Skip to main content

In Defense of Political Correctness

Duane is an avid reader and follower of all things social, spiritual, and political, and a committed leftist.

Trump Campaigned Against P.C. Culture


Political Correctness - Good Intentions

Personally, I have never liked the proverb "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." Good intentions are their own justification. Political correctness has good intentions; it just sometimes fails in execution. Change is clumsy, uncomfortable, causes animosity, and requires consistent practice. Yet change is one of the few constants life offers.

Society is changing. It wants to be better, more inclusive, and less marginalizing. Donald Trump's appeals to regressive old attitudes about race and language decency was alarming; his rise to the presidency of the United States is evidence that not only should political correctness matter, but it is critical for America to mature psychologically and emotionally. Trump's overtly bigoted pandering to the juvenile, fearful, narrow-minded mob manipulated their fears with incorrigible racism and misogyny that is validating for a specific group of people that want their reactionary views legitimized.

Political correctness, even in its annoying, bumbling, and awkward application is a necessary shift for public language. In a culture where perception matters, like here in the United States, making the effort to change the language is crucial to our maturing as a society.

Language and the tone we inhabit in our social discourse is critically important. Language that is inclusive and respectful. Words and terms that don't diminish, demean, or depreciate ones social status. Language can marginalize groups. Language can also help restore the previously socially marginalized.

Political correctness is why 'retarded' is now 'learning disabled.' 'Retarded' had become a pejorative in American culture, a school yard bully term used to demean. Political correctness is why there are no more actresses, women are simply actors; no more comediennes, only comedians; no more songstresses, only singers or vocalists.

Political correctness can also be absurd. 'Thought shower' was coined as a politically correct term for 'brainstorm'. Brainstorm was thought to be insensitive to those with epileptic disorder. 'Differently abled' was concocted to be politically correct for handicapped.

Everything can be taken to its ridiculous extreme, even political correctness. Reject the absurdities, not the concept.

The major motivation of political correctness is amending language and tone around race and gender, hoping that society evolves to a more equitable relationship with each other.

Political Correctness - Self Determination



Political correctness in its present context was born in the "new left" movement of the 1960s and '70s. This new left formulated after the classic leftist, socialist, and communist structures were decimated by the paranoid, unconstitutional McCarthyism of the 1950s. The classic or 'old left' was more focused on workers rights, the relationship of labor to capital. Social/cultural issues were acknowledged, but it was not their major focus.

The new left emerged from college campuses. Academia was much more resistant to anti-constitutional suppression of thought. Students were freer to explore and experiment with alternative ideologies and their application. So, in the ashes of the classic vanguard socialist and communist left, wrecked by McCarthyism, the new left formed.

Political correctness in its present context is widely attributed to writer Toni Cade Bambara, in her essay The Black Woman: An Anthology (1970). Toni wrote,
"A man cannot be politically correct and a [male] chauvinist, too."

Progressives and leftists often used to the term in their own circles, as a reminder of their own resistance to trans-formative cultural change. The term politically correct became PC in leftist circles, but wasn't in mainstream usage until the 1980s and the Reagan administration's resistance to it. That resistance was founded on the resurgent conservative movement's war on academia. After the momentous gains of the left from the mid-1960s to the late 1970s, Reagan's election symbolized a conservative backlash, a regression. Activism on college campuses became non-existent. Social movements that were starting to find a voice in government and the media hit a stone wall with the election of Reagan and the conservative revolution. Gil Troy of the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History writes:

"Critics consider the Reagan Revolution reactionary, an assault against the great liberal gains that, over the previous fifty years, had democratized and humanized America. They claim Reagan widened the gap between rich and poor, encouraged greed, and threatened the accomplishments of the civil rights, feminist, and environmental movements. The intensity of the ongoing debate more than three decades after his inauguration demonstrates the Reagan Revolution’s continuing resonance."

Resistance to PC culture was, to conservatives, resistance to the ideas and efforts of the left in general, and academia in particular. It continues to this day.

