Actually, if one reads the 'report' that Corno Dolce links to, it's extremely badly written, since it freely mixes so-called reportage with editorialisation and lazy sensationalism ("shocking" and "Orwellian" in the opening paragraph, for instance). Much of the 'report' makes conclusions but provides no supporting evidence for them other than quotes from unnamed students.
The programme that it discusses, however, does not only mention racism – it mentions sexism and other things too. It apparently deals with learning to be a responsible consumer in terms of the environment – is anyone seriously objecting to this?
In terms of the one aspect that Corno Dolce chose to highlight: the reality is that those of us who are white have grown up in societies that are historically racist – be that the UK or the US. That's a fact; it is a matter of historic record and we do not have to go back to the slave trade to see examples of exactly that. It does not, however, mean that we are all racists now.
Political correctness (which is generally understood to have started in US universities in the 1970s) does, it seems to me, have a great deal in common with fundamentalist religion – and it's no coincidence that in terms of fundamentalist and politically correct feminism, some of the proponents of that have been more than happy to get into bed with right-wing religious groups, even where these have agendas that could be viewed as misogynistic or at least opposed to sex equality (see Dworkin and McKinnon).
The attempts of political correctness proponents to create a Utopian society, often by changing words, is facile and shows an infantile approach to politics. It is about control – and this is at a time where the UK and US governments are using various excuses to conduct an onslaught against civil liberties in both those countries.
Political correctness is essentially a form of puritanism.
This, however, is hilarious:
FIRE said:
FIRE reminded Harker of the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), a case decided during World War II that remains the law of the land. Justice Robert H. Jackson, writing for the Court, declared, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."
One wonders if that case, that "law" and Justice Jackson's comments were ever considered during the period of McCarthyism?
