Sojung Kim

Paradigm Shift Paper

11 July 2016

Making Speech Great Again

Political correctness. I guess you could just toss it onto the perpetual heap of

controversial topics making news headlines these days, right on top of race relations and

pandering from political candidates. The importance of having discussions about political

correctness is paramount because political correctness determines how we speak, write, and

interact with each other, as well as the standard by which we define what is considered

acceptable in discussions about other issues. Over the past few decades, America has become

increasingly politically correct, careful about offensive speech and actions as we strive to

become inclusive and sensitive towards diverse populations. In recent months, however, a huge

movement against political correctness, or PC culture, has emerged as frustration over having to

be extremely cautious about speech and having to silence certain beliefs because of societal

non-acceptance has boiled over. Catalyzed by todays political atmosphere, the monstrous debate

over PC culture voraciously feeds on intensifying societal divides and age old frustrations. Ideas

regarding speech, one of the most fundamental aspects of the American culture, are currently

diverging as a forcefully emergent anti-political-correctness movement challenges what is

considered societally acceptable to write or say.

The origins of the term politically correct as we know it today dogmatic language

boundaries aimed at conforming to a political belief, according to the Washington Post

extend way back into Americas history (Bump). One of the first usages of this term was in a
New York Times article from 1934 about the lack of personal liberty in the German Reich; only

politically correct opinions were lawful to express (Bump). Throughout following years, the term

continued to be used as a pejorative descriptor of authoritarian regimes that limited political

dissent during the Cold War (Bump). As politically correct became a mainstream phrase in

political conversation, the term slowly morphed into a cultural term used by general society in

regards to speech about race, gender, religion, and other sensitive topics. The strongly dominant

movement towards political correctness during the 1990s was especially visible on college

campuses, where bigoted, ignorant, and racist speech and actions were met with intense

backlash. According to the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, the number of speech codes

(meant to restrict offensive speech) at U.S. universities grew by 400% from 1990 to 1991

(Uelmen). No longer referring simply to political views aligned with the governing body, the

term politically correct became much more widely used to describe tactful, considerate

language designed to avoid excluding, marginalizing, or offending certain groups of people.

After peaking in the 1990s, the term went dormant until recent years, with heated national fights

over religion (especially after 9/11 and other terrorist attacks), gay marriage, and race (especially

after several black youths were killed by police) taking center stage (Bump).

Political correctness has dominated American culture for about 40 years, according to

Ta-Nehisi Coates writing in The Atlantic, as the general populace places increasing value on

being sensitive and trying to understand people who are different from them (Coates).

Fundamentally, PC culture grows out of identity politics which emerge in response to the unfair

treatment that people from marginalized groups [receive] in daily life and the ways in which

American culture [does] not reflect or include our experience or realities (Mukhopadhyay). In
the 1960s, PC culture built off movements for things like civil and womens rights; today, PC

culture stems from myriad fights against societal inequities like continuing racism, religious

intolerance, sexism, homophobia, and classism. This shift in thought is especially noticeable on

college campuses, where America has experienced increasing popularity in areas such as

womens studies and gender studies as society increasingly values knowledge and awareness of

other groups of people. According to the National Opinion Research Center, over the last 37

years the number of womens studies programs has increased by over 235% (Reynolds, Shagle,

and Venkataraman). This trend on college campuses across America is representative of a larger

push to make the country a more inclusive, less hateful place for those who are different, with

the biggest manifestation of this paradigm shift being the increasingly politically correct standard

applied to American speech today (Mukhopadhyay).

However, as current American culture grasps at correctness and sensitivity, the noble

values of non-discrimination and inclusiveness have veered off to an extreme for some. Riding

the PC wave, certain advocacy groups are fighting against words and actions many people find

completely inoffensive and commonplace. According to the Washington Post, students at UCLA

staged a sit-in protest against a professor accused of creating a hostile campus climate for

students of color, simply for correcting a couple of grammatical errors on papers

(Abdul-Jabbar). Students at the University of New Hampshire are encouraged to avoid

offensive language such as American (because it suggests the United States is the only country in

the Americas), homosexual (should be same gender loving), elderly (people of advanced age)

and healthy (non-disabled) (Abdul-Jabbar). Certain animal rights activists have even
contended the word pet is offensive and disrespectful to animals, so people should say

companion animal instead (Tumulty and Johnson).

