Connect with us
//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Latest

How Political Correctness Legitimises Western Aggression

Political correctness has nothing to do with tolerance or respecting diversity. It is an authoritarian tool which is used to impose a world view that stifles dissent and legitimises war.

Siddharth Pathak

Published

on

Political correctness. It was a term that I hardly heard before I came across it in the funny, and long drawn out political circuses around elections in the US.

It was remarkable that in the four years I attended college here, the term became more in usage in just a short time: things would be criticised and put down because, HEY! THEY WERE NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT! And hence was the implication that everything in the society had to strive towards being the perfect utopia and that would be achieved by enforcing a certain version of “political correctness”.

To an Indian this looked strange – I was used to a loud raucous culture where everyone and everything barked at each other, threw tantrums in the air and shouted abuse. And yet somehow all of the 1.3 billion people from all walks of life, all religions in the world and belonging to all the cults imaginable get along fine. How come if we Indians have done it for a few thousands of years, could not the Americans do it, who incidentally are far more homogenous than us?

Life begins with diversity. India, a country that I deeply adore and love, for it is the land that lends me the identity I use to look and understand the world, is the epitome of diversity. It always has been. But so is America. You find people from all the walks of life, all the colours which humans exist in, and all the genders people consider themselves to belong to. There are religious farmers toiling hard believing in a concept of a God distinct from others, as there are painters atheistic in their beliefs using the brushes to paint a unique interpretation of life. In a diverse land such as America’s we tend to consider quite naturally that political correctness enforces a vision that is representative to every single strand of life that manifests itself. But I have come to realise that this is a false view and in facts leads to the destruction of diversity itself.

The basic problem lying in the core of the PC movement is on whose terms are the guidelines of PC enforced? Because each community, state, district and county are diverse and different and unique from each other. Is it really sensible that someone living in a very well off neighbourhood in the suburbs of Boston has an acute understanding of the culture, and historical nuances of a rural farming community in the lush brown wheat fields of Iowa? No it does not make any sense. PC feeds into this asymmetry by imposing forcefully a vision of how society ought to be on every single person, whether or not he or she shares that vision. It is incredibly unfair to lump a very narrow vision of not a descriptive worldview but a normative one, on people. It shreds the diversity it seeks to protect by hijacking it and conforming it in a cage. How can this be termed as “protecting” diversity?

Another glaring issue about political correctness as practiced by people today in the West, is its relationship with the dreaded five letter religion – Islam. Yes, Islam is the favourite protectorate of the PC crowds which rush towards its defence from far right wing groups. Islam has become the second side to the PC coin, the other side being discrimination of women and black people.

I admire these people for standing up for the defence of a religion that is needlessly belittled and chipped away of its decency bit by bit. But here I unfortunately find the PC movement to have caused a far greater harm than heal. Due to the conformity inherent in the PC structure, any case it deems as Islamophobic it hijacks completely, thereby reducing the political discourse to such a volatile level, that many urgently needed discourses are discouraged from ever being put into practice.

The real damage to Muslims is not being done by the people who spew hateful comments against it in the US, UK, Canada or anywhere else.   It is being done in the unjust, immoral slaughter-fests of wars that have been going on in the Middle East, with the elite political class egging them on, and participating in them.  This happened in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Libya and now it is underway in Syria. I am sorry to say it, but where were these crusaders when entire nations with their carefully built institutions were being burned down to the ground in a magnitude that would even shock the great Genghis Khan?

The problem is that because the people on whose hands lies the blame for this came up with their justifications hidden behind arcane and very long papers, they were not violating the false comfort of the PC movement. Basically you could get away with murder and duplicity if you were able to hide your goals and aims in exponentially long pieces of text that lent your argument some false air of “legitimacy”. I find the idea that if you say the right things, and don’t offend anyone with words, and yet get away with waging immoral, unneeded and horrific wars that don’t serve anyone, unacceptable.  There are well deserving occasions when the time calls for robbing peoples of their reputation and attacking their prestige by mocking them, when they have done everything to deserve that bit of karma. My ancestors came up with the concept of karma as a way of saying that nothing in the world without repercussions. And I would very much like to see the veneer of legitimacy afforded to people who have done so much to wrong the millions of Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians and yes, Americans, destroyed.

Political correctness comes in between and enforces a limited version of an idealised view whereby everyone speaks without offending others and impose checks on what they say and how they say it. Far from respecting diversity, PC looks like a manifestation of an Orwellian worldview, where our idiocy, resilience, differences, religious attitudes, lifestyles, manners of speaking, drinking cultures, and eating habits are all subjected to a sanitised version of an overlord interpretation of the idealised society, ready to burn down the political and social capital of anyone daring to deviate from this.

Political correctness itself is not correct. And it is ripping apart people by protecting those who need to be heckled and ridiculed, those who need to atone and punished for their horrific crimes. Life is diverse. Let us not destroy it by being politically correct.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement //pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Trump Has Gifted “No More Wars” Policy Position To Bernie Sanders (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 148.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

RT CrossTalk host Peter Lavelle and The Duran’s Alex Christoforou discuss how US President Donald Tump appears to have ceded his popular 2016 ‘no more wars’ campaign message and policy position to Bernie Sanders and any other US 2020 candidate willing to grad onto a non-interventionist approach to the upcoming Democrat primaries.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

“Is Bernie Stealing Trump’s ‘No More Wars’ Issue?” by Patrick J. Buchanan…


The center of gravity of U.S. politics is shifting toward the Trump position of 2016.

