What is more dangerously:Political Correctness or Terrorism?

As a nature consequence of Political Correctness the effective fighting of Terrorism is almost impossible, the Libs, Lefties & Co. make huge outrage and cry out if for example a Mosque is observed or a Government want to perform the "Profiling" of Passengers in the Airports. It seems the Political Correctness is grown up to one of the biggest supporters of Terrorism in the Western World.

Or maybe the aforementioned statement is wrong, against that the Political Correctness is the biggest combatant against Terrorism, please vote and describe your opinion.

Neither, overbearing thieving, murderous governments is the most dangerous

Terrorism. Political correctness is just having good manners, self-restraint, and the ability to get points across without provoking people.

First off political correctness came from the right, not the left. Sure the left might have adopted it to fixate on its pet pevs, but political correctness originated on the right and especially being pushed by the religious right on areas of "morals". It was politically correct once that women did not smoke in public, or wear pants. It was politically correct that a woman marry young to the man of her parents choice.. a woman not married at the mid 20s was seen as a spinster. It was political correct once that women did not work or go to college. It was highly politically incorrect when the first women did such things.. and all this happened long before the "left" started up. And that is just some of the many examples of "political correctness".

Second off, terror is a relative term. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Those words ring very true even to this day, just as they did when they were first voiced long ago, and even before the concept was categorised. George Washington would be a terrorist in today's terms. The tactics he used during the Revolutionary war were at the time, new and seen as immoral as it went against the code of war. Much like today's terrorists. Now this is not a defence of terror in any ways, but one has to remember at one time the founding fathers of Israel for example were considered terrorists. The French resistance were terrorists to the Germans... and so on and so on. Terror has been around a very long time, but they were usually quantified as criminals or rebels.

Now both are dangerous, no doubt about that, especially when used to control others.

However what is much more dangerous is government and corporations and especially corporations since we have no control over those what so ever. So corporatism is by far the most dangerous thing on earth at this time, far more dangerous than terror or political correctness... in fact one could easily claim that terror is a result of corporatism gone unchecked. At least with government we get to have some say in who runs it.. that we often elect people that corporations want is another matter... this of course varries with country to country.. some are worse then others.

Good points that I had not thought of!

No opinion

Definitely political correctness, didn't you see politically correct people fly planes into a couple of tall buildings? :roll:

spud_meister said:

Definitely political correctness, didn't you see politically correct people fly planes into a couple of tall buildings? :roll:

Click to expand...

Actually you did. Political correctness manifests itself in many ways. For example, the 9/11 bombers came from a society where it was politically correct to strike at those who had "wronged" them or their society in some way. Now this does not mean terror per say, but also upholding ones and ones clan/family honour and other traditional aspects of "ancient" human traditions. This is done by striking those who have wronged you.. which was what 9/11 in its bare cold facts was... a strike at the supposed enemy of the bombers beliefs/politics.

Remember also political correctness is the bullying of the powerful (not the many per say) of everyone else based on some set of beliefs (political, economic or religious). That is why you have a small minority in some countries bullying the rest to oppose gay rights for example.

PeteEU said:

Actually you did. Political correctness manifests itself in many ways. For example, the 9/11 bombers came from a society where it was politically correct to strike at those who had "wronged" them or their society in some way. Now this does not mean terror per say, but also upholding ones and ones clan/family honour and other traditional aspects of "ancient" human traditions. This is done by striking those who have wronged you.. which was what 9/11 in its bare cold facts was... a strike at the supposed enemy of the bombers beliefs/politics.

Remember also political correctness is the bullying of the powerful (not the many per say) of everyone else based on some set of beliefs (political, economic or religious). That is why you have a small minority in some countries bullying the rest to oppose gay rights for example.

Click to expand...

No, the bombers came from a society where it was acceptable to seek retribution, that is not political correctness, PC is seeking to minimise offense through moderation of behaviour. Political correctness is a business enforcing rules that employers use words like "foreperson" instead of "foreman" not a guy murdering blacks 'cause he thinks it's OK.

spud_meister said:

No, the bombers came from a society where it was acceptable to seek retribution, that is not political correctness, PC is seeking to minimise offense through moderation of behaviour. Political correctness is a business enforcing rules that employers use words like "foreperson" instead of "foreman" not a guy murdering blacks 'cause he thinks it's OK.