Its somewhat inevitable as political correctness becomes the norm, there are always

new groups of people who find different words offensive, particularly in the diverse U.S.

population. While small interest groups may find certain things offensive, the majority of the

population may consider their responses to be unreasonable. The strongholds of extreme political

correctness today tend to be college campuses, where students increasingly demand colleges be

safe spaces where students are protected from upsetting ideas, and receive trigger warnings

when course material contains distressing information (Tumulty and Johnson). College protests

are now regularly hitting the news as students demand the names of historical figures (who were

racists or bigots) be taken off buildings or call for the resignations of professors and

administrators who express differently faceted views on the handling of offensive Halloween

costumes. Nearly nobody would argue against the ideas of confronting and eliminating prejudice,

but at a time when some portions of PC culture have reached extremes, many people have begun

to express strong discontent.

An entire movement against political correctness has formed; in other words, an

emergent ideology is developing out of opposition to the dominantly PC society today. Portions

of the population are frustrated with political correctness, arguing that it limits their freedom of

expression and belief and that its actually a form of counter-discrimination (against views the

majority of society finds unsavory). Todays anti-political-correctness, or anti-PC, movement is

rooted in the theory of psychological reactance, explained by Professor Jack Brehm of Yale

University as:
 An aversive affective reaction in response to regulations or impositions that

impinge on freedom and autonomy. This reaction is especially common when

individuals feel obliged to adopt a particular opinion or engage in a specific

behavior. Specifically, a perceived diminution in freedom ignites an emotional

state, called psychological reactance, that elicits behaviors intended to restore this

autonomy.

Essentially, portions of the population whose views dont agree with ever stricter politically

correct expectations lash out against PC culture because they believe foreign opinions are being

forced on them while their freedom is taken away. These populations have recently coalesced

into an extremely strong, vocal group against PC culture, putting this topic at the forefront of our

cultural battles. The anti-PC movement was mainly catalyzed by and can be most easily

observed though the presidential campaign of Donald Trump.

Donald Trump is undoubtedly one of the most controversial, hot-topic figures in

American discussion today, and his candidacy has provided a platform for the anti-PC movement

to support. One might even argue there was one infamous quote by the businessman turned

politician that fomented this revolution: I think the big problem this country has is being

politically correct. I've been challenged by so many people, and I don't frankly have time for

total political correctness (Bump). His shockingly blatant statement appealed to the frustrations

of many in the U.S. who have felt silently oppressed because they cant say what they want for

fear of being completely shunned by the politically correct majority. Many Trump supporters

rally around Trump's anti-PC stances. As an unnamed Trump supporter explains, it's almost

impossible to have polite or constructive political discussion [in our hyper-PC culture because]
disagreement gets you labeled fascist, racist, bigoted, etc. It can provoke a reaction so intense

that youre suddenly an unperson to an acquaintance or friend (Friedersdorf). Many who have

felt silenced by political correctness find Trump the first breath of fresh air theyve had in four

decades, and his appeal to this widespread frustration is turning out to be extremely successful.

Trumps success is strongly correlated with how Americans feel about political

correctness. Just a few weeks ago, Quinnipiac University published a national poll that found

51% of Americans believe political correctness is too extreme in the U.S. today (Malloy).

Moreover, a poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University found anti-PC sentiment was fairly well

distributed throughout different populations (political party, gender, race, etc.), with Republicans

and Caucasians polling somewhat higher in opposition to political correctness (Tumulty and

Johnson). The antipathy felt towards political correctness builds Trumps so called silent

majority, and may explain his success despite deeply racist and sexist comments because people

dont necessarily always agree with what hes saying, but agree that he (and everyone else) has

the right to express anti-PC opinions freely. To cite The Washington Post, One thing is clear:

Trump is channeling a very mainstream frustration (Tumulty, Johnson).

The theory of psychological reactance also pertains to Trumps success. Professor

Thomas Edsall of Columbia University explains:

The accusatory and vindictive approach of many social justice activists may

actually have increased the desire and willingness of some white men to say and

do un-PC things Trump comes along and punches political correctness in the

face. Anyone feeling some degree of anti-PC reactance is going to feel a thrill in

their heart, and will want to stand up and applaud.

Essentially, many Americans who hold unpopular opinions find Trumps blunt opposition to PC

culture cathartic and relieving. As certain groups become more extreme in their fight for political

correctness, those who dont agree feel attacked, discriminated against, and oppressed. Speech

codes and societal restrictions on what is considered polite and acceptable are setting a certain

standard, and people who fall short of the standard or dont agree with the views of the majority

feel theyre immediately judged. Thus, when Trump appealed to this frustration and fear of

societal exclusion, the anti-PC movement quickly formed to fight against the dominant ideology.

Although this movement seems like a newly emergent ideology, its actually strongly

rooted in the age old idea of free speech. One of the fundamental values of our nation, espoused

in the U.S. Constitution, is freedom of speech. Much of anti-PC sentiment is rooted in discontent

about not being able to have discussions about controversial issues without being shouted down

for not agreeing with the politically correct point of view. Maybe the anti-PC culture has a point.

