Liberty dying on the alter of PC

[12icer]

But yet you rail against other people objecting to what YOU say. How are you any different from them?

It is impossible to go through life without giving offense to someone, unless you never say anything to anyone. The only thing a person can do is to treat others the way YOU would like to be treated.

So if I am offended when a black person at work takes the Lords name in Vain I can have him fired, Is that your position?

Sure, go have a black guy fired, are you free now?

One line statement with no qualifying direction. IE The idea that any company would fire an offensive black man for any vile or disgusting thing he did other than a physical crime is ludicrous. The FACTS are that the friends were fired for the satisfaction of some other person. That is WRONG in my view. Do you think THEY should have been fired? If you do I see you as part of one of the problems with this country that needs to be addressed.

 

[RodISHI]

But yet you rail against other people objecting to what YOU say. How are you any different from them?

It is impossible to go through life without giving offense to someone, unless you never say anything to anyone. The only thing a person can do is to treat others the way YOU would like to be treated.

So if I am offended when a black person at work takes the Lords name in Vain I can have him fired, Is that your position?

Sure, go have a black guy fired, are you free now?

One line statement with no qualifying direction. IE The idea that any company would fire an offensive black man for any vile or disgusting thing he did other than a physical crime is ludicrous. The FACTS are that the friends were fired for the satisfaction of some other person. That is WRONG in my view. Do you think THEY should have been fired? If you do I see you as part of one of the problems with this country that needs to be addressed.

Vile things can get you fired regardless of your race, etc... To satisfy some bullshit that one does not like in another person's personal views or PC thought crimes on political views would be wrong.

 

[12icer]

What is "vile", a persons protected right of free speech as weighed against the liberal idea of an unprotected right not to be offended? I see no comparison between the two, as one is a Constitutional right protected by the FIRST AMENDMENT and also covered in others that prevent all types of discrimination. That should include the right to have differing views but PC and liberals views take precedent apparently over anyone else's in PC actions.

 

[usmbguest5318]

We would have missed some great classics if these type PC were around when they came out.

It's been decades since I've seen Our Gang/Little Rascals, but re-watching the first 7 minutes, I didn't see anything that struck me un-PC -- even by today's standards -- in that clip. Maybe I didn't watch far enough in?

I did notice that the woman who gave Stymie the dog biscuits seemed more inclined to feed the dog than feed the boy. That doesn't strike me as politically incorrect. It strikes me as indurately crass, but it's a long stretch to extrapolate from that that the woman's behavior is impolitic, or as we say verbosely these days, "politically incorrect."

Perhaps it's my background in economics that makes me see the matter of political correctness as I do and am about to explain. I think the overwhelming majority of people haven't the first idea of what the term "politically" means in the saying "politically correct."

In economics we have the term "positive economics." The term has nothing to do positive in a "good and bad" sense. It's merely a term that applies the "-ive" ending to the verb "posit." The word was created by nothing more than articulate speakers of English using the language the way it's meant to be used. One takes a root word, slaps an ending on it, and "boom" one has a word. That English works that way is little but the great power and flexibility of the language. Of course, prefixes and suffixes also help to reduce the quantity of words one must know in order to communicate, if not poetically, at least effectively.

As best as I can tell, and as makes any sense to me, the "politically" of "politically incorrect" is nothing more than the "-ally" ending applied to the root "politic." [1] Why did anyone ever needed to invent the term "politically incorrect" when "impolitic" was just fine? It's not as though it's ever correct to be tactless. [2] When in our past were people ever deliberately impolitic (click on the prior link to politic before you answer)?



Note:

1. That "public" is a word that doesn't follow the "-ly/-ally" rules, is an illustration of what makes English a difficult language to master. I suppose that's ironic insofar as English also has features like suffixes that also make it easy to use, highly flexible (within the confines of the grammar structure that defines it) and very receptive to coinage.
2. I'd like to say it's incorrect to be tacky too, but it's really not. Sadly, it's not wrong to lack sophistication or refinement, but it's never a bad idea to acquire more of those qualities than less.

 

[gallantwarrior]

The PC culture is slowly taking small chunks of our freedoms this will continue until nothing remains Those of us who believe in the Constitution need to fight against these intrusions by any means violently if necessary.

“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
― Benjamin Franklin

Publishers are hiring 'sensitivity readers' to flag potentially offensive content

I'd like to add another Founding Father's observation: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.

 

[gallantwarrior]

We would have missed some great classics if these type PC were around when they came out.

It's been decades since I've seen Our Gang/Little Rascals, but re-watching the first 7 minutes, I didn't see anything that struck me un-PC -- even by today's standards -- in that clip. Maybe I didn't watch far enough in?

