Annoyances...

For anyone viewing this internationally in America we have "Freedom of Speech"

Today I was watching youtube and it was very annoiying how people try to be politically correct about EVERYTHING. I mean come on.

So I did some research and here is what I've found.


The terms 'politically correct' and 'political correctness', in the sense defined above, entered the language via the U.S. feminist and other left-wing movements of the 1970s. The use of 'PC' language quickly spread to other parts of the industrialized world. The terms had been used previously though. The previous meaning was 'in line with prevailing political thought or policy'. I.e. the terms previously used 'correctness' in its literal sense and without any particular reference to language that some might consider illiberal or discriminatory. That usage dates back to the 18th century.


Really I think being politically correct is just a cheap stand in for manners. Yes we need tolerance for many different groups. It seems to me though that "PC" just silences people about topics which should really be stopped. Some examples are how criminals are called "Misguided" all the time...or when people have an opinon against allowing illegal immigration they are immediatley shut out just take a look at some youtube videos that are about controversial topics and look at the comments.


Being politically correct is to avoid  conflicts in people's views. But has anyone ever thought that this might further polarize people? Looking back in history people were not as divided in their views on the political spectrum you had your left and right with most people in the middle. Now a days it is almost always far left or far right and fewer in the middle. Why is that? Maybe because instead of discussing their conflicted views people would rather avoid the conflict in the first place. SO are we really exercising our freedom of speech then? To me it seems no. For example say in school I called people who support abortion without danger to the mother or rape, babykillers I'd be liable to getting sent out of class, detenion, etc. Can we really use this freedom then?

In politics, Republicans and Democrats seem to be evolving separate languages or, at least, long lists of different nouns. Democrats warn of "global warming" ; Republicans talk calmly about "climate change." Democrats are starting to call themselves "progressives." Republicans just say "liberals." Other Republican/Democratic partisan pairs include trial lawyer/personal injury lawyer, death tax/estate tax, collateral damage/civilian dead, quotas/goals and timetables, campus race preferences/race-sensitive admissions, indoctrination/sensitivity training, faith-based/religious, school choice/school vouchers, personal accounts/privatization, tax relief/tax cuts, illegal/undocumented, fetus/uterine contents, military difficulties/quagmire, rendition/shipping captives out for torture, racial charlatan Al Sharpton/civil rights activist Al Sharpton, John Kerry's weaseling/John Kerry's nuanced approach.

Most of us have no problem using the word "terrorists" for people who regularly blow up innocent bystanders for political effect. But the mainstream media still shun the "T" word in favor of "insurgents" or "the resistance." The "insurgents" in Iraq aren't really "insurging." They are blowing up large numbers of random people. But the press keeps talking about activists, rebels, militants, fighters, assailants, attackers, hostage-takers, etc., etc. Some media outlets are willing to refer to "acts of terrorism," as long as they don't have to call the people who perform those acts "terrorists." We have sin, but there are no sinners. Is what it comes down to. People want to dodge responsibility. Do these people really have enough faith in what they believe to stand up and fight for it? I'd say no.


Again if I upset anyone just comment or message me we can discuss it.