Some politicians have been criticised for negatively gearing their property investments. Fair enough. But one commentator complained that Nick Xenophon is obviously very rich because he has no mortgages on his properties. Is there any PC-acceptable situation?

Another diatribe against, just being fair to marginalised minorities or just common civility? Which by the way costs nothing!

Even so there could be a case made for PC gone made, and overcome by irreverent humor rather than a ridiculous rant? i.e., A few days ago I was extolling the virtues of hyperbaric oxygen therapy for geriatrics to a young nurse, who enquired if I were using it? No, just a lot of heavy breathing, I replied in lightening fast repartee.

If you are going to be politically incorrect; make sure you're ancient, doddering, irreverently humorous and intentionally ambiguous if you want to get away with it without (hopefully, occasionally) offending anyone? But rather clutching at aching ribs.
Alan B.

Alan B.

the pc brigade hate truth and usually are very bigoted. Just look at the ' rainbow ' politicians who are more intolerant and hateful than most. And as for the spiteful twisted Emily's listers!

PC is not "reverse intimidation", it is straight-out, full-on intimidation by politicians and other social engineers. It is an assault on freedom of speech and freedom of thought; a bullying of people into thinking they have no right to make their own judgements. The result of this bullying - telling us that everybody is equal - is that those of us who still wish to make our own judgements and think as we wish, become harder, and become even less tolerant of rubbish. While the PC and HR brigades might find it easy to subdue high profile journalists like Andrew Bolt etc., they can do nothing about the rest of us, who can say and do as we wish, simply because the elites don't think we are worth bothering about. We have the votes, and we can use them.

//Basketball Australia should have immediately suspended Cambage for workplace intimidation of Alice Kunek.//

For pointing out that blackface is racist? That's not intimidation, it's pointing out the bloody obvious - just like that kid in the emperor's new clothes. Even though it was a fundamental truth that the Kunek was being racist, you'd prefer that nobody could utter the truth because they'd get fired for 'intimidation' calling attention to that fact.

Michael would like us to live in a world where it's fine for the emperor to be racist but punishable to point out that the he is being racist. This should tell you everything you need to know about the his beliefs on free speech. So much for Voltaire, eh Michael?

Congratulations on your post Michael Keane - more people need to speak out about this collective form of insanity that is now called political correctness. In my view PC is now so entrenched that it will take a major event, usually financial collapse or war, to shake Australia free of this soul destroying nonsense.

In response to Toni, How is innocently painting your face black for a fancy dress party "racist"?

That is exactly a case of intimidation. Do you think Alice Kunek was intentionally being racist? However, the poor girl was publically humiliated. That is definitely intimidation.

Political Correctness is an entrenched, pernicious disease that is devastating our country, stifling free speech, and completely crippling those among us who're our cleverest and most perceptive !

These disgusting PC creatures are like a virulent malignancy, and once they're permitted access to any vital area, of either government or any large private enterprise, will infect and displace the entire operation and subvert good governance of that organisation with their insidious ability to corrupt and divide. They MUST be stopped, and thoroughly extirpated while we still possess both the capacity and capability to do so !

A simple example is to be seen in modern day Great Britain, half their cities in the midlands have 'no-go areas' for the civil authorities, without first seeking police protection. Yet if a single public figure dares to utter the true reason(s) why; he's immediately branded a raciest and outwardly vilified for all time.

Yet this is GB the home of freedom; the genesis of free speech, and the foundation of democracy that we all know and revere.

anyone seen the ex head of the Australian Defence force with his pc garbage. He is doing his best to weaken our army to a bunch of wossies. You need a vomit bag to listen to him.

As discussed in the article, political correctness means that it is not possible to even remotely challenge the extremist feminist or family violence lobbies, else you will be ridiculed publically for sexism. Violence against women is a severe problem. I can only think of how devastating it is for your sister, daughter or friend to be in such a situation. But,no, family violence is not 100% about women being victims. Many men suffer terribly in silence. We must be able to say openly that there are also aggro, psycho women out there too.

Just the way people suspended their disbelief over the Emperor’s new clothes, PC-enabled feminists ignore that overall, men are 40% MORE likely to be the victim of physical violence than women, and men are still assaulted by women 35% as often as women are assaulted by men; these are the stats in the Government's’ own Respect.gov.au site. And there is no greater neuropsychological trauma than losing access to your children, especially if it involves injustice.

What are the long term psychological and societal consequences of a generation being relentlessly indoctrinated in the meme that 100% of the problem is violence against women?

Even though it perhaps had some good points, it seems to me that this essay was just a collection of the usual one-dimensional cliches re the goody-two-shoes nature of what is usually called common sense by our mainstream cultural "authorities".

And not just as they exist in the "21st century", but how we were ALWAYS "educated" or more correctly brain-washed into believing by our dreadfully sane parents, our religion and ALL of the forms of popular media - print, radio and more importantly TV

An integral part of this "education" was of course the erroneous belief in the " CHRISTIAN WHITE MAN'S BURDEN" (especially men of course) in bringing "culture" and "civilization" to the "heathen savages".

