Where did 'political correctness' originate?

[Brian4Liberty]

Where did 'political correctness' originate? (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/08/8_25_2015_6_6.html)
By Clarice Feldman - August 25, 2015


The prolific Michael Walsh has just released a book, The Devil's Pleasure Palace, in which he sheds light on the background of political correctness, which I imagine most of our readers find as offensive as I do. He traces, to the Frankfurt School (an outgrowth of Karl Marx's works), speech codes and other efforts – which defy reason and foreclose dissent to the leftist cultural monopoly – to compel concurrence with things "our culture used to recognize as antithetical to a moral society."

Walsh explains that the leftists' work was "grounded on an ideology that demanded ... for philosophical reasons, an unremitting assault on Western values and institutions, including Christianity, the family, conventional sexual morality, nationalistic patriotism, and adherence in general to any institution or set of beliefs that blocked the path of revolution." In his words, the Frankfurt School "hated the old narrative of a confident, muscular Christian West." In its place, they created what he calls "the anti-Narrative," which makes us begin to question our own history.
...
Highlighting Herbert Marcuse, one of the leaders, Walsh pinpoints why the left turns reason upside-down and assumes a cloak of moral superiority to its detractors in order to deny those who take a different view all the civil rights the Constitution guarantees:
...

"They would include the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements which promote aggressive policies, armament, chauvinism, discrimination on the grounds of race and religion…Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left."
...
More: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/08/8_25_2015_6_6.html

[THX 1138]

Thanks for sharing!

[stuntman stoll]

First thing I thought when reading the title was - government universities

[jtap]

I just so happened to read an article on PC this morning and thought it was good.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/mary-wakefield/9619312/the-contagious-madness-of-the-new-pc/




The contagious madness of the new PC
Obsessive searching for hurt and offence will create it where once it never existed
29 August 2015 Mary Wakefield

It’s becoming pretty clear, as the year rolls on, that some of our brightest youngsters have gone round the bend. It’s as if they’ve caught a virus, a mental one, a set of thoughts and ideas that might loosely be called political correctness, but seem to me weirder and more damaging than that.

Back in the 1990s, PC students would stamp about with placards demanding equal rights for minorities and talking about Foucault. This new PC doesn’t seem to be about protecting minorities so much as everyone, everywhere from ever having their feelings hurt. It came from America, this virus, incubated in the closed minds of the Land of the Free, but it’s here now, and contagious.

We have a right not to be offended, think these kids, but this has horrible implications, as Brendan O’Neill pointed out in his Spectator cover story ‘The Stepford students’ last year. Brendan arrived to speak in defence of abortion at Christchurch, Oxford, only to find his debate had been cancelled. Why? Because it was offensive and might damage the ‘mental safety’ of students to hear ‘a person without a uterus’ speak on abortion. What about free speech? Overrated, said the students. Just an excuse for bigots.

Students have also decided they need protecting from disturbing bits in books. There have been recent calls for content warnings — ‘trigger warnings’ — to be inserted into great books. The Great Gatsby (because it’s misogynist), Huckleberry Finn (racist) and The Merchant of Venice (anti-Semitic). This spring at Columbia University, a student complained she had been ‘triggered’ by Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Proserpina’s treatment at the hands of Dis gave her flashbacks to a past assault, she said, and made her feel ‘unsafe’, though I’d have thought her assailant pretty pleased to be compared to a god. Columbia have just announced, sotto voce, that the Metamorphoses will be replaced by Toni Morrison’s Song of Solomon

Here’s how twisted it’s all become: in December, Jeannie Suk, a professor of law, wrote a desperate piece for the New Yorker about the situation at Harvard, a sort of SOS. Her students, she said, had complained to the authorities that rape law was too ‘triggering ‘ to be taught at all. One girl thought the word ‘violate’ — as in ‘does this violate the law?’ — too traumatic to use in class. Surely some sensible top dog told them all to belt up? Nope, said Suk. The hounding that would follow on social media was too alarming a prospect.

Nor, as far as I can see, did anyone remind these kids that there are real victims of real rape out there who will need lawyers.

