https://www.cjr.org/criticism/political-correctness-journalism.php


points made in the article:

1. Tomi Lahren: people were less mad that she held that position, they were mad because she called conservatives who were pro-life "hypocrites." that's responding to an attack, not PC thought-policing

2. "Upon Trump’s election, why did pundits ruminate over the left’s “identity politics,” as if being white or working class is not an identity?"

because the white working class was so ignored, whereas every other minority was given a massive platform. the DNC was a PRIME example of this, and once again, they're confusing the causation. this was REACTIONARY.

3. "Why is there a continued debate over the use of the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism” while “white male extremism” is seldom used?"

Because there is a set doctrine of belief that causes much of the terrorism we see today, whereas being white and male doesn't actually have any set doctrine. see Sam Harris.

4. "Why was it okay to debate whether former president Barack Obama was a “secret Muslim” but not whether our current president, who mispronounces books in the Bible and appears to not know that Protestants are Christians, is truly a man of faith?"

both are stupid claims, Trump is just stupid. still, credit where it's due, they're half right.

5. "Why are generally liberal, centrist, or “apolitical” news outlets scrambling to hire the Megyn Kellys of the news world, though Fox News isn’t exactly shopping for a Joy Ann Reid?"

do they mean Megan Kelly specifically or the trend in general...? Megyn has a fanbase so profit incentive... and the trend is a massive conservative youth. that's just demographics... how does this apply to liberals being PC?

6. "Why was there bipartisan condemnation of comedian Kathy Griffin’s picture with a bloody Trump head, but no such furor when folks lynched and burned effigies of President Obama?"

WHAT? THERE WERE MASSIVE NEWS REPORTINGS ON THAT SHIT! Mccain came out and criticized it, Breitbart, Prager AND Fox said they were over the line. i mean we had a RODIO CLOWN describe Obama ALSO as a clown and the man LOST HIS JOB DUE TO NEWS MEDIA PRESSURE. i mean a COMIC could not MOCK THE PRESIDENT. and you think WE ARE SUPER PC? i mean christ, what the hell? they just went off the deep end.

7. "Shouldn’t the same people defending Bill Maher’s racist joke defend Stephen Colbert’s homophobic satire of President Trump?"

...what? the LEFT attacked them BOTH on those things. in fact everyone i know on the right called them idiots who made bad jokes, but nothing more than that! We have had a SECOND "cancelcolbert" hashtag after that from LEFTISTS, and Maher was put to the Cross by LEFTISTS. Most on the right are just sitting back and love watching them tear themselves apart. once again, there's a serious lack of introspection here.


8. "Why do free speech absolutists scurry out of the woodwork to defend Milo Yiannopoulos, Richard Spencer, and Ann Coulter, but not Linda Sarsour, George Ciccariello-Maher, or Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor?"

step by step, Milo is a provocateur, Ann says whatever to get on stage, and Spencer is an asshole white supremacist. most on the right agree with that, orin slight variations from Shaprio to Hannity. Meanwhile Sarsour REALLY hit the stage when she supported the FGM right here in the USA, a specific incident. she spoke on political change, not just theory. George is an asshole, and hasn't been relevant for a little while now, but Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor has had her own problems. she's called for more radical protests (yes, BLM and women's marches need MORE fury) which is an open display of violence.

however, i'll support all their right to speech, even when i don't like it. if they call for policy, i'll challenge them, and if they call for violence, i'll denounce them. now let's flip the tables. is the LEFT saintly in this regard? NO. So why are they painting this as the right being MORE PC??? because they have a narrative.


9. "Have we made up our mind on whose “opposing views” are okay for college students to hear?"

Ask Berkley, where the left held riots. ask evergreen where a jewish bernie voter got called a racist and driven off campus. ask HARVARD where they held a separate commencement ceremony JUST FOR BLACK KIDS, in self segregation.

are you REALLY saying there's a CONSERVATIVE PROBLEM on campuses? denial of reality. the campuses are much farther to the left... what the hell are they even arguing on now?


10. "Why do we act as if President Trump’s accusations of “fake news” aren’t just PC ways of attacking news outlets that give him any modicum of negative press?"

Because the NYT ran stories saying the FBI had connections to Trump that Comey just disproved (fake news)

Because CNN openly fed the DNC go girl Clinton questions (fake news)

Because Buzzfeed's dossier got ran by EVERY major network (fake news)

Because MSNBC's Rachel Maddow and her blatant lies about polling data (fake news)

i mean those are just 4 examples VERIED fake news stories. ONLY FOUR. this isn't disliking opinions, this is rejecting lies.


11. "And when the media do call out his dishonesty, why don’t they get a pat on the back for “telling it like it is”?"

you mean doing their job? we pay them for that. you shouldn't be extra specially rewarded for having a modicum of ethical responsibility.

and even when they do "tell it like it is" like Trump's last night in Sweden comments, they create the narrative MUCH farther, like NOTHING bad is happening in sweden with migrants, and then cite politifact that says 1% of crime is done by 1% of population which is refugees, and that comes from a newspaper that's talking about police CALL OUTS to immediately identifiable as refugee crime, which means they statistics are skewed WAY DOWN, plus it was only done over a 3 month period, PLUS that same newspaper ran an article talking about islamic self segregation.

and that's when they tell the truth a BIT

when they call out Flynn for his shit, and then create a narrative based off of leaks and anonymous sources which have ZERO credibility, and now many of which have been disproven, to call Trump a Russian agent.