“If your social consciousness seems stuck in 1975, 2018 is gonna be a rough ride.” -

John Scalzi

Freedom of Speech - Not Freedom From Consequences

There are few if any laws mandating political correctness, nor should there be. Activists and academics provided us with a linguistic framework for social equality, while still acknowledging each person's unique expression and challenges. PC is not the disingenuous American platitude of us being a melting pot. PC is founded in the spirit of the cultural mosaic and community cultural strength through diversity. Individuals don't have to contort themselves to blend in to the melting pot, people are able to express their full uniqueness in a mosaic society.

The standardized version of what an American is changes. What represents an American becomes a broader, more inclusive vision. Expanding that vision requires language changes.

Scroll to Continue

Those language changes are not codified legally, they're slowly, sometimes discouraging, and even a woefully painful striving to become cultural norms. The personal consequences of not at least trying to be PC are not legal ones, they're social. Ones livelihood can be adversely affected. However, the 1st Amendment is protection against legal consequences. Which is the the largest misnomer about PC. One is not legally responsible for being non-PC.

The 1st Amendment is constitutionally protected speech. However, the 1st Amendment does not offer protection from the social consequences of speech. The bill of rights free speech assurances does not translate to employment, business relationships or social interactions. Such is the natural order, those that refuse to acknowledge or make the effort in the face of trans-formative change endure consequences, social, not legal consequences.

PC is awkward, its proponents can be overbearing, but PC signifies the next chapter in humanity's social evolution. As PC evolves itself, it will be less bumbling, its proponents will become less strident and demanding. PC will develop a grace of its own, as society begins to appreciate the beauty, the resilience, of a diverse, more dialectic-ally thoughtful society.

All Change is Initially Ridiculed


Presently PC Is Mainly Ridiculed

While researching this piece, it was exceedingly difficult to find any sources that were supportive of PC. What came to mind is the south of the 1950s. One would have been hard-pressed to find any sources that supported integration.

Momentous courage over several decades brought civil and voting rights to the disenfranchised. Although I'm not proposing legal remedies for speech mandating PC, even if it were legally possible. I believe in humanity collectively, I believe the majority of people want to be equitable, want inclusiveness and empathetic relations to diverse others. The forces of regression are loud, shrill...even boastful now. I think it the last desperate stand of bigots.

Youngsters on college campuses have found their voices again, after decades of relative silence. Those young folks publicly embrace PC, if not personally.
I am optimistic.

One Love,

Duane Townsend

© 2016 Duane Townsend


Duane Townsend (author) from Detroit on January 06, 2019:


You joined HunPages 55 minutes ago. Presumably to comment on this Hub.

Thanks for commenting.

However, I doubt you even read what I wrote, nothing in your comment reflects you actually read the Hub.

Welcome to HubPages.

BLIZZ2012 on January 06, 2019:

The problem is that PC culture isn’t even close to being neutral. We are all different individuals with different thoughts and ideas. Intentions don’t matter based on how you play the game. If we want to move in a more progressive state we need unity. Basically what this article is saying is that we need to crack a few eggs to make an omelette just because of “good intentions”. Based on attitudes of the past year it has been very divisive when discussing certain issues. Your reasoning is no different than “just think of the children” when most are indifferent. It’s the factor of not everyone is an activists and that we talk about issues instead of shutting down discussion just because you disagree. You just can’t feasibly force people to change their mind or how they behave because it upsets or discomforts someone. Plus the factor of assumption. You basically accused the current president for curtain things without any actual evidence to point to. You mostly just assumed that because of the extremists on one side. Eventually you create the opposite and everyone stops caring all together. If you are going to offend someone if not everyone then why care at all? The way most people react and respond to issues through the PC lends is piss poor regardless of intentions. That’s why there is a push back in the first place. If you are going to run a controversial figure or media off a platform then might as well take away the first amendment. Everyone has a right to any platform and say as they will. You don’t run them out of town just cuz you don’t like what they say. And it’s this that’s the problem. If you want to sway people You half to be more suggestive with your discussions. Guide instead of in force. You can’t simply force change and dismiss bad behavior just because it’s for the greater good. Things come naturally and slowly. Eventually we will get there but way most go about it is just not great at all nor efficient.

