Origin of Political Correctness

[XJEEPER]

Origins of Political Correctness

The person most responsible for this development is a German emigre named Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), who preached that freedom is totalitarianism, democracy is dictatorship, education is indoctrination, violence is nonviolence, and fiction is truth.

Marcuse was a early member of The Institute of Social Research, later known as the Frankfurt School which was founded on Marxist beliefs, with the goal to deliberately undermine Western culture. It blended Marxist and Freudian psychoanalytic theory that stressed the centrality of sex to personal and social development and added the study of linguistics to create Critical Theory and “deconstruction”. These later influenced education theory that gave birth to political correctness.

Members of the Frankfurt School introduced the idea of psychological conditioning as a means of changing culture to fit their warped image. Anyone with middle class, conservative or Christian value was labeled a racist and a fascist. It was a libelous indictment of western values. They infiltrated American society to subvert it by saturating the existing culture with their destructive ideology.

In Marcuse’s book, An Essay on Liberation, he proclaimed his goals of a radical eroding of values; the relaxation of taboos; cultural subversion; Critical Theory; and a linguistic rebellion that would amount to a methodical reversal of meaning.

Political correctness is the progression of Critical Theory in every respect because it is anti-God, anti-Christian, anti-family, anti-nationalist, anti-patriot, anti-conservative, anti-hereditarian, anti-ethnocentric, anti-masculine, anti-tradition and anti-morality.

Cultural Marxism, or political correctness shares with classical Marxism a vision of a classless society – a society of equal opportunity and equal condition. This vision contradicts human nature since people are different and end up unequal regardless of their starting point. So equality has to be enforced. It is therefore totalitarian in nature. This explains why political correctness aims to control freedom of thought, speech and the press.

This video clip is 22 minutes long, but offers some great insight how the groundwork was laid to allow Political Correctness i.e Cultural Marxism to infiltrate American society and influence our laws and policies.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236#

 

[Crawler]

Good stuff, bro... I'm sure there are many who greatly appreciate your efforts.

Personally, I believe the "rabbit hole" to be much older, deeper, and more propagated,
but I won't open up that "can of worms" just yet... ;^]


The FCC decided to go ahead with "net neutrality" today despite legislative objection.

As I'm sure you are already quite well aware of, it's the proverbial "foot in the door" to
mainstreaming remaining free-speaking media and reinstitution of the "fairness doctrine".

If they manage to shut free speech down, we're probably done... God help us...

 

[DrMoab]

The FCC decided to go ahead with "net neutrality" today despite legislative objection.

As I'm sure you are already quite well aware of, it's the proverbial "foot in the door" to
mainstreaming remaining free-speaking media and reinstitution of the "fairness doctrine".

You have it ass backwards about net neutrality. We don't want AT&T, Verizon and the others to control which content we get or not.

 

[Crawler]

You have it ass backwards about net neutrality. We don't want AT&T, Verizon and the others to control which content we get or not.

Sure looks that way on the surface, doesn't it? I sure hope you're right.

 

[kastein]

The net neutrality bill, as passed, as as good for network neutrality as the Patriot Act was for civil rights.

I would really like to meet the two faced liars who name these bills.

 

[XJEEPER]

The net neutrality bill, as passed, as as good for network neutrality as the Patriot Act was for civil rights.

I would really like to meet the two faced liars who name these bills.

It's the Socialist way, as they describe it......methodical reversal of meaning.

 

[kdailey4315]

Heard this on the radio the other day and it made me laugh.

To my Liberal Friends:

Please accept - with no obligation, implied or explicit - my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling, and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2011, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great - not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country, nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere. This wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, nationality, religious faith, or sexual preference of the wishee.


To my Conservative Friends:

Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year!

 

[kastein]

And to my Jeep friends:
Happy Winter Solstice! The days only get longer from here out, more jeep work time!

 

[5-90]

You have it ass backwards about net neutrality. We don't want AT&T, Verizon and the others to control which content we get or not.

But we do not want the FCC to control what content we get, either.

Particularly when it's a bunch of bureaucrats at the FCC who have been appointed (or hired) without public input and without public accountability. How in the Hell are we supposed to get them to reverse bad decisions?

I don't want business to control the content available to me - but I don't want the government to control it, either. If I don't want to look at something, I don't. If I want to complain about something, I can. If I wish to offer an opposing viewpoint, it's no trouble for me to do so under the current model.

Think that will change? Maybe I'm paranoid, but I think it's coming...

 

[5-90]

Origins of Political Correctness

The person most responsible for this development is a German emigre named Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), who preached that freedom is totalitarianism, democracy is dictatorship, education is indoctrination, violence is nonviolence, and fiction is truth.

