Review of Related Literature

Political Correctness (PC) is a controversial topic that has become more and more

the topic of debates. This term has been said as the communal tyranny that erupted in

the 1980s. It was an impulsive declaration that specific ideas, expressions and behavior,

which were then legal was now prohibited by law and the people who disobeyed should

be punished. [4] (Atkinson, 2017) This was an idea taken from a novel titled 1984 by

George Orwell where he imagined that a future world where speech was greatly restricted

existed. He had called the language of the totalitarian state as “Newspeak” which bears

a significant resemblance to the political correctness we see in the society right now. [5]

(Snyder, 2013) Political correctness is something that has creeped and seeped in our

society with many conforming silently, knowing or unknowing, in this speech code.

An important contributor Political Correctness was Betty Friedan who wrote the

book The Feminine Mystique wherein she related Feminism to Abraham Maslow’s theory

of self-actualization. Friedan’s revolution was a manifestation of the social revolutionary

process that begun by Karl Marx.

Political Correctness has its roots traced back to the 19 th century when Karl Marx

developed his theory and over time, this theory has been improvised with many more new

ideas and standards. But the origin of the phrase itself cannot be very precisely explained

and pointed out. This phrase was not even heard of the Americans until October 1990

when an influential article was published by the New York Times reporter Richard

Bernstein with the headline “The Rising Hegemony of the Politically Correct”. He warned

in his article that the universities were threatened by a “growing intolerance, a closing

debate, a pressure to conform”. This article had set off a chain reaction. In December of
that year, the cover of Newsweek featured a headline called “Thought Police” and another

gloomy warning which says, “There’s a ‘politically correct’ way to talk about race, sex and

ideas. Is this the New Enlightenment – or the New McCarthyism?” [6]

Bernstein had said in his article that the word “politically correct”, is being spoken

more with irony and disapproval than with reverence. He also said even if this term is not

used in utter seriousness, there is a large body of belief that a group of opinions about

race, ecology, feminism, culture and foreign policy describes a kind of “correct” attitude

toward the problems of the world which is a sort of unofficial ideology of the university. [7]

Ruth Perry, a professor of literature at MIT who was active in civil rights movement

and the feminist, wrote that, “The attack on the ‘politically correct’ in the universities is an

attack on the theory and practice of affirmative action – a legacy of the sixties and

seventies – defined as the recruitment to an institution of students and faculty who do not

conform to what has always constituted the population of academic institutions: usually

white, middle-class, straight, male.” Perry also said in an interview that the emerging

definition was “confusing to us, me and my buddies…It was our shorthand, and it was

always used ironically. It was always used as a joke. It was, I think, one of the ways we

distinguished ourselves as the New Left from the Old Left. It was about not being

dogmatic. So that you would say, 'I know it's not politically correct, but I'm going to go get

a hamburger anyway,' or, 'I know it's not politically correct, but I shave my legs.'” [8] It was

at that time that people were arguing over language that seemed to serve as a substitute

for deeper divergences on how Americans should handle equality and equity.

Debate on Political Correctness had died down in the year 2001 and resurfaced

again in the final years of Obama’s presidency as well as anti-political-correctness

groups. Articles were again published about this topic. Later, current President Donald

Trump had used his anti-political-correctness advocacy to his own advantage in winning

the presidential elections and said that he was only doing what was sensible whole his

opponents were operating on a political agenda. This is an evidence of what Vincent

Hutchings, an American politics professor at the University of Michigan had said that the

term “politically correct” is used as a kind of “linguistic jujitsu” to incapacitate an

opponent’s diversity argument. He also said that, “It is the case that words are weapons

in political discourse, and they always have been.” [8]

Advocates of Political Correctness had presented their beliefs quite attractively

saying that it is a system of being “sensitive” and “tolerant” to other people in way that all

would get along despite of the differences. Political Correctness may be convincing, but

it is not at all about being good to one another or getting along well. It can imply controlling

our own thoughts, defying traditional social order, and the loss of freedom to speak and

express. It causes society to be uptight which may cause countless misunderstandings

and panic. Although being sensitive to other people is good but not to the extent that it

limits your own freedom. Your own freedom only begins when you don’t restrict another

person’s freedom.