By Oliver Mills From Caribbean News Now

The idea of the need for political correctness has emerged during the primary elections in the USA, and continues in the presidential elections stretch. It was linked to Donald Trump in his not too complimentary remarks about the facial looks of a female contender, and in his descriptions of other male contestants as having low energy, and as choking. And in his reference to Marco Rubio as ‘little Marco.’ We also saw how Trump himself was described as a con-artist by one of his competitors. And in the present political atmosphere, he speaks of the state of Hillary Clinton’s health, in a way that is not too becoming.

My view is that these castigations lack the standards of political correctness, since they belittle the character of those targeted, and dishonour political discourse. When more appealing and acceptable descriptions are utilized to refer to persons and situations, and are seen as being in good taste, they fit the characterization of being politically correct.

The concept of political correctness is explored by Dan Moller in an article in the Journal of Practical Philosophy, where he describes it as an attempt to advance the interests of certain groups in the public sphere. He says it filters public discourse, and establishes norms of speech or behaviour to protect vulnerable or marginalized groups. It shapes public discourse, and avoids offending the sensibilities of these groups.

For Moller, politically incorrect implies there is something objectionable at work. One of the examples he gives of political correctness is deleting offending material, which avoids the sense that certain groups are marginalized, by not being represented in the syllabus for example. Political correctness also seeks to avoid any implication that certain groups are inferior, or that their grievances are not worth addressing. For Moller, what makes a statement politically incorrect is whether it threatens the public standing of people reflected in a lowered sense of self-esteem, and inclusion.

I think that Moller’s characterization of political correctness is quite reasonable, even provisionally acceptable. Powerful forces operating in society, including Caribbean society, use their influence to realize their ambitions, projecting their own concerns at the society’s expense.

For example they influence the award of scholarships to their benefit. This could be for business studies, where graduates could be used to maintain innovative dominance. Or it could insist on the development of technology to gain an edge, or encourage it against other areas such as the arts or social sciences, which produce critical mind-sets, that could challenge the ideology of the dominant group, and threaten its control. This advances the interests of certain groups in the public sphere. Is political correctness the desirable behaviour in these circumstances?

Again, by filtering what is expressed in public, through establishing norms of behaviour and speech, does this really protect sections of society without the resources to help themselves, or does it protect the protectors from being exposed. What on the surface seems as efforts to enhance civility, actually gags free expression of opinions. Public discourse is then not only shaped, but managed in the interest of those with influence.

However, I share Moller’s view that political correctness avoids the possibility of groups being insulted or offended because of the acceptable behaviour it seeks to promote. This leads to a more cultured society. But beneath all this, is there not a mechanism of control by others, who also approve behaviour regarded as desirable and respectable? Is not political correctness then a subtle strategy to control thinking, and the way persons choose to act?

I further agree with the writer that political correctness is proper when offending material is deleted to avoid the feeling by particular groups that they are devalued by its existence, shows them as being underrepresented, and their issues not taken into account into the syllabus or textbooks. Here political correctness can be used as a tool to redress these concerns, and result in education materials being more inclusive. This enhances the sense of self-regard and identity among such affected groups.

It is because of the idea of political correctness that Caribbean countries have developed a sense of nationalism, and self-esteem. Their histories are being written by conscious scholars with an indigenous perspective, which shows their accomplishments, and contribution to world culture, and scientific and philosophical ideas.

Previously we were either colonial outposts, or military bases, not dignified countries with a positive future for our people as we currently are. It is because our Institutions and leaders sought to set the record straight, and present us as achievers, and the makers of history, with the wisdom and knowledge to transform our societies and ourselves, this makes political correctness for us, the desirable behavior and strategy to catapult us further forward.

IMAGE: olivermills3.jpg
Oliver Mills is a former lecturer in education at the University of the West Indies Mona Campus. He holds an M.Ed degree. from Dalhousie University in Canada, an MA from the University of London and a post-graduate diploma in HRM and Training, University of Leicester. He is a past Permanent Secretary in Education with the government of the Turks and Caicos Islands

For more on this story go to: http://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/headline-Commentary%3A-Is-political-correctness-desirable-behaviour%3F-31698.html