The hope, I suppose, is that this generation, both here and in America, will grow up one day; that reality will intervene. But I read a piece this week that considers a more alarming possibility. In the latest edition of the Atlantic magazine, Greg Lukianoff, a constitutional lawyer, and Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist, argue that these youngsters are driving not just us, but themselves, literally mad. They cite a survey last year by the American College Health Association, in which 54 per cent of college students said they had ‘felt overwhelming anxiety’ in the past 12 months. No surprise, say Lukianoff and Haidt.

Who wouldn’t be stressed by this culture? The children of the West have created for themselves an echo chamber. The more obsessed they become with outlawing offence, the more hyper-alert for it they are, ‘triggered’ by every passing comment.

As Haidt and Lukianoff point out, the PC way of thinking is unhinged too. If someone feels slighted then no other arbitration is needed. Emotion is everything. If offence has been taken, an offence has been committed. But this is the thinking of paranoiacs and phobics. It’s to confuse reality with perception. I understand, I do. I’m pathetically claustrophobic, but I’ve learnt (sometimes) to face my fear, and that when I do, it retreats. The young victims of Oxbridge and the Ivy League imagine they can outlaw the causes of fear instead, and so are consumed by them.

One of the allures of the new PC world must be the thought that you’re particularly ‘caring’. But this too is deluded. Is it selfless to pose as a hero on social media, to accuse some poor don of racism for teaching Huckleberry Finn? It’s an unpleasant irony that a gang which purports to be so sensitive feels no qualms about destroying the lives of the inadvertently offensive.

There are other ironies to the new PC. My favourite is that this daft bunch, who insist they’re quite sane, are demanding padded cells. Universities must provide ‘safe spaces’ in case a ‘triggered’ individual needs respite from a frightening lecture, on Shakespeare, say. The safe space at Brown University contains cookies, Play-Doh and videos of puppies. I feel a little triggered just thinking about it.

And elsewhere, in the world beyond the safe space, the real victims of trauma — child soldiers, Isis prisoners, the people of North Korea — go unnoticed and unchampioned by these bright young things who should be fighting their cause.

Haidt and Lukianoff end their terrific piece with a plea to the young to stop obsessing about their selves and their own hurt feelings. Because Buddhism is fashionable these days, and inoffensive, they remind the young that the Buddha emphasises detachment from emotions.

To this, I’d add the lessons of Christianity — still at the bedrock of both Europe and America’s sense of right and wrong. There’s the bit about taking the beam out of your own eye before jumping up and down about the speck in another’s. More than that, there’s the whole gospel emphasis away from self.

In my twenties, just as full of self-pity and terror as this new generation, I once dropped in to see a priest, Father Fudge, and poured out my woes, imagining he would be both sympathetic and impressed by my torment. Fr Fudge listened quietly, then said: ‘The point of being a Christian is not to feel better, it is so God can use you to serve others.’

Others? They hadn’t occurred to me for a while. I said goodbye to Fr Fudge, feeling not triggered or marginalised but unaccountably lighter. It wasn’t all about me! I actually laughed with the relief of it.

[milgram]

Wikipedia calls Frankfurt School a conspiracy theory. :o

Mao is quoted as saying "Not to have a correct political point of view is like having no soul."
source: On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People (February 27, 1957)

[Brian4Liberty]

Wikipedia calls Frankfurt School a conspiracy theory. :o

Mao is quoted as saying "Not to have a correct political point of view is like having no soul."
source: On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People (February 27, 1957)

It doesn't call the Frankfurt School a conspiracy theory. It's a very real thing.

But isn't that footnote interesting? Calling something a conspiracy theory is just another way of demonizing critics...

Here's what some Marxists have to say:


The Institut für Sozialforschung (Institut) was the creation of Felix Weil, who was able to use money from his father's grain business to finance the Institut. Weil was a young Marxist who had written his PhD on the practical problems of implementing socialism and was published by Karl Korsch.
Felix Weil

With the hope of bringing different trends of Marxism together, Weil organised a week-long symposium (the Erste Marxistische Arbeitswoche) in 1922 attended by Georg Lukacs, Karl Korsch, Karl August Wittfogel, Friedrich Pollock and others. The event was so successful that Weil set about erecting a building and funding salaries for a permanent institute. Weil negotiated with the Ministry of Education that the Director of the Institut would be a full professor from the state system, so that the Institut would have the status of a University.