12. "Why didn’t conservative media call out the president’s political correctness when he didn’t say “radical Islamic terrorism” during his summit address to the Arab and Muslim world?"

because it's just ONE address, not Barack Obama's campaign to vindicate muslims, and make an intentional effort EVERY TIME to disconnect islam from anti-liberal behavior, including terrorism.

13. "If a free and independent press is paramount within our democratic society, why isn’t all media up in arms about the GOP’s anti-media strategy for 2018?"

Because of media bias. but don't worry, actual conservatives (i.e. Ben Shapiro) HAVE called out Trump when he says he wants to make harsher libel laws. of course, you only have a cursory knowledge of your enemy, so this ENTIRE ARTICLE is built off of a warped perspective.


The rest of the article i'll address free form, but "political correctness" is Not the same as a catchy term that everyone uses. "Cringe" really hit the mainstream in 2016 and sadly is still around, but does it's popularity mean it's PC?

the article mentions breitbart's usage of black on black crime as a "PC" term... no, that's a classifying term even used by the FBI and DOJ. besides, "PC" actually when said as politically correct is changing, and i'll give this article a slight bit of credit.

4 years ago, PC was entirely controlled by liberals, but now conservatives and neocons and populists and all the other righties are starting to get a bit bitchy too.

the problem with this article is a mass equivalency it's trying to draw, and also the fact it ignores the last 8 years under Obama and the cultural domination by hollywood and the media. i know people point to FOX and say "look they're conservative." but CNN, NYT, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, and so many more that have big TV rights and money behind them... TYT online too... and the right has what, Breitbart for the fringes? this is not an equal fight we've been seeing. We have censorship from the left on youtube and Facebook... PC is PC whoever does it, but the Left have been the dominate drivers of "groupthink" for years now. Hell, the left openly houses Marxists who IDEALIZE groupthink on college campuses.

look at Evergreen college, these guys are professors who vote for Bernie and are semi-socialist, but they're white and the kids are attacking them! even they are seeing the problems deep inside the left, whereas this is an emerging problem in the right.



now onto your reply to this article:


"Liberals are more introspective than conservatives."

this article begs to differ. it misrepresents conservative complaints, and then equivocates them with liberal actions, ignoring their true breadth. they fail in intro AND outside analysis.

also, nice generalization using an article with ZERO ACTUAL DATA. #notallmuslimswhoblowthemselvesupandscreamallahuakbarbutithasnothingtodowithislamtheyjustneedjobsandlove(andtotaketheirdoctrinelesseriously)

that hashtag is too long, but quite accurate.


"Therefore, liberals are more likely to want to address problems to themselves, their families, communities, states and countries (social programs, anyone)?"

1. false and unfounded pretenses
2. no data
3. liberals support community values? lol no
4. social programs often create more dependancy, and cripple inner city communities. ever wonder why black poverty rates are highest under Democratic governor's? hmm....
5. and also conservatives aren't evangelical christians predominantly? aren't they BASED on values???


"Therefore, since liberals do have this internal focus, they choose language that allows them to broach difficult subjects in the most tactful way possible. This has been branded "political correctness" by conservatives."

i agree tact is necessary, but weakness has corrupted liberals. now LEFTISTS like Bill Maher and Sam Harris can't criticize the doctrine and implementation of the word for word doctrine of islam in the quran or the hadith without being called "gross" and "racist" by batman. wait was that a typo? nope?

damn. they got batman guys (at least it's the shitty one)


"Conservatives on the other hand are more attuned to seeking cohesion and order."

conservatives like freedom and personal responsibility. this isn't always cohesions and order. you're confusing the anarchist-fascist axis with the liberal-conservative axis.


"Therefore, conservatives are more likely to define their world in terms of "in" and "out" groups."

god this logical string is full of more holes than Batman's parents. ooh that joke was bad.

also, you're still confusing political, social and economic beliefs. conservatism is more of a social or economic belief than a political one, just as liberalism is more social or economic than political.

you need to make the connection between fascism and conservatism, but looking at Trump we actually don't see a true conservative, but a populist semi-fascistic political, economic liberal, social conservative.

with more and more of the modern socialist left (less fringe than ever before with Bernie around), we see policies that can ONLY be implemented by fascistic means.


"Therefore, since conservatives have this external focus, they choose language that allows them to differentiate between groups, and in some cases they deliberately choose to use divisive language to make the delineations appear stronger than they may otherwise be in reality."

this can actually be the case sometimes, but conservatives also can OVER generalize, (remember #notallmuslims?) so your logic really doesn't fit a SINGULAr conclusions, but simply says that humans will be human.


"finis"

you've entirely failed at connecting the tenets of conservatism to absolutism OR fascism, all while pulling off the amazingly hypocritical mental gymnastics of saying conservatives lack introspection while omitting any flaws within the liberal movement in your argument.

you ARE finis-ed


also it is 3:03 in the morning where i am, so any more responses i will deal with later. Night.