Marcuse was a early member of The Institute of Social Research, later known as the Frankfurt School which was founded on Marxist beliefs, with the goal to deliberately undermine Western culture. It blended Marxist and Freudian psychoanalytic theory that stressed the centrality of sex to personal and social development and added the study of linguistics to create Critical Theory and “deconstruction”. These later influenced education theory that gave birth to political correctness.

Members of the Frankfurt School introduced the idea of psychological conditioning as a means of changing culture to fit their warped image. Anyone with middle class, conservative or Christian value was labeled a racist and a fascist. It was a libelous indictment of western values. They infiltrated American society to subvert it by saturating the existing culture with their destructive ideology.

In Marcuse’s book, An Essay on Liberation, he proclaimed his goals of a radical eroding of values; the relaxation of taboos; cultural subversion; Critical Theory; and a linguistic rebellion that would amount to a methodical reversal of meaning.

Political correctness is the progression of Critical Theory in every respect because it is anti-God, anti-Christian, anti-family, anti-nationalist, anti-patriot, anti-conservative, anti-hereditarian, anti-ethnocentric, anti-masculine, anti-tradition and anti-morality.

Cultural Marxism, or political correctness shares with classical Marxism a vision of a classless society – a society of equal opportunity and equal condition. This vision contradicts human nature since people are different and end up unequal regardless of their starting point. So equality has to be enforced. It is therefore totalitarian in nature. This explains why political correctness aims to control freedom of thought, speech and the press.

This video clip is 22 minutes long, but offers some great insight how the groundwork was laid to allow Political Correctness i.e Cultural Marxism to infiltrate American society and influence our laws and policies.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236#

I hate being right - even if I find out that I was right for the wrong reason...

"Why be politically correct when you can be right?" I flatly refuse to be politically correct in anything I do - I shall continue to call a spade a spade, describe things just as I see them, and let people know what I am thinking.

 

[Gonepostal]

I hate being right - even if I find out that I was right for the wrong reason...

"Why be politically correct when you can be right?" I flatly refuse to be politically correct in anything I do - I shall continue to call a spade a spade, describe things just as I see them, and let people know what I am thinking.

I am RIGHT there with you.

 

[XJEEPER]

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) passed Internet regulations for the first time ever on 12-21-2010.
After weeks of negotiating, Democratic FCC Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Michael Copps have agreed to support the FCC chairman's plan — although they both said they wish it were stronger.

"While I cannot vote wholeheartedly to approve the item, I will not block it by voting against it. I instead plan to concur so that we may move forward," Copps said in a statement. Clyburn took a similar line in a statement. "The Commission has worked tirelessly to offer a set of guidelines that, while not as strong as they could be, will nonetheless protect consumers as they explore, learn, and innovate online," she said.


This is what they claim their goals are, with this ruling. Now let’s take a look at what the real goals are:
The net neutrality vision for government regulation of the Internet began with the work of Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor who founded the liberal lobby Free Press in 2002. Mr. McChesney's agenda? "At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies," he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. "But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control."

A year earlier, Mr. McChesney wrote in the Marxist journal Monthly Review that "any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself." Mr. McChesney told me in an interview that some of his comments have been "taken out of context." He acknowledged that he is a socialist and said he was "hesitant to say I'm not a Marxist."
Over 300 House and Senate members have signed a letter opposing FCC Internet regulation, and there will undoubtedly be even less support in the next Congress.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...6031512110086694.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read

Additional statements made by Mr. McChesney in 2009 further expose the real agenda:

"There is no real answer but to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles."

"We need to do whatever we can to limit capitalist propaganda, regulate it, minimalize it, and perhaps even eliminate it."

• In September 2009, McChesney stressed the importance of reforming the media as a preliminary step along the path toward societal transformation. "No one thinks any more that media reform is an issue to solve after the revolution," he said. "Everyone understands that without media reform, there will be no revolution."

• Regarding Venezuelan broadcaster RCTV, a persistent Chavez critic whose license was revoked by the president himself, McChesney suggests that if the station were broadcasting in the United States, “its license would have been revoked years ago,” and that “its owners would likely have been tried for criminal offenses, including treason.”

All this, coming from the founder of a group called “Free Press”.....anyone else see the irony?


"All of this begs the question: Once the federal government starts subsidizing our own free press, how long until the feds start revoking broadcast licenses of government opponents and bringing pesky reporters up on charges of say, “corruption” or “subversion”? According to McChesney and the Free Press folks, it apparently can’t happen soon enough."-Steve Forbes is President and Chief Executive Officer of Forbes and Editor-in-Chief of Forbes magazine.


Now let's look at how this aligns with the agenda of Obama' FCC Diversity Czar:
"It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies. The purpose of free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance."

“This... there's nothing more difficult than this. Because we have really, truly good white people in important positions. And the fact of the matter is that there are a limited number of those positions. And unless we are conscious of the need to have more people of color, gays, other people in those positions we will not change the problem. We're in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power.”