That having been said there is a long well written essay on the historical development of the "savior" syndrome of Western white Christian males, and hence the development of the unconscious religious, cultural and political correctness that we have all been subliminally programmed (brain-washed) into believing. As such it is the invisible sub-stratum or template that patterns and limits everything that we do both individually and collectively.

We are defined and controlled by everything that we have not transcended, or become responsible for at the level of conscious awareness.

It is titled The White Christian's Burden on the An und fur sich website (which is my favorite very eclectic Christian website)

While there might be some truth in some of what you say, Daffy? It's also true that domestic violence and child abuse (rape and incest) has its highest (reported tip of the iceberg only) numbers in indigenous communities! Along with the also largest young suicide rate it causes!

Where no doubt this brand new and inculcated behavior into formerly kind, gentle and sober blackfellas, bless them, by their white masters, who forced them as completely helpless victims to roll dope smokes and raise a never ending glass (one is one too many and a thousand never enough) to the lips!

While they, the poor innocent victims of white brainwashing, struggled mightily with every ounce of strength to resist!
Alan B.

“An integral part of this "education" was of course the erroneous belief in the " CHRISTIAN WHITE MAN'S BURDEN" (especially men of course) in bringing "culture" and "civilization" to the "heathen savages".”

Whilst the motivation for this may have been to Christianize other societies there is no doubt that they also helped to civilise societies and civilisation is the goal of all societies. No human being wants to have to remain in a situation where every day is a struggle for existence. Romanticising primitive societies ignores the fundamental striving for peace and safety that is part of every human being. White Christians brought not only their religion but their better methods for refining life so that science and practical skills could make life less stressful and ultimately more enjoyable. They should never apologise for this. This is a gift well worth having for any society.

Christianity may not be such a gift worth having but civilisation certainly is and such a gift could not be divorced from the people who gave it. Now it can be. Not every society on the planet is equally civilised and some have a long way to go - especially those steeped in Islamic fundamentalism.

We should never stop striving for world-wide civilisation simply because it is better than anything else we know about. Apologising for that now or for having done so in the past is to devalue the best of humanity. It is not our burden but our gift.

When did the popular tabloid media ever invite or encourage anyone to consistently exercise positive discriminative intelligence in ANY area of ones life?

The tabloid media includes the Herald Sun and the Daily Telegraphy, all of commercial radio and TV, and all popular magazines, especially women's and consumer lifestyle magazines.

The purpose of such media is of course to provide "faithful" customers/consumers for the products advertised on them.

We are all supposed to eat junk food, watch TV and thus stay "tuned" to the "news" (which is mostly propaganda),and become very excited about the next-big-thing whether it is a new toilet cleaner, a bright-shiny product, the latest movie or stage show, etc etc. We are all supposed to work ceaselessly and not ask any real fundamental or profound questions about anything. And certainly not become involved in any kind of profound transformative doings.

The modern "everyman" of consumer society is a propagandized individual, participating in a "culture" of illusions and, effectively, self-destructing.

The modern "everyman" is being created by the power system of the world-mummery, because it is in the interests of that power system for there to be consumer egos who are entirely self-involved, self-seeking, and stupified (even by believing in "jesus")

At present, a "culture" of total war, a "culture" of death is ruling, while the people are engrossed in consumerism.

Love your work. And yes - political correctness, both left and right - is dangerous. It is the enemy of logical compassionate thought.

Remember Hitler put all the smokers in the gas chambers because they were sub human and supposedly caused the first world war.

Just to add my little bit

1) Political correctness only works on debates that were fought and won 20 years earlier. We have little bravery in our societies nowadays but we have many "good" people. And that is the appeal - to be seen to be a "good" person.

2) It was a conscious and organised strategy to control language thought out by some very clever academics and published in a series of papers in the 70's if memory serves me correctly.

3) The past perpetrators categories of "bad" people are rapidly and clearly becoming defenseless victims of their own sins so words like racism and sexism are having to be redefined. These PinC (Politically Incorrect) behaviors can now ONLY be committed by members of a powerful group or a group perceived to be power. It cannot be committed by the powerless or those who perceive themselves as powerless (look up Wikipedia or google "arguments against Reverse Discrimination" if you don't believe me)

4) And finally - Don't panic (as a wise sage once said) - it is all fluff. Surveys repeatedly show that the strength of individuals real beliefs differ markedly from what they say as part of a group on PC subjects. They massively overestimate the strength with which beliefs are held by the other members of the group. ie they are just trying to be polite. At lease there is something good about PC control of other people. It only works if they are polite and want to avoid conflicts.

There is heaps of evidence through the centuries, that show certain groups, such as religious, political groups that were ostracise, persecute, exterminate those who do not have the same mind set.

Just look at Cambodia and Pol Pott regime, or the Spanish Inquisition.

I forgot that Stalin use to send dissidents to Siberia.

Trials that were held were show trials with the verdict already made.

Erin Pizzey reported that the time she spent in China, every one was spying on each other, children on parents, neighbour on neighbour.

Political Correctness is a tool to silence voices of dissent on social agendas that divide a nation and destroy its sovereignty. Its a tool of the New World Order used to undermine us and steer us towards a global government and total enslavement.