I did notice that the woman who gave Stymie the dog biscuits seemed more inclined to feed the dog than feed the boy. That doesn't strike me as politically incorrect. It strikes me as indurately crass, but it's a long stretch to extrapolate from that that the woman's behavior is impolitic, or as we say verbosely these days, "politically incorrect."

Perhaps it's my background in economics that makes me see the matter of political correctness as I do and am about to explain. I think the overwhelming majority of people haven't the first idea of what the term "politically" means in the saying "politically correct."

In economics we have the term "positive economics." The term has nothing to do positive in a "good and bad" sense. It's merely a term that applies the "-ive" ending to the verb "posit." The word was created by nothing more than articulate speakers of English using the language the way it's meant to be used. One takes a root word, slaps an ending on it, and "boom" one has a word. That English works that way is little but the great power and flexibility of the language. Of course, prefixes and suffixes also help to reduce the quantity of words one must know in order to communicate, if not poetically, at least effectively.

As best as I can tell, and as makes any sense to me, the "politically" of "politically incorrect" is nothing more than the "-ally" ending applied to the root "politic." [1] Why did anyone ever needed to invent the term "politically incorrect" when "impolitic" was just fine? It's not as though it's ever correct to be tactless. [2] When in our past were people ever deliberately impolitic (click on the prior link to politic before you answer)?



Note:

1. That "public" is a word that doesn't follow the "-ly/-ally" rules, is an illustration of what makes English a difficult language to master. I suppose that's ironic insofar as English also has features like suffixes that also make it easy to use, highly flexible (within the confines of the grammar structure that defines it) and very receptive to coinage.
2. I'd like to say it's incorrect to be tacky too, but it's really not. Sadly, it's not wrong to lack sophistication or refinement, but it's never a bad idea to acquire more of those qualities than less.

Plenty of modern-day liberals would prefer to feed the dog and ignore the child, too.

 

[Mac1958]

That should include the right to have differing views but PC and liberals views take precedent apparently over anyone else's in PC actions.

Once the Regressive Left found it could effectively weaponize PC, all bets were off, and they were more than willing to defy the spirit of Freedom of Speech in exchange for political advantage.

There are some cracks in the wall, but the wall is still there.
.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

The PC culture is slowly taking small chunks of our freedoms this will continue until nothing remains Those of us who believe in the Constitution need to fight against these intrusions by any means violently if necessary.

“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
― Benjamin Franklin

Publishers are hiring 'sensitivity readers' to flag potentially offensive content

I'd like to add another Founding Father's observation: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.

Its a good quote the thing is Mr Jefferson never personally got his hands dirty. Those who have to spill the blood just want it to be worth it.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I thought Ben Franklin was a jew?

So ?

 

[RodISHI]

We would have missed some great classics if these type PC were around when they came out.

It's been decades since I've seen Our Gang/Little Rascals, but re-watching the first 7 minutes, I didn't see anything that struck me un-PC -- even by today's standards -- in that clip. Maybe I didn't watch far enough in?

I did notice that the woman who gave Stymie the dog biscuits seemed more inclined to feed the dog than feed the boy. That doesn't strike me as politically incorrect. It strikes me as indurately crass, but it's a long stretch to extrapolate from that that the woman's behavior is impolitic, or as we say verbosely these days, "politically incorrect."

Perhaps it's my background in economics that makes me see the matter of political correctness as I do and am about to explain. I think the overwhelming majority of people haven't the first idea of what the term "politically" means in the saying "politically correct."

In economics we have the term "positive economics." The term has nothing to do positive in a "good and bad" sense. It's merely a term that applies the "-ive" ending to the verb "posit." The word was created by nothing more than articulate speakers of English using the language the way it's meant to be used. One takes a root word, slaps an ending on it, and "boom" one has a word. That English works that way is little but the great power and flexibility of the language. Of course, prefixes and suffixes also help to reduce the quantity of words one must know in order to communicate, if not poetically, at least effectively.

As best as I can tell, and as makes any sense to me, the "politically" of "politically incorrect" is nothing more than the "-ally" ending applied to the root "politic." [1] Why did anyone ever needed to invent the term "politically incorrect" when "impolitic" was just fine? It's not as though it's ever correct to be tactless. [2] When in our past were people ever deliberately impolitic (click on the prior link to politic before you answer)?



Note:

1. That "public" is a word that doesn't follow the "-ly/-ally" rules, is an illustration of what makes English a difficult language to master. I suppose that's ironic insofar as English also has features like suffixes that also make it easy to use, highly flexible (within the confines of the grammar structure that defines it) and very receptive to coinage.
2. I'd like to say it's incorrect to be tacky too, but it's really not. Sadly, it's not wrong to lack sophistication or refinement, but it's never a bad idea to acquire more of those qualities than less.

