â€œsafe spaceâ€ where you can â€œshare your feelingsâ€ about â€œinstitutional oppressionâ€ and â€œsocial injustice.â€
Another poisonous branch of the Political Correctness Tree: Labels. Ironically, the Leftist ideology is woven together by, and derives power from, implementing labels, while simultaneously demonizing people who use labels they happen not to like. The Left loves to demonize Conservatives for assigning Labels. â€œLabel Jars, Not People.â€
Labeling Saves Time, Plus Itâ€™s Fun!
Youâ€™ve heard it before â€“ the snarky clichÃ© thatâ€™s meant to do nothing but pass judgment on passing judgment. Itâ€™s a way for Leftists to redirect a conversation from the fundamental to the irrelevant. Itâ€™s meant to encourage you to close the part of your mind that literally keeps you alive. It is the part of your mind that distinguishes friend from foe.
Labeling saves time. Labeling gathers all of the experience of your life into flash judgments that help to keep danger away. Aside from the obvious Leftist hypocrisy of labeling the â€œLabelersâ€ as such, they are all too cavalier about missing the point of virtually every discussion about any issue and pointing it out as though itâ€™s YOU who broke the strict rules of common decorum. All you were trying to do is be direct and to the point. That is the real antipathy of the Left and why Democrats and Republicans alike cannot standÂ any politician who seeks to limit the power of the state. Â When the state controls speech, they control your thoughts – and it’s happening right before our eyes.
The clearer they are, the more substance they have to convey, the more people will know that most of them are frauds, criminals and cowards. At this point, folks are just looking for someone to shoot it to them straight. 7 years of getting the end-run from Obama and practically nothing from the establishment, has made Conservatives weary and rightfully so. They reverse the meaning of words at will, not because stand on moral or intellectual high ground, but because beyond their ability to accuse, they have nothing.Â If they control the language, they can accuse you of anything.
Do yourself a favor and read Kark Marx, Saul Alinsky and Derrick Bell. Â You’ll need a barf bag through the whole ordeal. Â Deal with it. Â You have to know your enemy in order to defeat your enemy. Â There is no other way around it. Â When you think you’ve lost all hope because everything you see around you resembles a Marxist Utopian Dream in the making, read Ayn Rands Atlas Shrugged.