vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑
Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:31 pm
It's a bit difficult to discuss it with you when you don't understand what it is, and ignore it when it's explained to you.
I must apologize for causing these problems. I haven’t been trolling, but I have been playing “devil’s advocate” in order to nudge the discussion back to the future (no pun intended). Unfortunately, that tack has given off the impression that I know nothing of which I’m talking.
As Veggie astutely pointed out, I ignored explanations of PC and anti-PC. I had hoped that the discussion would focus on the future of PC rather than its agenda, per se.
I’ve paid little attention to posts other than those by Judaka, -1-, JohnDoe, and HQ. Other than these four, there have been none who’ve prognosticated anything about the future. The rest are stuck in the present at best.
What follows is nothing new for me; this has been my opinion all along:
PC, per Wikipedia, is a movement to avoid language, policies and actions that may (or may not) be offensive to certain disadvantaged, at least in the minds of PC’ers, minority groups.
What PC does is it censors language, policies and behaviors that it deems offensive. In other words, PC obstructs freedom of speech along with the freedom to engage in policies and actions of one’s own choosing.
The consequences of PC are seen in our news, our courts, our schools, our entertainment and our public bathrooms.
The Anti-PC backlash calls out this agenda for being excessive and unwarranted.
Worst of all, insofar as thought and language are interdependent, PC is a movement that relies on mind control to bring about its agenda.
And that's the way it is.
What it will be will be shaped by a battle between the growth of the PC culture and the strong pushback it garners. For that reason, I see PC as a cyclical movement, as the pendulum swings, so it were.