Colby Itkowitz with the Washington Post expounds:

Although the movement [for political correctness] arises from the laudable desire

to sweep away the debris of racism and sexism and hatred, it replaces old

prejudice with new ones. It declares certain topics off-limits, certain expressions

off-limits, even certain gestures off-limits.

Increasingly politically correct culture is becoming something of a cultural, societal

language-policing method.

The fact that certain speech is unacceptable seems completely counter to our First

Amendment right America is founded on the basic idea that people can hold any opinion they

want and can express it within reasonable limits (i.e. you cant scream fire in a crowded
theatre). In a sense, the movement towards increasing political correctness may seem just another

form of discrimination in our attempt to battle discrimination. PC culture is imbued with

righteousness, people who dont fit this ideology are shunned, labelled as racists, bigots, sexists,

and the like. Those labels may be true, but the worrying aspect is that people arent given the

chance to engage in discussion about their beliefs because of politically correct limitations; this

only causes frustration and obstinate clinginess to their opinions and closes the door to any

potential compromise, real understanding, and progression into a more accepting and

understanding culture (which is what the goal of political correctness was in the first place).

America today is standing at a political and moral crossroads. In terms of which path

America is headed down, the ramifications of this paradigm shift are indeterminate. As

American opinions split regarding how acceptable political correctness is, our culture divides

into two increasingly separate movements extreme PC supporters continue to place taboos on

new words each and every day while anti-PC supporters rally behind Trumps cathartic, but

racist, sexist, and violent speech. This divisive time seems uncompromisable, as the fight over

political correctness constitutes a fundamental disagreement about what we consider offensive

and what we consider a basic right (neither things are topics weve historically been willing to

compromise on). The emergent movement against political correctness is shifting what is and

should be considered acceptable in our society by fighting for true free speech and the

elimination of at least some of the more extreme restrictions that inhibit controversial but

necessary debates.

At this point in America, a dominant ideology does not exist any more. In reflecting the

political extremes the country is being pulled to, ideas concerning acceptable speech are splitting
cleanly into two parties. On one hand, the fight for inclusiveness and acceptance of infinitely

many different groups of people is more important and prominent than ever; on the other hand,

when or how do we draw a line between protecting people against discrimination and actually

discriminating against other ideologies by limiting free speech? Like many problems in the

world today, there may not be a right answer (most definitely not a simple one), only a search for

moderation and creative compromise between two potential extremes. As our world increasingly

globalizes, diversifies, and connects, our nation must figure out a way to unify and remain true to

our values (and figure out what our values are since the question of political correctness threw

those into question). In a sense, whether or not political correctness will become great again

seems strongly linked to what the outcomes of the 2016 Presidential Election will be due to

Trumps integral role in the anti-PC movement. Among other things, the vote in November will

be something of a proxy vote on political correctness that will significantly push America down

one path or the other. However, even that will be but a small scratch to contribute to scraping

away societal divisions, intolerance, and discrimination of all forms while also maintaining

personal freedoms as we try to move forward as a nation.

 Works Cited

Abdul-Jabbar, Kareem. "Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: Every GOP Candidate Is Wrong about Political
Correctness." Washington Post. Web.
Brehm, Jack W. A Theory of Psychological Reactance. APA PsycNET. Web.
Bump, Philip. "How Politically Correct Moved from Commies to Culture and Back into

Politics." Washington Post. Web.

Coates, Ta-Nehisi. "The Importance of Being Politically Correct." The Atlantic. Web.
Edsall, Thomas B. "The Anti-P.C. Vote." The New York Times. Web.
Friedersdorf, Conor. "A Dialogue with a 22-Year-Old Donald Trump Supporter." The Atlantic.
Web.
Itkowitz, Colby. "Donald Trump Says We're All Too Politically Correct. But Is That Also a Way
to Limit Speech?" Washington Post. Web.
Malloy, Tim. Hate Winning, as Clinton-Trump Race Too Close to Call, Quinnipiac University
National Poll Finds; Neither Candidate Would Be Good President, Voters Say.
Quinnipiac University. Web.
Mukhopadhyay, Samhita. "Why Political Correctness Is Still Politically Relevant." Al Jazeera.
Web.
Reynolds, Michael, Shobha Shagle, and Lekha Venkataraman. A National Census of Womens
and Gender Studies Programs in U.S. Institutions of Higher Education. Web.
Tumulty, Karen, and Jenna Johnson. "Why Trump May Be Winning the War on Political
Correctness." Washington Post. Web.
Uelmen, Gerald. "Campus Hate Speech Codes." Markkula Center for Applied Ethics: Character

Education. Web.