PC only has power if we let it. Freedom of expression should encourage robust discussion. After all, throughout modern history, it's been one major way for any of us to learn.

The power of PC to silence or restrict discussion is a bit overblown in a world where, short of violence or the threat of it, each of us really can say what we damn-well like - and take the consequences, i.e. rebuttal, ridicule, the ostracism of idiots, and hopefully further discussion on the topic. Marx would call this 'the dialectic'.

After all, although some of us would like to, we can't reach through cyberspace and strangle someone with a different point of view, we can only use words, and frankly words on their own don't devastate.

So speak up, everyone, tell the simpletons to shove PC where it belongs: you have nothing to lose but a bit of dignity !

Joe

@Loudmouth

"So speak up, everyone, tell the simpletons to shove PC where it belongs..."

+1

There's a rising tide of chauvinism across the board in the globalist, egalitarian monoculture, it takes a variety of forms but it's endemic to that way of life.

Toni Lavis,
I think a lot of readers would like to know why using blackface to help impersonate Kanya West is racist.
It’s not like Alice Kunek wanted to impersonate the proverbial “Sambo” with blackface, eating watermelon and shuffling around on the dance floor, or whatever the alleged stereotypical behaviours are.

Like Edward, I am wanting to know From Toni why simply painting your face black for a fancy dress party is racist. Those sorts of aggressive accusations of racism are exactly the sort of intimidation that we should stand up to.

Sometimes people are unthinking, they don't think through to the consequences, or implications, of their actions. Sometimes they are a bit stupid and unintentionally hurtful. Sometimes they are consciously racist. I don't think this girl (can I use that term now ?) was necessarily racist, just a bit silly, and I'm sure she regrets what she did, so let's move on.

People with some tenuous Irish links tell Irish jokes. I'm sure that for some Irish people, such jokes are sort of reflective back on the teller, as jokes told or invented by Irish people for non-Irish people, to show what a dill the teller is. A joke within a joke. That complexity is what might make it such a sort of double-joke. Still, I like the one about the bloke who comes into a doctor's waiting room with both his ears bandaged. ??

PC covers vast ground. Luckily, so does common sense. And good-natured humour. We take the mickey out of ourselves. We call our mates 'bastard', at least my wife used to call me that, with a laugh. Of course, there's a line that shouldn't be crossed but it depends a lot on context.

But PC should never be allowed to cripple freedom of expression, or discussion, or passionate argument. If you disagree with someone, explain why, put your own point of view forward. I remember arguing with an Aboriginal student and he said, 'You're a racist', i.e. because I disagreed with him. I said, 'Go to buggery.' or words to that effect. After all, the problem with using only PC as a weapon is that, like every other means of disagreement, it has to stand up for itself: 'PC ?' 'Prove it.' It has no particular superior mandate.

Well, he was ironing and the phone rang....

Joe

The ideology the Michael Keane discusses, is manifest in an article from SBS Insight today, link below. The article accuses the government of framing policies about aborigines in a significantly negative way, the quote is below.

"For example, current government policy is entitled the “Indigenous Advancement Strategy”. By its very name, this suggests that Indigenous people are in some way “behind” or “lacking”, needing to be advanced."

The same article then continues, and contradicts itself. Quote below;

"There is a serious need to understand how such discourses are produced and repeated, and what their effect might be on efforts to alleviate Indigenous disadvantage."

No mention is made in the article of the government support of the ABC, which has a dedicated Aboriginal Affairs section, which carries a mixture of positive and negative articles. Nor does it mention any code of conduct for the media to follow, which is what must be so, as the media is constituted of a myriad of organisations most of which are independent of the government. The nitpicking could continue, but it would be abhorrently petty to do so.

The government can do better, so to can the citizens of this sunburnt nation, the SBS article does include sensible suggestions for improvement, but nevertheless, it manifests a harmful aspect of PC culture. This is clearly illustrated by the attitude that when the government says, "development", there is some kind of moral and systemic failure, yet when the writer says, "disadvantage" it is the proper way to speak. What difference would be made if it was "Indigenous Advantage Strategy" or "Indigenous Anti-Disadvantage Strategy"?

http://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/2016/06/10/governments-must-stop-negatively-framing-policies-aimed-indigenous-australians

Hi Abraham,

Yes, surely truth trumps convenient narrative ? What on earth is to be gained by pretence and lies ?

Aboriginal people are vastly more likely to commit offences of violence and theft: FACT. Who does it help to deny this ?

Aboriginal 'communities' are, on the whole, hell-holes. FACT.

'Self-determination' is a sham. FACT.

Around forty thousand (+/- 10 %) Indigenous people are university graduates. FACT. Those numbers are increasing at around 5 % per year. FACT. More than a hundred thousand Indigenous people have been to universities. FACT.

On the whole, Indigenous people, certainly adults, more or less do what they like, they never have been, or ever will be, herded. FACT.

And after the Orlando Massacre (FACT), can we still call Islam a 'religion of peace' ? Will its spokespeople, i.e. its spokesmen, repudiate what that bastard did ? Don't hold your breath.

Cheers,

Joe