Persuasive Essay On Political Correctness

In order to find truth to anything, one must make multiple suggestions, ask many questions, and sometimes ponder the unspeakable. Without doing so, there would be no process of elimination; therefore, truth would be virtually unattainable. Now, in our attempts to either find truth, express our beliefs and opinions, or generally use the rights we are given constitutionally, we are often being criticized and even reprimanded. Our freedom to voice our opinion(s) is being challenged, as critics of free speech are taking offense to what seems like anything and everything merely controversial and arguably prejudice. As people continue to strive for a nation free of prejudice and discrimination, where everyone is equal, safe and

What is free speech? Does the term ‘free speech’ cover offensive words? Painful ones? Words that disrespect others? What about objectionable, or even wrong beliefs? When is speech illegal? What is exactly meant by free speech? According to Rampell, the term ‘free speech’ includes ‘hate speech’, and is therefore protected by the first amendment (np). This means that even messages we don’t like, agree with, feel uncomfortable about, or even are disgusted by, are legal. Unfortunately, many college students consider harmful words an assault, and some students believe that such verbal attacks can and should be met with violence (French np). Students and speakers today are discriminated against in classrooms and other scenes where free speech and debate should be especially cherished.

Freedom of speech is a glorious thing and a privileges of living in the United States of America is being able to express one’s opinion. Segments of society are making an effort to stifle people’s opinions to do what is politically correct. Can people’s ideas of protection be too extreme? In the article, “The Coddling of the American Mind”, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt argue that there is a negative outcome when rules are given to stop people from being offended, and this statement is supported from real life examples, analogies, and reliable sources.

George Orwell once famously said ‘If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.' This sentence sums up the very essence of free speech; it is, as Orwell believed, the mother of all civil rights. Without the unconditional freedom to offend it cannot exist. Ideas are, more often than not, dangerous things. There is little point in having freedom of speech if it only defends the most popular and innocuous of opinions. The freedom to offend can perpetrate racial, social or religious intolerance; however, conversely, it is also the only means available to fight against such bigotry. Free speech is not something to work towards when the world is ‘better'; it is, rather, the vital tool through

Now a days, you have to watch what you say, how you say it, and where you say what you think in order to a) not offend those around you and b) to avoid government (whether local, state or federal) scrutiny. It appears that now a days anything and everything that is said has some form of backlash. We are

Not only does political correctness limit language, it limits competition between groups. For example the competition between the upper and lower class for power would cease if we were made to be politically correct. We need the upper and lower class for our society to function correctly. Without competition society can not thrive, and the philosophy of political correctness attempts to make people equals which effectively blocks individual success thus eliminating any motive to take the risks necessary to succeed. How can a person move up in this world with out stepping on others, and every time someone steps on someone else they will use methods or words that could be taken as politically incorrect. It is the nature of capitalism and democracy to have competing groups which ultimately leads to a separation of the bourgeoisie and proletariat or the upper and lower class. This is the greatest good a capitalistic democratic society can reach because the factions are not permanent; the members of each group are free to move

The NFL protest is a silent protest to police brutality and institutional racism. In Between the World and Me, Coates brings attention to institutional racism and police brutality. They are both extremely common in America. The NFL protest is an act of patriotism and brings awareness to institutional racism, but some Americans find it disrespectful to the national anthem.

Elaborating on Charles’ comment, political correctness is a troubling aspect of American society as is the tone of the current presidential race. Yet civil war, foreign attacks, economic turmoil, two presidential impeachments, a presidential resignation, military campaigns and political correctness has battered but not destroyed the nation. The key is the inward base found in the simplicity of a government created by the people and for the people, an outside

Political correctness in the United States is often seen as killing the country. From the point of view of republicans, it is believed that political correctness is more like a sort of Manchurian candidate which has been unleashed by the Democrats in order to undermine the establishment of conformity and mediocrity. The political correctness also often results in the downfall of the country. There are resulting declining educational standards along with the inability to have the security of jobs and also the resultant diminished American within the current modern world. The political correctness also seems to be taking over the entire American society which is evident when 5 of the Californian students were however sent back home

I believe freedom of speech is becoming more and more subjective. Being politically correct has become a top priority in today’s world. Offending people and freedom of speech are, in my opinion, connected. There are many people who believe that if someone doesn’t share their opinions, they are automatically at odds. There are many ways in which people feel limited in what they say because of this notion. People who are in the media feel this pressure over and above what the average person does. Their careers can be jeopardized if they say something that angers the wrong crowd.

Anywhere in America today, a newspaper headline or magazine article touts an alleged injustice against an individual based on their race, handicap, religion, or sexuality. Yet the supposed victims of discrimination are sometimes the very people shouting the loudest if they receive the equal treatment they are demanding. If taken on a case-by-case basis, there is certainly bountiful evidence authenticating the practice of impartiality does occur. However, the danger of attempting to placate all by offending none, can destroy every American’s right to free speech. We have become a nation so focused on policing our own thoughts and expressions we bowdlerize their very intent and meaning. Consequently, this

Censorship has been a touchy topic over the past few years. Everyone has their own opinion on the topic, but the fact is censorship is way more damaging than people may notice. First off, the definition of censorship is to restrain, block, and censor ideas and information that some may find offensive. The basic definition of censorship completely violates the First Amendment. We, as Americans, have the right to Freedom of Speech. Censorship blocks that by blocking anything some may find offensive. It’s not fair because they’re blocking out how people feel/think just because someone found it “offensive” or wrong. It completely contradicts the First Amendment. People have the right to know about the world and what’s happening. Keeping the

In Political Correctness In America, the author, E.W., argues against Obama's message in that "in 'modern, complicated, diverse societies' Americans must 'exercise civility and restraint and judgment'". Political correctness is here for a reason. So that you don't offend anyone. While some find it burdensome, it's not impossible to call people what they prefer or use terms that are more acceptable to the public while still getting your point across. The author writes that "criticism—is a necessary ingredient of debate and deliberation". While criticism is necessary, it is possible to have a proper debate within the boundaries of respect. Refraining from offending others and insisting on political correctness are two very different things. People

“Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right. It reinforces all other human rights, allowing society to develop and progress. The ability to express our opinion and speak freely is essential to bring about change in society.” Freedom of Speech grants you the right and privilege to speak your mind without facing any type of consequence . I strongly believe that censorship and the lack of free speech can and will cause a negative effect on our world.

Freedom of speech in America is defined by the right to express any opinions without any censorship or restraint. But it isn’t just defined by the words people speak aloud. It’s the actions they take part in to support the words they express. The writing of books and essays, creating artwork, giving speeches to grand crowds, voting, protesting. But do all people have the right to speak their mind? Should people be able to speak freely, to express opinions and thoughts, as promised in the United States constitution? A controversial topic, with many different opinions weighing in from around the world.