Duane Townsend (author) from Detroit on May 01, 2018:


This Hub states the case for P.C.

P.C. is not a singular black-white issue that it's opponents try to make it.

cawbber on August 19, 2017:

Things change, and its a necessity as we evolve culturally. However, the PC agenda has swayed too far in other direction and is now a legitimate threat to free speech.

A perfect example is the recent situation with the Google Engineer who complained of the affirmative action programs he felt were negatively affecting that organization.

Agree with the thesis or not, the author had some well thought out remarks, which should have been the basis for a healthy debate. Instead, he was summarily fired and the Internet exploded with a deluge of articles of "how dare you" insinuations. It was clear to me that the majority of those didn't really take the time to read and consider his point of view, instead opting for the "you're not allowed to talk about this" rhetoric which is all too common these days.

This is the dark side of political correctness. It is also the reason why you are starting to see a counter-culture movement specifically aimed at taking on PC extremists.

My last thoughts on the matter: words are simply that, but context is everything. Don't overlay your own potentially biased context before truly considering the original intent.

Duane Townsend (author) from Detroit on March 17, 2017:


The defined are wresting power from the definers. Culturally, definitions of people and conditions were from a white, Christian, male perspective.

That is changing as it must.

“What I think the political correctness debate is really about is the power to be able to define. The definers want the power to name. And the defined are now taking that power away from them.” ~ Toni Morrison

deanna munson on March 17, 2017:

political correctness is how we've gotton to this point .why would you want dangerous people to continue fooling the public by decieving them with pretty sounding nice inoffensive words .we need authenticity .if racists and pedophiles are using the same watered down "acceptable" speech no one knows who or what theyre dealing with .making someone speak a certain way is deceptive and changes nothing behind the scenes .

Duane Townsend (author) from Detroit on March 15, 2016:


I'm approving your comment. The world needs to see the absurdity of the anti-PC argument.

Seems you're anti-PC simply because you want to be disrespectful to others. You called me 'boy'.

You're the perfect example of the majority of anti-PC'ers.

roob on March 15, 2016:

thats your opinion boy unless you can prove me wrong lol. The govt has been pc for as long as they have been corrupt. Maybe you like being lied to and not hearing the truth. I don't know. I would rather hear it as it really is instead of sugar coat. Gay people are gay. I don't need to say homosexual. People should stop being so sensitive and trying to act all sophisticated. Behind closed doors all these proper people are as big as sinners as everyone else. They just look that much more shady when they get caught doing something not PC.

Duane Townsend (author) from Detroit on March 15, 2016:


Yours is a false analogy.

The point being, one can speak their truth in a manner that is respectful to others.

roob on March 15, 2016:

@Duane Townsend: Yes sir I am, when people are being politically correct they are at the least changing their tone and use of words to sound a certain way or appease a certain crowd. Some things they believe they can't say because they aren't politically correct. Very often the truth is not politically correct, that is what I mean!

Duane Townsend (author) from Detroit on March 15, 2016:

Big E... Your comment is dangerously close to a troll. I approved it just in case you intended to make a more reasonable point.

Big E on March 14, 2016:

Let me let you in on a secret. You do not have to watch what you say nearly as much when you are black. Black skin is like a shield.

it is possible to change you appearance to black. They have a dark chocolate tan. They have wigs. Or shave your head. Color contacts for eyes. Renew drivers license picture and live as a black person.

Duane Townsend (author) from Detroit on March 14, 2016:

roob...Sounds like you're saying PC leads to dishonesty.

Please explain.

Duane Townsend (author) from Detroit on March 14, 2016:

Ron...Those people that decided actress wasn't acceptable to them anymore were the women actors.

(See Toni Morrison's image and quote above in the article)

roob on March 14, 2016:

How about people act in a real manner? Why can't they be "true" instead of pc. I mean who would honestly want someone to act politically correct after all the politically correct lies that have been told.

