"Thatcherite" <ryan_byrne@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:1162380018.284974.180030@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Since Labour were voted into Government in 1997, steps have been made
> to make it ridiculously difficult for any other party; namely the
> Conservatives to enter the corridors of power. I subcribe to the
> opinion that political correctness has been used as a weapon, to turn
> British politics into a popularity fest in which the politician who
> offends the least people wins.
>
> There have been many bi-products of this ridiculous process, the loss
> of our nationality and Sovereignty (do you feel particulary British
> today?). The way that equality seems to have turned back on itself. The
> way that many Brits feel that they are punished increasingly by Gordon
> Brown, simply for wanting a beverage after a long weeks work.
>
> Why should we be punished by this Governments scheme to be rid of all
> rival parties?
> Why should we have to pay a ridiculous price to fill up our tanks or
> for a few drinks after a hard days work?
>
> Why should politics have to adapt to the labourite vision that is
> political correctness.
>
> They say we have freedom of speech, but it is counter-acted with
> political correctness. In which any of us that have anything to say are
> silenced by this blairite regime.
>
For somebody to assert that something is 'politically correct'
then they, as an individual or a body, must have:
a) a policy (their policy)
b) their notion that said policy correct
In other words 'they' simultaneously ASSERT
policy and ASSERT correctness. Not truth, fact, accuracy
opr reality note, but pure assertion. The content of policy
and it's accuracy are mere matters of opinion.
They attempt to control definition and language - so just reject
such assertions MAKING SURE TO USE YOUR OWN
LANGUAGE AND NOT THEIRS.
If you control the language,. you control the conception and ideation,
so jsut reject PC as the bollocks it is, noting this as you do:
'Human beings do not live in the objective world
alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as
ordinarily understood, but are very much at the
mercy of the particular language which has become
the medium of expression for their society.
It is quite an illusion to imagine that one adjusts
to reality essentially without the use of language
and that language is merely an incidental means
of solving specific problems of communication and
reflection.
The fact of the matter is that the "real world" is to
a large extent unconsciously built up on the language
habits of the group.'
[This famous passage from the American linguist and anthropologist Edward
Sapir (1884-1936)'s 'The Status Of Linguistics As A Science', written in
1929, demonstrates the dominating thought of what has come to be called by
all sorts of names including the 'Sapir-Whorf hypothesis']
|