What we're really saying is that the Fairness Doctrine's not enough. And that having a sort of over-arching rule that says broadcasters ought to be "fair" or ought to provide issues important to communities and that they ought to do it in a fair and balanced way is simply enough. Unless you put some teeth into that and put some hard, structural rules in place that are going to result in fairness.

“The conversation about how we communicate with each other despite being aware of the clear impressions that I know that I make in rooms that I walk into, when people hear my voice, is a challenge. How much do I express the... I think really pretty obvious complaints of black Americans in rooms full of whites....There are few things I think more frightening in the American mind than dark skinned black men. Here I am.”
-Mark Lloyd-FCC Chief Diversity Czar

More from Mark Lloyd

• "In Venezuela, with Chavez, is really an incredible revolution - a democratic revolution. To begin to put in place things that are going to have an impact on the people of Venezuela."

• The property owners and the folks who then controlled the media in Venezuela rebelled - worked, frankly, with folks here in the U.S. government - worked to oust him. But he came back with another revolution, and then Chavez began to take very seriously the media in his country."

Here's how Chavez handles the media in Argentina:

December 2010-Venezuela's government has taken a 20% stake in Globovision, the last local television station that offers news and views critical of President Hugo Chavez. Globovision has been the only stridently anti-Chavez channel on the air since another opposition-aligned channel, RCTV, was forced off cable and satellite TV in January. RCTV had been booted off the open airwaves in 2007.

"The country can't tolerate that channel any longer," Mr. Chavez said recently during a nationwide broadcast. "It's a matter of public health," he explained. "That channel poisons the mind." We aren't eliminating the Internet here, nor ... censoring the Internet, what we're trying to do is protect ourselves against crimes and cybercrimes through a law." We will ban all messages showing "disrespect for public authorities," that "incite or promote hatred," or create "anxiety" in the population.
-President Hugo Chavez

Methodical reversal of meaning.


Weird….the White House seems to be following Chavez' lead......

President Obama comments regarding Fox News: "It's a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world."

White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN on Sunday that President Obama does not want "the CNNs and the others in the world [to] basically be led in following Fox."

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod went further by calling on media outlets to join the administration in declaring that Fox is "not a news organization."

Nov 17, 2010-Sen Jay Rockefeller

“There’s a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to FOX and to MSNBC: ‘Out. Off. End. Goodbye.’ It would be a big favor to political discourse; our ability to do our work here in Congress, and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and more importantly, in their future.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUZDPVo3ACE

“Totalitarians have always sought to control the media and use it to disseminate it's propaganda. The mainstream media in America is already owned and controlled by collectivists, but what's new for them is the flow of information over the Internet. Their real concern is not pornography or terrorism as they claim, but the free flow of information that exposes their agendas.”


Karl Marx, in creating the Communist Manifesto designed 10 planks AS A TEST to determine whether a society has become communist or not. If they are all in effect and in force, then the people ARE practicing communists.

#6-Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State.
Federal Communication Commission (FCC), Department of Transportation (DOT), Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

http://www.libertyzone.com/Communist-Manifesto-Planks.html

Net Neutrality is an attempt to circumvent the First Amendment and control the free flow of information via the Internet. Open access to all form of media and sources of media is critical to our Freedoms. Knowledge is power and one only needs to glance casually at history to know that whoever controls the information, controls the People. It’s worked well for Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Hussein, Kim Jong-il, Hu-Jintao, Castro, Chavez, Ahmadinejad......

Examine the facts, investigate for yourself and recognize the truth.

None are more hopelessly enslaved, as those who falsely believe they are free....
atriot:

 

[XJEEPER]

Total clarity as to why the White House is targeting FOX, #1 rated and opposes the elected elites Socialist agenda.

http://www.businessinsider.com/in-2010-fox-news-had-more-total-viewers-than-msnbc-cnn-and-hln-combined-2010-12

 

[XJEEPER]

Media Journalist Group Complains ‘Illegal Immigrant’ Term is ‘Offensive’ to Latinos
The Diversity Committee of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) is calling on news reporters nationwide to drop the term “illegal immigrant” from their news coverage in an effort to “inform and sensitize” people on how “offensive” the phrase is to Latinos.


The Diversity Committee of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) is calling on news reporters nationwide to drop the term “illegal immigrant” from their news coverage in an effort to “inform and sensitize” people on how “offensive” the phrase is to Latinos.

In the latest issue of the SPJ’s magazine, Quill, Diversity Committee member Leo Laurence announced the organization’s new campaign against “illegal immigrant” and “illegal alien,“ claiming that individuals living in America without approval should be called ”undocumented workers“ or ”undocumented immigrants.”

“[T]his is not about being politically correct,” SPJ Diversity Committee chairman George Daniels says, but about aiming to “minimize harm” when reporting.
https://www.spj.org/quill_issue.asp?ref=1745


The Latinos that I know are OK with calling the los labrones.......illegal aliens.