Weil himself was an orthodox Marxist, who saw Marxism as scientific; the role of the Institut would be social and historical research mainly on the workers' movement. Indeed, in its early years, the Institut did fairly orthodox historical research. However, one of Weil's central objectives was also cross-disciplinary research, something which the German University system made impossible.
Karl Korsch

Although Georg Lukacs and Karl Korsch both attended the Arbeitswoche which had included a study of Korsch's Marxism and Philosophy, both were too committed to political activity and Party membership to join the Institut, although Korsch participated in publishing ventures for a number of years.
...
In 1931/32 a number of psychoanalysts from the Frankfurt Institute of Psychoanalysis and others who were acquainted with members of the Institut began to work systematically with the Institut. These included Franz Borkenau, Erich Fromm, Wilhelm Reich, Karl Landauer and Heinrich Meng.
Erich Fromm

In joining what was predominantly a “Hegelian-materialist” current of Marxists, these psychologists gave the development of Marxist theory an entirely new direction, which has left its imprint on social theory ever since.

Erich Fromm [Archive] dealt with psychological aspects of social control, delusion and conformity and became one of the founders of “socialist humanism”.
...
Later he was joined by the Hegelian philosopher Herbert Marcuse [Archive] who was probably the only member of the Institut who achieved wide influence among political activists, in the 1960s.
...
Perhaps two of the most famous figures who were in the central core of the Institut were Theodor Adorno [Archive] and Walter Benjamin, both renowned for their studies of literature and mass culture which would become so influential from the 1960s on.
...
The intellectuals who founded the Frankfurt Institut deliberatively cut out a space for the development of Marxist theory, inside the “academy” and independently of all kinds of political party.

The result was a process in which Marxism merged with bourgeois ideology. A parallel process took place in post-World War Two France, also involving a merging with Freudian ideas. One of the results was undoubtedly an enrichment of bourgeois ideology.
...
http://www.marxists.org/subject/frankfurt-school/


What could possibly represent this new hybrid "bourgeois ideology" more than modern US colleges and media?

[milgram]

Sorry about that, I screwed up the details ... the wiki entry was on Cultural Marxism rather than the Frankfurt School itself

https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2occ7m/wikipedias_cultural_marxism_article_now_redirects/

[osan]

Where did 'political correctness' originate? (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/08/8_25_2015_6_6.html)
By Clarice Feldman - August 25, 2015

Yes, PC was the creation of progressive socialists and its very purpose was in part to aid in the destruction of language with an eye toward destroying the ability and inclination of the individual to capably assess any given circumstance arising about him. Once the mental destruction is complete, the individual in question becomes much like a Marine boot: pliant and prone to suggestive training to new standards of perception and judgment.

Man, have they ever succeeded. It is quite scary to witness, knowing the difference between what was and what is.

[Anti Federalist]

What about free speech? Overrated, said the students. Just an excuse for bigots Jews and Communists.

Said Boobus Germanus, circa 1936.

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Yes, political correctness is soft cultural Marxism, with roots in the Frankfurt school. Most people who peddle these narratives have no idea about that, however. If you ask a cultural Marxist university student, most of them will deny what they are because they genuinely don't know. They just think they're being modern progressives; they're totally ignorant of the roots of their ideology.

[alucard13mm]

Political correctness was a weapon of the soviet union/KGB.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLqHv0xgOlc

[HVACTech]

I think the answer lies here.

Edward Bernays. (Freud was a piker. :))

The Century Of The Self: Controlling The 'Dangerous Crowd' In An Age Of Mass Democracy

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-01/century-self-controlling-dangerous-crowd-age-mass-democracy

good stuff if you can still find it. I watched them back in 07 or so. they were trying to ban it even then.

[Aspie Minarcho-Capitalist]

It's all rooted in Frankfurt School's "Critical Theory," which was developed in the 1930's by the Institute for Social Research (now known as the Frankfurt School) to emphasize group identities and multicultural heterogeneity as a sole root cause of social and economic inequalities and thus differs from the traditional constructivist framework of economic Marxism. The New Left counterculture movements (psychoactive gratification advocacy, sexual revolution, permissive society, group heterogeneity and collective identity movements - hippies, radical feminism, civil rights activism) of the 1960's were mainly just the first stage of it's evolutionary basis as implemented by Frankfurt School theorists and was responsible for the rise of the neoconservative statist revolution, as well as provocation of the culture war between secular progressives and religious traditionalists alike.