Ronald E Franklin from Mechanicsburg, PA on March 14, 2016:

Duane, on the use of "actress" - I deliberately tied it to the example of the Academy Awards Best Actress award to show that the term is considered offensive, except for when it's not.

In other words, some people decided that an "actress" was somehow a lesser being than an "actor." Isn't it derogatory in itself to say that the feminine form of a word is inherently inferior to the masculine? PC never demands that all thespians be called "actresses." Isn't that a rather obvious bias in itself? Isn't it clear that the choice of "actor" rather than "actress" is either entirely arbitrary, or an admission that those trying to impose that usage, though they probably would never admit it even to themselves, actually do consider anything identified as female to be inferior to what is identified as male?

In my opinion the use of "actor" as the only descriptor for both men and women of that profession is not something that arose from the grassroots, but something imposed, as I say above, by the culturally elite gatekeepers of mass communication. In the process, they unwittingly reveal their own prejudices.

Duane Townsend (author) from Detroit on March 14, 2016:

Ron...thank you for reading and responding. This is an important discussion that needs to happen.

You present so many points it's gonna be tough to consolidate an efficient response.

Yes, social media is notoriously non-PC. I have no issues with that. Page moderators and social media sites have done a good job in trying to minimize incendiary language and derogatory comments. There is no 'force' involved, these are individual people or groups that decided that decency and respect for all matters.

When you refer to a woman actor as an actress, that does communicate a 'lesser' professional expression than being a actor. Words do have history, labeling women with a noun -actress- that are performing the same vocation as men, is a change that needs to be made. People that act are called -actors.

There are no laws against smoking, however, smoking is highly unacceptable in society now. I would say the same, about old, non-PC language. PC society learning to address itself in a more equitable manner.

Ronald E Franklin from Mechanicsburg, PA on March 14, 2016:

Duane, this is a well written and heartfelt defense of your point of view. I disagree with your premise, but you presented it very well.

Why do I disagree? Because PC is inherently coercive. The whole point of it is to force everyone in the society into speech conformity through the use of massive and punitive social pressure. The purpose is to enforce a shift toward a more "progressive" outlook. You explicitly acknowledge that when you note that conservatives are usually anti-PC while progressives are usually the PC police. Why is that? Obviously it is because PC is designed basically to force people to speak, and therefore eventually to think, in a way progressives approve.

Thus, PC is not neutral, but is a weapon for beating down opponents on the other side of the cultural and political divide.

Who defines PC? It is the cultural elites, the gatekeepers of mass communication. It's certainly not the grass roots. Social media is notoriously non-PC. So, PC serves to enforce fealty to the societal norms favored by the culturally powerful, who, like any other set of human beings, are interested in perpetuating their own power and worldview.

This is not at all to say that the people who rail against PC are on the side of the angels. What they usually are crying about is being criticized for their use of abusive, disrespectful, and denigrating language toward people and groups they dislike. They should be criticized. They should be subjected to “the social consequences” of speaking in ways that belittle people they consider to not be part of their cultural tribe.

But that’s very different from approving the enforcement of PC as a societal norm. If I refer to someone as an actress, I’ve denigrated nobody. In fact, I may just be congratulating Brie Larson for winning the Best Actress prize at the Academy Awards.

Abusive speech takes place on both sides of the political spectrum. PC effectively attempts to forcibly stack the deck against one side of that spectrum and in favor of the other. By doing so, it becomes abusive in its own right.

Duane Townsend (author) from Detroit on March 13, 2016:

Thank you Shadrake2.

Shadrack2 on March 13, 2016:

Such an interesting perspective. I love the way you have brought it out.

Duane Townsend (author) from Detroit on March 13, 2016:

Thanks for reading Ann. Your added perspective is appreciated.

Ann Carr from SW England on March 13, 2016:

I agree with most of your points. Sadly, it's not usually the change that is the problem, it's the way people take it to extremes.

The origins of the 'political' part were (here, at least) to get 'one up' on the opposition. In Britain, political correctness has gone totally barmy! I've written a hub on it.

PC is great when it brings respect, tolerance and understanding, but then that should exist anyway.

Great hub!


Related Articles