- Position1 of 3›
- Political correctness is bad for our society
- Argument‹2 of 2
Political correctness' suppression of ideas leads to their polarisation
Political correctness merely prevents people using offensive words, the motivation behind them remains, and views become more harmful once suppressed
The argument
When people cannot think, share or say their feelings, their feelings do not disappear. These thoughts can intensify and become even more toxic. The frustration felt at the injustice of not being able to express ones views has been shown to exacerbate views, not diminish them. Historically, when a society is oppressed or its views are censored, the people revolt against politicians as their views begin to fester. Donald Trump's success stems predominantly from his lack of political correctness. A large proportion of Trump's support comes from people with highly unpolitically correct views . An APPP poll found that a third of Trump voters support banning gays and lesbians from the country. Twenty percent said Lincoln shouldn’t have freed the slaves. They felt that Trump was addressing issues such as immigration with a brutal approach that others wouldn't dare.
Premises
Counter-arguments
Political correctness does not polarise ideas by suppressing them. Political correctness makes people reconsider whether they are saying something of prejudicial or inappropriate. Political correctness raises awareness about the severity of extreme opinions/toxic views that target minority groups. Political correctness makes people consider that harmful views can lead to more drastic measures down the line. For example, Anti-semitism first showed up as jokes and alienation before it lead to millions of Jews being murdered.
Rejecting the premises
[Rejecting P1] The pressure-cooker model is asserted, and the evidence runs both ways. Social norms also shape what people come to think, which is why attitudes to race, sexuality and disability have shifted alongside changes in what is sayable rather than merely hardening beneath them. [Rejecting P2] Two problems. Political correctness is a social norm rather than state censorship, so the analogy to censored and oppressed populations does not hold. And the polling establishes that some voters held views well outside the mainstream, not that political correctness produced them — those views may equally have preceded it, which is the more straightforward reading. [Rejecting C] The conclusion proves too much. If naming a view unacceptable reliably radicalises those who hold it, then no norm against any view could ever be established, yet norms plainly do change what people say and, over time, what they are willing to think.