recentpopularlog in

political-correctness

« earlier   
"Bring home the bacon" debate is a case study in how stupid we've all become
Well said, that Carl Kinsella.
How are we supposed to focus on the things that matter when media organisations refuse to? Ivan Yates and Matt Cooper ran a segment on whether or not we've reached political correctness. Niall Boylan had a discussion about whether or not it's okay to ban phrases that nobody really wants to ban [as PETA has suggested].

As a matter of pure coincidence, other reports from outlets like the Daily Mail and Today FM reported that the HSE was going to ban its employees from using phrases like "love," "pet" or "dear." That wasn't true either. Again, it was one line in a huge report that asked the question as to whether or not it was the best course of action to use such terms. It wasn't mentioned again.

Unlike phrases about meat, this actually matters. This is the kind of thing that could actually change how people are treated in hospital. But again, it wasn't true. The public – which has lost its capacity to verify what is true and what is not — was being lied to by the media. That's how it works now.
media  clickbait  fake-news  news  today-fm  daily-mail  hse  niall-boylan  peta  controversy  political-correctness  ivan-yates  matt-cooper 
3 days ago by jm
"Two incompatible sacred values in American universities" Jon Haidt, Hayek Lecture Series - YouTube
On October 6, 2016, Professor Jonathan Haidt gave a Hayek Lecture at Duke. The event was co-sponsored by the programs in the History of Political Economy (HOPE), Philosophy, Politics, & Economics (PPE), and American Values and Institutions (AVI).
antifragility  free-speech  identity-politics  jonathan-haidt  microaggression  political-correctness  safe-space  social-justice  trigger-warning  victimhood-culture  video  youtube 
22 days ago by kogakure
Campus Week: The Emperor’s Woke Clothes – Tablet Magazine
The survey’s findings confirm the intuitions of those who have long regarded political correctness as what it has become: a mode of exercising power within an intramural contest between rival elites. In this contest, the fetishistic invocation of the “marginalized” is a tool the powerful use to increase the power of a given group, often to the detriment of the very people they purport to represent. The study shows that virtually no one who does not directly benefit from the exercise of this power (in the form of sinecures, professional advancement, or the destruction of rivals within liberal institutions) supports it.

The only group within which a majority of respondents do not regard political correctness as a problem are those that the study characterizes as “progressive activists,” a category that comprises 8 percent of the country. Only 30 percent of this group considers political correctness to be a problem.

“Compared with the rest of the (nationally representative) polling sample,” Mounk writes,

progressive activists are much more likely to be rich, highly educated—and white. They are nearly twice as likely as the average to make more than $100,000 a year. They are nearly three times as likely to have a postgraduate degree. And while 12 percent of the overall sample in the study is African-American, only 3 percent of progressive activists are. With the exception of the small tribe of devoted conservatives, progressive activists are the most racially homogeneous group in the country.

The extent to which this finding might surprise you is a measure of how close you are to either elite. It is also a measure of how successfully the toxic rhetoric of warring elite cliques has gaslighted you into submitting to a narrative that is brazenly false. The findings are disquieting because they show by implication the power of that false narrative. It reveals the extent to which the overwhelming will of the majority can be continually frustrated by wildly unrepresentative, power-seeking elite factions that increasingly occupy critical chokepoints within media, educational, nonprofit, legal, government, and corporate bureaucracies. For that is what political correctness really is—a symptom of a large disorder which the vast majority of Americans of all races and creeds regard as a problem.
PC  political-correctness 
6 weeks ago by thegrandnarrative
Free Speech Police - YouTube
If you want the Police to arrest people for their choice of words then you want to live in a police state.
free-speech  political-correctness  politics  video  youtube 
8 weeks ago by kogakure
On the Censorship of Michael Hoffman's Books by Amazon
To be banned by Amazon is not equivalent to being banned by any other private business. Most publishers will admit that Amazon has replaced Bowker Books in Print as the industry’s authoritative guide to what books in English have been printed in the past and what is in print now. Amazon is currently the reference source. For a book to be forbidden by Amazon renders it largely invisible. It is equivalent to burning the book.
censorship  zionism  amazon  political-correctness 
12 weeks ago by foliovision
Trump really hates apologizing for misogyny and racism. New reporting explains why. - The Washington Post
What Trump basically declares again and again, in one form or another, is that those who demand resistance to our basest and most divisive and hateful instincts should just shut up and stop ruining all the fun. Instead, by all means, go ahead and revel in them — without apology.
trump-voters  trump-rhetoric  trump-racism  trump-misogyny  political-correctness  apologies 
12 weeks ago by Peony43

Copy this bookmark:





to read