“The president has said that he does not want to see this country involved in endless wars… I agree with that,” Bernie Sanders told the Fox News audience at Monday’s town hall meeting in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

Then turning and staring straight into the camera, Bernie added:

“Mr. President, tonight you have the opportunity to do something extraordinary: Sign that resolution. Saudi Arabia should not be determining the military or foreign policy of this country.”

Sanders was talking about a War Powers Act resolution that would have ended U.S. involvement in the five-year civil war in Yemen that has created one of the great humanitarian crises of our time, with thousands of dead children amidst an epidemic of cholera and a famine.

Supported by a united Democratic Party on the Hill, and an anti-interventionist faction of the GOP led by Sens. Rand Paul and Mike Lee of Utah, the War Powers resolution had passed both houses of Congress.

But 24 hours after Sanders urged him to sign it, Trump, heeding the hawks in his Cabinet and National Security Council, vetoed S.J.Res.7, calling it a “dangerous attempt to weaken my constitutional authorities.”

With sufficient Republican votes in both houses to sustain Trump’s veto, that should be the end of the matter.

It is not: Trump may have just ceded the peace issue in 2020 to the Democrats. If Sanders emerges as the nominee, we will have an election with a Democrat running on the “no-more-wars” theme Trump touted in 2016. And Trump will be left defending the bombing of Yemeni rebels and civilians by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia.

Does Trump really want to go into 2020 as a war party president?

Does he want to go into 2020 with Democrats denouncing “Trump’s endless wars” in the Middle East? Because that is where he is headed.

In 2008, John McCain, leading hawk in the Senate, was routed by a left-wing first-term senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, who had won his nomination by defeating the more hawkish Hillary Clinton, who had voted to authorize the war in Iraq.

In 2012, the Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who was far more hawkish than Obama on Russia, lost.

Yet, in 2016, Trump ran as a different kind of Republican, an opponent of the Iraq War and an anti-interventionist who wanted to get along with Russia’s Vladimir Putin and get out of these Middle East wars.

Looking closely at the front-running candidates for the Democratic nomination of 2020 — Joe Biden, Sanders, Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker — not one appears to be as hawkish as Trump has become.

Trump pulled us out of the nuclear deal with Iran negotiated by Secretary of State John Kerry and reimposed severe sanctions.

He declared Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization, to which Iran has responded by declaring U.S. Central Command a terrorist organization. Ominously, the IRGC and its trained Shiite militias in Iraq are in close proximity to U.S. troops.

Trump has recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, moved the U.S. Embassy there, closed the consulate that dealt with Palestinian affairs, cut off aid to the Palestinians, recognized Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights seized from Syria in 1967, and gone silent on Bibi Netanyahu’s threat to annex Jewish settlements on the West Bank.

Sanders, however, though he stands by Israel, is supporting a two-state solution and castigating the “right-wing” Netanyahu regime.

Trump has talked of pulling all U.S. troops out of Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet the troops are still there.

Though Trump came into office promising to get along with the Russians, he sent Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine and announced a pullout from Ronald Reagan’s 1987 INF treaty that outlawed all land-based intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

When Putin provocatively sent 100 Russian troops to Caracas — ostensibly to repair the S-400 anti-aircraft and anti-missile system that was damaged in recent blackouts — Trump, drawing a red line, ordered the Russians to “get out.”

Biden is expected to announce next week. If the stands he takes on Russia, China, Israel and the Middle East are more hawkish than the rest of the field, he will be challenged by the left wing of his party, and by Sanders, who voted “no” on the Iraq War that Biden supported.

The center of gravity of U.S. politics is shifting toward the Trump position of 2016. And the anti-interventionist wing of the GOP is growing.

And when added to the anti-interventionist and anti-war wing of the Democratic Party on the Hill, together, they are able, as on the Yemen War Powers resolution, to produce a new bipartisan majority.

Prediction: By the primaries of 2020, foreign policy will be front and center, and the Democratic Party will have captured the “no-more-wars” political high ground that Candidate Donald Trump occupied in 2016.

Do You Appreciate Reading Our Emails and Website? Let us know how we are doing – Send us a Thank You Via Paypal!

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Over 200 killed, hundreds injured in series of blasts at Sri Lankan hotels & churches

A series of bombings hit churches and hotels across Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday, killing more than 200 people.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT…


A series of eight explosions rocked Catholic churches and luxury hotels in Sri Lanka as Christians began Easter Sunday celebrations, with over 200 killed and hundreds injured, media reported, citing police.

The blasts started at around 8:45am local time at St. Anthony’s Church in Colombo and St. Sebastian’s Church in Negombo, a Catholic-majority town outside of the capital. The Zion Church in Batticaloa on the eastern coast was also targeted. At around the same time, the Shangri-La, Cinnamon Grand and Kingsbury five-star hotels were also hit, police confirmed.

Two more explosions happened later in the day, targeting two more locations in Colombo. All attacks appear to have been coordinated.

At least 207 people were killed, Reuters reported, citing police. More than 450 were injured in the attacks.

Alleged footage of the aftermath, shared on social media, showed chaos and large-scale destruction inside at least one of the churches.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Mike Pompeo reveals true motto of CIA: ‘We lied, we cheated, we stole’ (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 147.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris take a look at a Texas A&M University speech, and subsequent interview, with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

The former CIA Director admitted, ‘as an aside’ to the question asked, that the Intelligence agency he headed up before being appointed as the top US Diplomat had a motto “we lied, we cheated, we stole”…which, according to Pompeo, contained entire CIA training courses based on ‘lying, cheating and stealing.’

Pompeo finally speaks some truth.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Videos

Trending