A Further Perspective

The Politicization Crusade

The tyranny of political correctness will only intensify in its intolerance.

By 5.8.13

Send to Kindle

We are far down the road leading to the politicization of every aspect of life. A partial list of examples would include language, science, health care, climate, food, cars, sports, education, the military, and sexual orientation. Why is this happening? Why does the left want to politicize everything?

What it means to politicize something? Although not synonymous, politics and government are essentially two sides of the same coin. The dictionary defines “political” as “of or relating to government.” Liberals love government and want it to grow as much as possible. Politicizing something is an important element in expanding the reach and scope of government.

The political environment is the favorite field of battle for the left. It is their home field, their arena of choice. Liberals are much more adept at the game of politics than are conservatives. Liberals love politics far more than conservatives do. Liberals want politics maximized, conservatives want politics minimized.

Politicizing is what the left does. It’s who they are. The politicization process is essentially bringing the world into conformity with their vision of how the world ought to be and how people ought to behave. Politicization is essentially the application of conformity, intimidation, and force.

Allowing government to take charge of something is an act of centralization. It is a process of transferring power and choice from individuals to politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Michael Bloomberg. It is a reduction in variety and an increase of uniformity and one-size-fits-all. What liberals really want is not equality and fairness, it is uniformity. Obamacare is about making sure everyone has the same health care rather than making sure they have better health care.

Health care is no longer about health. Health care has become a pawn in the game of growing the government.

Politicizing something virtually guarantees increased conflict. Our country has not been as divided as it is now since the Civil War. The politicization movement is a leading contributor to this division and conflict. Instead of freedom of thought there is coerced conformity of thought. Conformity will inevitably lead to resentment unless everyone is the same.

When pro basketball player Jason Collins announced recently that he is gay, it was the lead story on the evening news that night. Mr. Collins’ public announcement about what used to be a private matter was a classic illustration of the meaning of politicization, as was the media’s exaggerated celebration of it.

A popular battle cry of feminists in the ’60s and ’70s was “the personal is political.” That phrase pretty well reflects the politicization movement in general. Politicizing something essentially moves it from the personal, individual realm to the public realm. It converts what used to be in the private sphere to the public sphere. Issues and preferences are moved from individuals to the “collective.” Pressure is applied to create uniformity of opinion. Independence of thought cannot be tolerated. An irony of liberals is in spite of their professed belief in “diversity,” what they actually yearn for is conformity.

The personal is political, the private is public. That includes not just behavior, but more insidiously, thought and choice. In the left’s view there is only one “correct” way of thinking. If you have another opinion you must be a bigot, racist, or Neanderthal. And they don’t want to discuss it.

Next month the U.S. Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8. That is the ballot initiative passed by voters in the November 2008 election. The initiative states that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” 

The most common bumper sticker for opponents of California’s Proposition 8 said, “8 is Hate.” Rather than consider there might be legitimate reasons for the maintaining the traditional definition of marriage, liberals descend to accusations of bigotry. Don’t debate your opponents, vilify and dehumanize them. 

The left is insecure. They have no confidence in the legitimacy of their beliefs. They rarely even attempt persuasion. They can’t deal with competition of ideas.

Liberals are not willing to debate the issue of man-made global warming. They claim it is “settled science” and talk endlessly about “consensus.” Anyone who has doubts or skepticism is labeled a “denier” or accused of being a paid shill of the oil companies.

“Political correctness” (PC) is the hijacking of language. It is the politicizing of words and communication. It is also based on the arrogant assumption that the left knows what’s correct and what isn’t. Political correctness diminishes language and prevents communication. It attempts to squelch humor and spontaneity. The traditional purposes of language are subjugated to the political objectives of liberalism.

PC is nothing more than censorship in disguise. Because its true nature is disguised it is all the more insidious. As Washington Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III put it so effectively, “In the land of freedom we are held hostage by the tyranny of political correctness.” Exactly.

Political correctness, however, is more than censorship, it is also the distortion and corruption of language. Abortion is called “choice.” If there were honesty in labeling, the Planned Parenthood Federation would be called the Prevented Parenthood Federation. Racial quotas are called “affirmative action.” The “Affordable Care Act” (Obamacare) is already making health care more expensive and less affordable. 

Language is not only how we communicate, it is how we think. If you corrupt language, you also corrupt thought. The left is doing its best to politicize our brains.

Politicizing almost always makes things worse. It is like a reverse Midas touch.

Until we somehow find a way to turn off the road to politicizing everything, about all we can do is find some humor in it. For example, it is rather amusing to see the mayor of America’s largest city devoting so much of his time and energy doing battle against super-sized sugary soft drinks.

Like this Article

Print this Article

Print Article