Ironically I had this huge paperback dictionary as a child. I started reading it from the beginning and studying words but dropped it after getting yelled for always having my nose in a book. The mishmash of words today can be somewhat confusing for those of us who did not finish school but went on to the survival part instead. Plus the twisting that takes place in order for anyone group to push their agendas. It must be very confusing for some of the young people these days but I think they will survive it. Some think its tacky when you tell them the truth or show them something real that offends them.

 

[RodISHI]

What is "vile", a persons protected right of free speech as weighed against the liberal idea of an unprotected right not to be offended? I see no comparison between the two, as one is a Constitutional right protected by the FIRST AMENDMENT and also covered in others that prevent all types of discrimination. That should include the right to have differing views but PC and liberals views take precedent apparently over anyone else's in PC actions.

The word "vile" to me may be different than it is to another. Freedom of speech is not guaranteed when someone else is signing your paycheck. I suppose for an example I would fire one person for harassing another person in a sexual manner, "**** you" and other phrases could get someone fired if they insulted the public whom I had to make sure was satisfied with my service or product or it could just be the final nail in their employment coffin also.

 

[usmbguest5318]

getting yelled for always having my nose in a book.

OT:
That strikes me as a strange thing for which to chide a child, but your experience in that regard is your experience.

 

[RodISHI]

getting yelled for always having my nose in a book.

OT:
That strikes me as a strange thing for which to chide a child, but your experience in that regard is your experience.

Many of us grew up with hard working, working class parents. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[Divine Wind]

I don't see this generation growing into real world people, not with the elite on the left and the established "right" feeding these kids delusions.

I strongly believe there is a purpose to existence. History proves mankind tends to take two steps forward and one step back. Thinking in the long term proves we're doing better. Thinking in terms of 4-8 years causes some people to panic.

 

[owebo]

The PC culture is slowly taking small chunks of our freedoms this will continue until nothing remains Those of us who believe in the Constitution need to fight against these intrusions by any means violently if necessary.

“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
― Benjamin Franklin

Publishers are hiring 'sensitivity readers' to flag potentially offensive content

 

[Divine Wind]

Many of us grew up with hard working, working class parents. Different strokes for different folks.

True, but depending upon your age, that definition can vary. I'm soon to be 61. You? I don't expect you to answer since you're probably 5-10 years younger than me. LOL

 

[RodISHI]

Many of us grew up with hard working, working class parents. Different strokes for different folks.

True, but depending upon your age, that definition can vary. I'm soon to be 61. You? I don't expect you to answer since you're probably 5-10 years younger than me. LOL

You will have to keep guessing as I will meet your expectations (hint, someone who knows you knows my age).

 

[Divine Wind]

Well I think we all know gorwing up in america that blacks are responsible for everything and whites are blameless in all. And really, as long as we have someone to blame, no one has to do anything and no one is responsible for this miserable excuse for a society.

You don't know shit about growing up in America if that is what you think. Growing up in America for MOST people was about PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for ones actions, and the CONTENT of ones CHARACTER. The liberal agenda to divide the nation into small sects to blame each other for some perceived wrong by other groups is at the heart of PC, and is a complete fabrication. The facts are far from the ideas driven by PC, and statistically extremely devoid of factual evidence.

Agreed. It should be about personal responsibility and character, but many Democrats exist upon an agenda of blaming whites for the actions of black criminals. IMHO, the real problem is twofold; creating a culture of dependence upon government handouts and refusing to do what is needed to correct that dependency thus solving most of the problems in American ghettos.

 

[Divine Wind]

Man, everyone's a nazi today.

Thanks for your confession although I disagree with your assumption against others.

 

[Divine Wind]

Whatever I want whenever I want as long as it does not deprive life or liberties from others.

Agreed 100% here.

OTOH, wouldn't writers demanding publishers print their books "as is" be depriving the publishers the right to maximize their business?

IMHO, the OP article is more about maximizing profit than it is about some secret Liberal plan to make us all more "sensitive" Americans. Publishing a book costs money. It's an investment by the publisher done to make money. The publisher in the OP article, Lee & Low Books, is the largest multicultural children's book publisher in the United States. Their profits are maximized by selling to the largest number of parents and grandparents as possible. Controversial statements are not conducive to maximizing profits.

Writers are free to self-publish: Self-Publishing with Outskirts Press

Profit margins for publishers vary a bit, but as the link below proves, the average is a little over 11%.

Two Important Publishing Facts Everyone Gets Wrong - The Wayfinder - Hugh C. Howey