My first experience with Political Correctness (PC) was as a middle school student in the early 1960’s. One morning in home room when we rose from our seats for prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, we were instead asked to stand for a moment of silence. The change in procedure at first seemed strange. However, the customary call to obedience that is due our infallible prayer and pledge impelled us to respond here in like manner. We automatically, unknowingly, and respectfully granted that same obedience to the authority of a fallible state. I would not understand the ramifications that this alteration would have not only on the societal fabric of our country, but also the identity mutation that would slowly encroach on our right as a free thinking nation to exercise one’s good conscience. The slow deterioration of tolerance for difference of opinion would curtail discussion, erode our democracy and give rise to the realities of tyranny. One never appreciates the value of a thing until it is lost.
The PC culture has had profound degenerative effects on our country and encouraged division among its people. How can we as a people maintain unity through assimilation when the powers-that-be use diversity to establish lines of division that undoubtedly will cause frustration and disharmony, which in time will morph into hatred? But, that is the plan to take down democracy.
The slow and deliberate implementation of Political Correctness in America has had the same effect on democracy as that of a frog who finds himself in a pot of water on a stove. If you but increase the heat by one degree each day, the unsuspecting frog will boil to death before he becomes aware of the danger. Democracy in America and that frog now share a similar pot. And it is not the altruistic melting-pot which was once this nation’s aim that had made America unique.
Why is prayer such a threat to PC proponents? Because prayer contradicts political correctness; in that, God, who is the object of that prayer, is the antithesis of the State. As charity opposes selfishness and love contradicts hatred. Man cannot tolerate God in this circumstance; for if the goal is to win the confidence of the populace in order to control the populace, man, in the form of government, then must establish himself god. Prayer everywhere must be restricted, because if God is everywhere then the required vacuum for man to replace God cannot be created.
The following is the simple prayer which came under fire and went to the Supreme Court for the landmark decision:
“Almighty God, we acknowledge our (dependence on Thee) and beg Thy blessing over us, our parents, our teachers, and our nation.”
A professor at Boston University, John Miltimore, touched on origins of the term ‘politically correct.’ His following article, in double brackets, is revealing.
[[“The notion of political correctness came into use among Communists in the 1930s as a semi-humorous reminder that the Party’s interest is to be treated as a reality that ranks above reality itself,” writes Codevilla, Professor Emeritus of International Relations at Boston University.
The semi-humorous reminder went something like this:
“Comrade, your statement is factually incorrect.”
“Yes, it is. But it is politically correct.”
The anecdote was a vital reminder in Stalin’s empire: Stray from the party’s official position and it could mean death. Whether or not something was true mattered less than whether or not it advanced the Idea (i.e. the Party’s interest). Similarly, Saul Alinsky, the Chicago community organizer, used the phrase: “Use any means to achieve your goal.”
How does this apply to America today? Codevilla says progressives, like the Marxists before them, have a simple reason for existence: fix a broken society.
“The formula is straightforward: the world is not as it should be because society’s basic, ‘structural’ feature is ordered badly….For Marx and his followers that feature is conflict over the means of production in present-day society…. For Freudians it’s sexual maladjustment, for followers of Rousseau it’s social constraint, for positivists it is the insufficient application of scientific method, for others it is oppression of one race by another. Once control of society passes exclusively into the hands of the proper set of progressives, each sect’s contradictions must disappear as the basic structural problem is straightened out.”
The methods of the Communists and progressives differ, but the goal is one and the same: achieve “cultural hegemony(control),” a political phrase popularized by Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937), an Italian Marxist and politician who became prominent in progressive circles decades after his death.
Progressives learned that achieving hegemony by criminal punishment is difficult. Intellectuals seeking to remake America—“born tainted by Western Civilization’s original sins: racism, sexism, greed, genocide”, etc.—found a more effective way.
Political correctness, perpetuated by a small class of people ensconced at universities, bureaucracies, and major media, is the ideal tool for achieving cultural hegemony. It is “forceful seduction” in lieu of rape. It achieves “tacit collaboration by millions who bite their lip.”
As a political philosophy, political correctness might seem lifeless and aimless. But Codevilla noted the goal of Lenin and Stalin was not a state built on Marxist principles; it was always party control. The two philosophies are similarly empty.
“Like its European kin, all that American progressivism offers is obedience to the ruling class, enforced by political correctness….Nor is there any endpoint to what is politically correct, any more than there ever was to Communism. Here and now, as everywhere and always, it comes down to glorifying the party and humbling the rest.”
“Political Correctness is a movement 1) fundamentally political in nature; and 2) built on resentment.” – Dr. Jordan Peterson
Peterson said this is no accident. It comes right out of the Saul Alinsky playbook.
