“Political correctness is the inevitable result of a society that has turned its back on God.”
What are the origins of political correctness you might ask? Political correctness can be attributed to China’s communist leader Mao Zedong. In 1964, he published the “Little Red Book”, in which he laid out the strict party lines for the new “cultural revolution” (when China came under communism). Quite simply, if you (in your actions and beliefs) were within these party lines, you were “correct”politically…and if not, you were “incorrect” politically. For example, there was only a specific view of history that was considered correct by Chairman Mao. Any differing view of history other than what was laid out in party lines would be deemed “politically incorrect”. This extended to all aspects of life including art (politically correct art would reflect the party’s desired public sentiment of life and work) and science (scientific research which fell into line with party policy).
Excerpt from Mao’s “Little Red Book”…
“What we demand is the unity of politics and art, the unity of content and form, the unity of revolutionary political content and the highest possible perfection of artistic form. Works of art which lack artistic quality have no force, however progressive they are politically. Therefore, we oppose both works of art with a wrong political viewpoint and the tendency towards the ‘poster and slogan style’ which is correct in political viewpoint but lacking in artistic power.”
Use of the term “political correctness” has surged in recent times because of significant shifts within Western culture. Over the past 20 to 30 years, Western society has moved away from its predominantly Christian foundation and embraced post-modernism, and as a consequently, moral relativity. The most significant consequence of a society rejecting its Christian foundation is that it goes from a society embedded in an objective absolute moral framework based on Biblical principles, to an “anything goes” moral relativity. As Christianity vacated Western society, a new moral code needed to fill the vacuum. Whereas Christian morality got our eyes off ourselves and onto God, the new moral code revolves around SELF. Hence why, the chief virtues appeal to feelings, not external objective truth.
The implications are far reaching on a number of levels. Firstly, a society that has rejected objective moral values reverts to a “herd morality”. Hence, whatever is the prevailing view of the majority is acceptable. Whether it is actually true or not is irrelevant. If it is accepted by the herd (the majority), then it is deemed to be “true”, regardless if facts contradict it. It is a dangerous precedent to be in a society where morality is established by the majority view. Since the morality is not based on any absolute anchor points, the moral code is inevitably FLUID and subject to change.
For example, approximately 20 to 25 years ago the acronym “LGBT” began to establish a foothold within mainstream culture. The “B” representing bisexual was widely excepted to mean a person with sexual attraction to both male and female genders. 25 years later, and gay activists are now promulgating the belief that there is no such thing as two genders, but rather there are multiple genders that are based on a spectrum. Hence, in 2018, the “B” in LGBT has now become completely irrelevant. Within the space of 25 years we have gone from belief in two genders, to now believing in multiple genders. This is exactly what fluid morality entails and there is no end in sight to the amount of revisions and changes to the consensus of the majority.
Secondly, another far reaching implication comes into view when it comes to politicians. Once upon a time, politicians were guided by a timeless set of principles back when our society was based on objective moral values inherited from the Judeo/Christian moral framework. Today, considering the climate of moral relativity, politicians have abandoned their principles and are now appealing to the majority view in their effort to garner the most amount of votes. The motto is “power by any means necessary”. Whether or not what the general public believes is morally evil is irrelevant. The modern-day politician will do the bidding of its voters regardless of the moral implications.
Thirdly, the most frightening prospect to consider is that a populace devoid of objective moral values is very easy to manipulate. Leftist activists and politicians have wasted no time in inventing so-called “rights” out of thin air and have successfully convinced thousands of vulnerable people through blatant lies and indoctrination that these “rights” are systemic to their “identity” and worth fighting for. In the process of fighting for these “rights” the government expands in power to grant these rights — yet is almost always at the expense of the populace becoming more and more dependant on the government.
It matters not if the government had to engage in lies and deception to achieve this power. It is simply a means to an end. Political correctness is a crucial tool used by the Left to attempt to redefine the language of society in its effort to control the public discourse and hence, society itself. Once you capture the language, capturing the nation is just a matter of time. The end game is a totalitarian society with a society completely dependant on the state.
Dr. Theodore Dalrymple writes, “Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
Political correctness is the inevitable result of a society that has turned its back on God. Initially, the society bent on secularism feels a sense of “liberation” by shaking off the “shackles of religion”, but in doing so they have opened up a proverbial can of worms in which there is no end to the relative possibilities to which the society will embrace. As G.K. Chesterton once said, “When man ceases to believe in God, it is not that he believes in nothing, but rather he believes in anything.”
Yet, the inevitable trajectory in which a society heads after rejecting God is inevitably into more government regulation and control. In other words, slavery. As Walter E. Williams says, “I am not saying that we are a totalitarian nation yet, but if you ask the question — which way are we headed tiny steps at a time? Are we headed toward more personal liberty or more government control over our lives? It would have to unambiguously be the latter. More government control over our lives.”
So where does political correctness lead? Well, there is no end to the amount of minority groups manufactured by the Left in order to appease. Hence, political correctness follows a hellish cycle of continual appeasement of minority groups with no end in sight.
It needs to be said, that there is a spiritual reality that underpins the principles we have been discussing. At the heart of man’s rebellion against God is the concept of “sin”. Ironically, the middle letter of the word sin is the letter “I”. In other words, “God, you run the universe! I will run myself thank you!” The more one focuses on one self, the more one will be enslaved. Jesus said, “Anyone who sins, is a slave to sin.” (John 8:34). And the end game of sin is obvious, “The wages of sin is death.” (Romans 6:23a)
When a nation places priority on appeasing the feelings of those who demand their “rights” the loudest, the end result is the enslavement of the entire nation. But it doesn’t have to be that way. “The wages of sin is death, BUT the gift of God is eternal life.” (Romans 6:23) Thank God there is a way out of this totalitarian madness. Jesus said, “When you know the truth, the truth will set you free.” (John 8:32) He also said, “He whom the son sets free will be free indeed.” (John 8:36)
“Liberty does not exist in the absence of morality.” as Edmund Burke once said. Any nation where the Christian moral framework has been implemented has been blessed to experience freedom to the full. Former US President Harry Truman observed, “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don’t think we emphasize that enough these days. If we don’t have a proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anyone except the State.”
How right he is. The principles found in the Word of God are the essence of true liberty. As Horace Greely said, “It is impossible to enslave mentally or socially a Bible reading people. The principles of the Bible are the groundwork of human freedom.”
Reported by: Culture War Resource