Furthermore, it promotes the social engineering of relativistic nihilism and postmodernist collective ideological-isms like socio-cultural permissiveness, multiculturalism (accomplished by mass immigration and diversity codes), identity politics (single issue groups especially), news-speak (hate speech codes, positive discrimination), cultural relativistic globalization, moral degenerateness (e.g. hypersexualization, orange tanning, postmodern art and gangsta culture), compulsive materialism, radical egalitarianism, gender neutrality, hedonistic libertinism, third wave feminism (including eco-feminism), radical environmentalism (what conspiracists interpret as Agenda 21), "anti-fascism" (followers of this are every bit as fascist as the Neo-Nazis), moral relativism, secular humanism, militant atheism (Atheism + SJW folks), group rights (usually single issues - LGBTQ, women's, human's, minorities e.t.c) and general political correctness. These techniques are often over-prevalent in institutions such as university campuses that are subsidized by centralized governments.

Cultural Marxists almost always tend to express hostility towards the natural social order, the patriarchy, Christianity, nationalism, traditional family values, patriotism, individualism, free enterprise, national sovereignty, private property and meritocracy. The ideology its aficionados preach strives to necessitate conformance as much as religious theocracies and has transgressively subverted the traditional natural order (rule of law) which inevitably, has led to a collectivized and dumbed down human society utterly devoid of intellectual curiosity, free will and natural individuality.

[Mach]

Sig.......

The Origins of Political Correctness (http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/)


---
Communist Goals - House of Representatives 1963
http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm



None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen
http://www.whale.to/b/allen_b1.html

[Mach]

:)

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/08/allan-davis/taking-down-the-thought-police/

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B014GMBUR4/ref=as_sl_pc_tf_lc?tag=lewrockwell&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=B014GMBUR4&adid=0N8MC7PDJXNH68XPEFXM&&ref-refURL=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2F%3Fpost _type%3Darticle%26p%3D560548%26preview%3Dtrue%26n_ preview_id%3D560548%26preview_nonce%3D991644a719

[Brian4Liberty]

The left have achieved new levels of intolerance, and they are trying to create AI that thinks the same way (re; Twitter shadow banning).

[acptulsa]

Just look at all the regular posters who took their intelligent conversation and ran when Bolton's Alt-Right Brigade was given free reign of this forum...

[Brian4Liberty]

Just look at all the regular posters who took their intelligent conversation and ran when Bolton's Alt-Right Brigade was given free reign of this forum...

We can bring in some Moderators from Twitter to clean this place right up.

[timosman]

We can bring in some Moderators from Twitter to clean this place right up.

This would require forum software upgrades. I don't think you can shadow ban via vBulletin 4.:cool:

[acptulsa]

We can bring in some Moderators from Twitter to clean this place right up.

There's no need. The Bolton Brigade didn't need a banhammer to chase off almost everyone who blew the wrong dog whistles.

A few months of unrestrained female bashing almost did the trick all by itself.

That's the insidious thing about political correctness. When it gets bad enough, suddenly people start thinking poisoning the well is cool. Then how do you knit a movement together?

[Brian4Liberty]

This would require forum software upgrades. I don't think you can shadow ban via vBulletin 4.:cool:

I can certainly understand their desire to have AI take care of moderation. Probably won’t be in a version of vBulletin anytime soon.

[timosman]

I can certainly understand their desire to have AI take care of moderation. Probably won’t be in a version of vBulletin anytime soon.

AI my ass. They've found a set of rules they liked and applied them. When things came out to light it was "AI" that was blamed. In reality it was AIC - Asshole In Charge :cool:

[pcosmar]

Social Engineering

"I aim to misbehave"

[Marenco]

There's no need. The Bolton Brigade didn't need a banhammer to chase off almost everyone who blew the wrong dog whistles.

A few months of unrestrained female bashing almost did the trick all by itself.

That's the insidious thing about political correctness. When it gets bad enough, suddenly people start thinking poisoning the well is cool. Then how do you knit a movement together?

''The Year is 2025 and the only members left in RFP are Swordsmyth and Zippy...'' :D

[AZJoe]

The purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better.

When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed.

A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine Political Correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to."
--- Anthony Daniels