“The social justice people are always on the side of compassion and ‘victim’s rights,’ so objecting to anything they do makes you instantly a perpetrator. There’s no place you can stand without being vilified, and that’s why it keeps creeping forward….There’s no compassion at all. There is resentment, fundamentally.”]]
The elimination of the fear of God, symbolized by the Supreme courts actions in the matter of school prayer, led to a dramatic increase in crime, venereal disease, premarital sex, illiteracy, suicide, drug use, public corruption, and other social ills. This is documented by Specialty Research Associates, under the direction of David Barton, that has released a report entitled America: To Pray or Not to Pray. Below are just a few of the examples featured in Barton’s (1991) report.
A. Young People
1. For 15 years before 1963 pregnancies in girls ages 15 through 19 years had been no more than 15 per thousand After 1963 pregnancies increased 187% in the next 15 years.
2. For younger girls, ages 10 to 14 years, pregnancies since 1963 are up 553%.
3. Before 1963 sexually transmitted diseases among students were 400 per 100,000. Since 1963, they were up 226% in the next 12 years.
B. The Family
1. Before 1963 divorce rates had been declining for 15 years. After 1963 divorces increased 300% each year for the next 15 years.
2. Since 1963 unmarried people living together is up 353%
3. Since 1963 single parent families are up 140%.
4. Since 1963 single parent families with children are up 160%.
1. The educational standard of measure has been the SAT scores. SAT scores had been steady for many years before 1963. From 1963 they rapidly declined for 18 consecutive years, even though the same test has been used since 1941.
2. In 1974-75 the rate of decline of the SAT scores decreased, even though they continued to decline. That was when there was an explosion of private religious schools. There were only 1000 Christian schools in 1965. Between 1974 to 1984 they increased to 32,000.
a. That could have an impact if the private schools had higher SAT scores. In checking with the SAT Board it was found that indeed the SAT scores for private schools were nearly 100 points higher than public schools.
b. In fact the scores were at the point where the public schools had been before their decline started in 1963 when prayer and Bible reading/ instruction was removed from the schools.
c. The scores in the public schools were still declining.
3. Of the nation’s top academic scholars, three times as many come from private religious schools, which operate on one-third the funds as do the public schools.
I will interject a thought here: What should be of great concern to parents as regards most schools and Universities today is this: “Rather than teaching students how to think, they are being taught what to think.”
D. The Nation
1. Since 1963 violent crime has increased 544%.
2. Illegal drugs have become an enormous & uncontrollable problem.
3. The nation has been deprived of an estimated 30 million citizens through legal abortions just since 1973. ( to date, the number of abortions in the United States is estimated at 60 million.)
The above statistics impels the question: What would be the state of our country if prayer had remained in our school system? When we turn from a God based democratic system of government to a propagated politically correct progressive (socialist) system of governing, we then abandon an ordered society based on objective truth to one that adheres to subjectivism, where everyone does their own thing with little if any regard for their neighbor. Further, democracy is reduced to near dictatorship by flippantly disregarding a just and guiding constitution thereby subverting the rule of law through the establishment of the double standard which is a direct consequence of the PC plan.
If this is what and where we are without prayer, then it is reasonable and logical to conclude that those statistics above would not then apply if prayer and the human characteristics and behavior which are encouraged by prayer were still the norm. A law of physics-and there are many such laws that cannot be manipulated by relativism-states that: two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time. If a space is vacated, then something else will replace it; as air in an empty glass is forced out when the glass is filled with water. Are we that far removed from God that we are incapable of returning? The answer is, no; so long as man has the will to conform his will to that of God’s. God never willed our present conflict to be so. However, man did so by exalting pride over humility. Returning to the example of the glass: air can again replace water simply by emptying the glass. So too can a once just society created for the purpose of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness again flourish when man empties himself of pride and allows humility to rightly reign in his heart. I am not so naïve to believe that the lid once removed from Pandora’s box can easily again be replaced. Yet, I do recall one particular quote from scripture : “What is impossible for man, is not impossible for God.” In that all hope is not lost.
The school and class room where I first heard the words, “a moment of silence”, still stand today. That “moment of silence,” as we well now know, has been silenced completely. The advocates, foot-soldiers and custodians of the PC culture have done their work well, and, for the moment, have the upper hand. Be that as it may; for history has always shown that the proof is in the pudding. And political correctness has at best proved itself to be wrong; at worst proved itself to be a lie.
If man fails to purge himself of pride and restore his humility, then the sad circumstance of our present age will persevere.