Click to expand...

No politically correctness is as you said to "minimise offence through moderation of behaviour". One way of doing that is to kill off the offending party, and that in it self would minimize future behaviour.. much like the burning of witches in the US and Europe. It was politically correct to punish girls and women who spoke out of place. As I stated there are many versions and ways to be "politically correct". In Germany for example during the Nazi's it was "politically correct" to turn in Jews. In the south of the US, it was "politically correct" to be as offensive to black people as possible and so on and so on. Politically correct does not have to be moderation of behaviour in a "good way".. can also be of a bad way... it is all in the eye of the beholder.

Alfons said:

As a nature consequence of Political Correctness the effective fighting of Terrorism is almost impossible, the Libs, Lefties & Co. make huge outrage and cry out if for example a Mosque is observed or a Government want to perform the "Profiling" of Passengers in the Airports. It seems the Political Correctness is grown up to one of the biggest supporters of Terrorism in the Western World.

Or maybe the aforementioned statement is wrong, against that the Political Correctness is the biggest combatant against Terrorism, please vote and describe your opinion.

Click to expand...

I suppose that in the context of your question, PC vs. TSA sort of thing; that terrorism is more dangerous. It's used as propaganda tools to excuse government growth and expansion of power; and that is pretty damned dangerous. In the more generalized context, is PC behavior more dangerous than the threat of terrorism, I'd probably say PC is more dangerous. This is based on terrorism itself not being a huge impact on our daily lives. It's not really that dangerous because in reality it's a low probability even which will work itself out every once in awhile. It's far less dangerous than say cars. PC behavior, however, can also (in general) have the effect of excusing gross expansions of government power against the rights and liberties of the individual.

If you ask me, the greatest threat to our rights and liberties is the government itself. Not some outside insane group of people who blow themselves up. They can never change our laws, our Constitution, or the dynamics of our government.

I chose PC because the enemy within is far more dangerous than enemies on the outside and besides, terrorists are learning to use our PC tendencies against us.

Depends on how you define, "dangerously". Terrorists are certainly a larger threat when it comes to human lives, but political correctness is the larger threat when it comes to civil rights and personal liberties.

They are equally dangerous, IMO.

I think 'political correctness' as a term only refers to remarks on the public record.

apdst said:

Depends on how you define, "dangerously". Terrorists are certainly a larger threat when it comes to human lives, but political correctness is the larger threat when it comes to civil rights and personal liberties.

They are equally dangerous, IMO.

Click to expand...

What got the Patriot Act introduced, terrorism or PC?

PeteEU said:

No politically correctness is as you said to "minimise offence through moderation of behaviour". One way of doing that is to kill off the offending party, and that in it self would minimize future behaviour.. much like the burning of witches in the US and Europe. It was politically correct to punish girls and women who spoke out of place. As I stated there are many versions and ways to be "politically correct". In Germany for example during the Nazi's it was "politically correct" to turn in Jews. In the south of the US, it was "politically correct" to be as offensive to black people as possible and so on and so on. Politically correct does not have to be moderation of behaviour in a "good way".. can also be of a bad way... it is all in the eye of the beholder.

Click to expand...

This proves that you don't know what it means. And congrats on brining Nazi's into the thread.

Texas A&M had a contest for the best definition of a contemporary expression. The winner was political correctness.

"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

Click to expand...

GPS_Flex said:

I chose PC because the enemy within is far more dangerous than enemies on the outside and besides, terrorists are learning to use our PC tendencies against us.

Click to expand...

I can't help but laugh at this kind of crap.

"The terrorists will consider this mosque as a victory mosque"

"The terrorists are trying to scare us into giving up our rights"

"The terrorists are using the wikileaks leaks to recruit people" (as if they didn't already have enough recruiting tools)

"The terrorists are having anchor babies in the U.S. so they can attack us 20 years later"

"The terrorists are laughing their asses off over the TSA issues in the U.S."

"The terrorists are jealous of our freedoms, and that's why they attacked the U.S."

"The terrorists are just pissed off that they have to live in sh*tholes"


I'm tempted to report the people making these claims to the CIA. They must be in with the terrorists to know what the terrorists are thinking and doing.......

Neither
fear and ignorance
no vote

earthworm said:

Neither
fear and ignorance
no vote

Click to expand...

Political correctness is about fear.

However, I know your point.