#What is meant by the term “Political Correctness”? It became a well known phrase throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, mainly in a derogatory term to describe phrases to describe (usually) minority groups were now deemed to be “offensive”. It was often used in the context “political correctness gone mad!”. Many saw it as a restriction on freedoms of speech and a way of forcing viewpoints on others. Yet, despite this, is it forcing change or was it part of the change? To take an example, the British sitcom “Only Fools and Horses” frequently made jokes at the expense of ethnic minorities or homosexuals. At the time, this was seen as harmless, however looking at them in today’s more multicultural world you can see how these jokes were offensive to these groups. It isn’t forcing viewpoints to state that describing homosexuals as being “funny” would be very offensive to a homosexual. However, is cowering to political correctness now the easy choice with the least amount of aggravation? I would like to use the example of the late Sir Roger Scruton and the aftermath of his interview with the New Statesman magazine (Cameron’s resignation was the death knell of the Conservative Party”). In this interview, Sir Roger was misquoted by the interviewer to an extent where it implied he had said some derogatory words to describe, amongst others, the Chinese. There was a great fallout and controversy from this, and the then Conservative government immediately dismissed him from the government’s Building Better, Building Beautiful commission. The response from the government as soon as a decision had to be made after a controversial comment was to sack the individual. Yet, once the full transcript was found and released, this backed Sir Roger’s view that he had not said any derogatory against any people, but their governments, with the quotations manipulated. The New Statesman magazine issued an apology. I use this example as the government chose the easy option to sack Sir Roger, rather than the more difficult (politically and maybe socially) of reviewing all the evidence and asking for the full transcript before making the decision. Does this mean that in future it is best to sack and move on rather than investigate and action? I think it is crucial to touch the subject of “Political Correctness” when we speak about freedom of expression simply because it is becoming a very popular choice of opinion. You can agree, disagree or stay neutral. Why does remaining neutral is seen as the tastiest bit of cake ? Because you can’t offend anyone and neutrality will never be confronted.
