An Effort Towards Controlled Language

Thomas Wiley          
Mrs. D. Chadwell
English 11 Honors
May 20, 2007
Political Correctness: An Effort Towards Controlled Language.
         “Political Correctness is a killer, and so is the fact that on papers like the Globe, only the Beautiful People need apply for jobs.” (Carr.) Political correctness is a movement in modern society towards the elimination of words, phrases and actions that limit or hinder ones personal freedom, it is often referred to as “PC”. Political correctness is valuable yet hypocritical as it limits thoughts and emotions, in turn limiting freedom.
         As with many other movements, political correctness  found its roots in the radical ideals of  the 1960s. At the time its’ sole purpose was to stop bigotry by condemning the language that was used to articulate it ( Schwartz, 114). As with most of the other political ideals popular in the 1960s , political correctness works better on paper than it does in practice, as it does not eliminate  prejudicial thought only condemns the voice of such ideals. This is counterproductive to the very ideals that it serves, as thoughts of bigotry should be investigated and discussed rather than held inside(Cummings 1).
         Another very interesting dynamic of Political Correct language is its subjective nature. The recent example of the  Don Imus scandal illustrates this point. Imus was a radio “Shock Jock” who was nationally syndicated with an affiliate of CBS. On April 4, 2007, he made comments about the Rutgers University womens basketball team. His omments included “nappy-headed hos”. Imus is a 66-year-old Caucasian man. This is a stark contrast from the expectance the vulgarity of modern rap artists such as “Akon”. A song on his recent album “Konvicted ” drips vulgarity to such an extent, that if put to film, it would be X rated. The difference in these two men? One is 66 and white and the other is a 34-year-old African American. Thus, enters the double standard. A white man cannot call a black man a “negro”  but a black man can. This is spawned from the idea that white men have everything going for them and that everyone else “has suffered some form of repression and denied a cultural voice” (Schwartz 141). This double standard is apparent throughout the modern English language. Few words used to show distain for another person pertain exclusively to white males. Political correctness only limits the expression from those deemed “on top”, rather than leveling the playing field.
         How does this limit freedom? One could make the argument that those words that make minorities uncomfortable, are worthless and therefore should be removed from the English language. When in fact they are as useful as they are vulgar, as they reveal the true character of those who stand on the pulpit of bigotry. Removing such language does not solve the problem. The problem should be articulated and spoken about rather than smolder under pressure. Censoring one’s thoughts and idea is one thing. But what happens when the news  is censored in the name of political correctness?
         “I hate to say that there is a political correctness that guides us, but I think there is. We tend you give more credibility to groups on the liberal side of the spectrum than on the  conservative side.” Says political commentator Tom Feilder (Alterman 6) The news media has a obligation to society to cover the events of the world with objective reporting. Political correctness hinders this by manipulating the language in which the story is broadcast. This would not be a problem if there were a list of words and phases that are not politically correct. There is none such list; the language is subjective to the reporters’ opinions and thus the news is also. The language of news could thus  become so convoluted in an effort not to offend anyone, that no one will understand what actually happened. Except the white male.
         The white male. Since the beginning of time, white men have been in charge of western society. Many criminal deeds have occurred at the hands of white men; slavery, the holocaust destruction of the environment, etc. None of these are politically correct. In an effort to put other groups of people in charge, the idea of affirmative action came about in the mid 1970’s. This is also hypocritical in that it holds minorities at a lower standard of achievement.  “Preferential affirmative action patronizes American blacks, women, and others by presuming that they cannot succeed on their own. Preferential affirmative action does not advance civil rights in this country.”(Keyes). This is troubling, not only because of the artificial quotas set by the federal government, but because it is not necessary in today’s modern society. Political correctness started out as a change of language and now it has morphed into a change of  wider education and the workforce.  Another facet of political correctness is that anyone who disagrees with it and the standards it creates is considered a bigot.
         Although racism in America is far from gone, the simulated equality that affirmative action and political correctness creates is counterproductive to the equality of those who need it most. Political correctness is no longer useful. In the day of race riots and MLK Jr. political correctness leveled the playing field so that everyone would be heard equally. In current times, all minorities have a voice. Television stations such as “BET” (black entertainment television) and “Telemundo” (a Hispanic station) are prime examples that more minorities and people of color in America, have a voice and are heard.
         What’s next? In the 1960s the black community had their uprising. In the 1970s, women moved out of the house and into the workplace. In the 1980s the gay community exclaimed “We’re queer! We’re here! Get used to us!” Who’s next? Recent reports show that the number of illegal immigrants in America is above ten million. With majors cities such as San Francisco and Los Angles being “Sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants” (Bogan), the next group to take advantage of this phenomenon will be illegal immigrants. It is already happening as seen in San Francisco and Los Angles. With protests for equality and national boycott days, the undocumented workforce  is becoming mobilized and organized. They will win too. For it is not politically correct to send someone home for doing something illegal.
          What good has it done? Well, the black community is organized with originations such as the NAACP and the ACLU, a woman in the workforce is now commonplace and multiple states have or are in the process of legalizing gay marriage in one form or another. It is personal opinion weather or not these are the best thing for society at large or not. But one thing is for certain: no one will be offended by language in the future, only the absence of it, and without language, freedom is dead.


         







                                       Works Cited

Alterman, Eric . What Liberal Media?: The Truth about Bias and the News. New York : Basic   
         Books 2003

Brogan, Jim. "San Francisco: 'Sanctuary City' For Illegal Immigrants." The Post Chronicle [San
         Francisco, Ca] 23 Apr. 2007:

Carr, Howie. Howie Carr Quotes. 2007. http://www.brainymedia.com/. 20 May 2007
         <http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/h/howiecarr351662.html>.

Cummings, Michael S. Beyond Political Correctness: Social Transformation in the United States.
         Boulder , CO : Rienner Publishers, 2001.

Keyes, Alan. Alan Keyes Quotes. Thinkexist.com. 20 May 2007
         <http://thinkexist.com/quotation/preferential-affirmative-action-patronizes/349599.html>.


Schwartz, Howard S. The Revolt of the Primitive: An Inquiry into the Roots of Political           
         Correctness. Westport, , Conn. : Praeger, 2001.