Spindler College English 1.3.2017 In 21st century society, it’s common for people to publicly identify with certain groups that they relate to. Of these, the most common are political groups such as, Republicans and democrats, and needless to say they each have varying views. These groups even have sub cultures that don’t necessarily agree with the former party's platform. Everyone can relate to a time when they’ve either said, or been around someone when they’ve said something that isn’t P.C, or what we define as “Politically correct”. To be politically correct is to Avoid all forms of expressions and actions that exclusively exclude, or target those who are socially disadvantaged.”. Some definitions of the term include “Often taken to extremes”. …show more content…
Many believe that progressive orthodoxy can have more of a negative effect rather than a positive one. As everyone aims to be politically correct, a lot of people feel as if their freedoms are being limited. It’s very difficult nowadays to have a political identity without being branded with all of society's views about the types of people that belong to which groups. Most people have a difficult time sharing whether or not they have a political affiliation due to fear of scrutiny. They fear hearing things such as “You’re republican, so you must be a racist, bible thumping homophobe”, or “You’re a democrat, you must be a freeloading vegan.” David French, a staff writer at the national review would agree that statements like these “Narrows choices and minds” When we make quick assumptions like this, we limit the way that we process, and synthesise new ideas. As French says “It’s one thing to support gay marriage, transgender rights, affirmative-action, amnesty for illegal immigrants and large-scale Muslim immigration. They’re ideas worth debating. It’s another thing entirely to write off opponents of progressive ideology as homophobes, transphobes, racists and Islamophobes.” What French is trying to say is that you are completely allowed to practice whatever beliefs you want, but you can’t label any opposition as part of some evil, tyrannical, organization. Expressing some form of concern about the negative effects of large scale immigration is not racist. Defending christian biblical orthodoxy about sexuality isn’t a symbol of hate. People resent being censored because it makes them feel as if they are saying “evil things”. When factions two major factions occupied by the most people are generally unhappy with each other, it hinders the ability of a lot of things to be accomplished. Quite frankly it’s a waste of time, and energy that could be applied to far more
Gone are the days of legalized slavery, of Nazi Germany, of women being incapable of having a notable opinion. No longer is there a system of racial segregation adopted by an entire country, complete white supremacy or lynchings performed by the Ku Klux Klan. Yet, although we are no longer exposed to such past experiences and despite us living in a world where diversity is embraced more than ever, the existence of prejudice remains. Today we have universally come to accept multiculturalism, varied ethnic backgrounds and those populations who historically were forever stigmatized. But in spite of these developments prejudice has manifested itself in other, more subtle ways and no matter how modernized society become such unfavourable attitudes
Reform brought incredible change in America with the help of state and municipal levels of government in America, but primarily in the federal level. Influences within government at the national level such as Theodore Roosevelt, WIlliam Taft, and Woodrow Wilson brought significant successes and limitations in the period of 1900-1920. These three presidents inflicted the most change during the Progressive Era, helping rid America of corruption, trusts, poor living and working conditions, and promoting moral responsibility and conservation.
Within the period of 1900-1920, many national reforms were rising to the top as Progressive Era reformers and the federal government heard the voices of the people. The effectiveness of Progressivism is a controversial subject for some, but the future was changed through the events of any actions a president made, the rights of people, and unfair treatment and conditions. This era brings changes to our society that also changes the future of it. These two decades brought forth successful times in bettering America.
In the article “What’s in a Word?” (2004), the author George Lakoff, a professor of linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, describes that the term utilized to refer to the issue of same-sex marriage and the way that society frames the issue can change the whole view. Lakoff develops his claim by breaking down the issue of gay marriage into three perspectives: to American society, to conservatives and to liberals. Lakoff’s purpose of this article is to reveal how the meaning of a word and attitude towards an issue can have a negative affect as a whole in order to encourage Americans to reframe the negative connotation of gay marriage. Lakoff utilizes analytical and persuasive tones throughout the article to approach to his intended
The United States of America, as a whole, has pushed for rights and equality for any and all people. Gay rights and racial equality have received an ample amount of support as well as opposition. Even bringing up the other side’s argument may cause a debate in almost any environment. Today, Americans are easily offended by things that don’t agree with what they believe. America is full of passionate people who always have a cause to fight for or against. Gay marriage has been opposed countless times on local, state, and national levels. “Almost two- thirds of Republicans oppose the Supreme Court’s backing of gay marriage, according to Reuters/Ipsos Poll ” (Reuters). Even though another online survey stated that “more than half of Americans support it,” they still
The Progressive Era ( 1890’s- 1920’s) was a period of political reforms and social activism within politicians, and radical groups. Some politicians were also known as “Political Progressives”, this group made great changes in the effort to sooth the anger of many industrial workers, and to make their jobs a little less rigorous, however the changes put into effort by political progressives would do little to aid the concerns such as those of the radicals groups (women, blacks, Mexican-Americans).
Where did some of modern America's issues originate from? The answer to that is the Progressive Era. The Legislation of that era laid all of the groundwork for today, and much of it is still in public debate today. Roosevelt, Taft, and Wilson, three of the presidents from that era, all played roles in the groundwork. These presidents passed acts, tariffs, and amendments that are still with us, and debated today.
From 1890 to 1920 was labeled the Progressive Era and responded to the social problems that arose from the Industrial Revolution that was sweeping across America. This social movement changed into to a political one and corruption ran high throughout the governments and political parties. Corporate greed was astounding and was keeping the general society at poverty levels. The wealthy Americans used their wealth to live lifestyles of lavishness that was being created from the modernization of America, while the poor had to sleep in the alleys and beg for food. Men and women were being worked 12 to 16 hours a day and children labor was rampant with no laws in place to protect the children workers. The Progressive Era sought to eliminate these negative impacts to society create solid education systems and safe work environments. Social reform was seriously desired and the progressives were destined to change the way society in America was being established by the Tycoons such as Andrew Carnegie, John Rockefeller, and Cornelius Vanderbilt. Constitutional Amendments were added during the Progressive Era to create social change and correct the political interests of America. Woodrow Wilson views on the ‘literary theory’ of checks and balances is simply a consistent account of what our Constitution makers tried to do;” he stated, “and those checks
Rankin, Aidan. “The repressive openness of political correctness.” Contemporary Review 282.1644 (2003): 33+. Literature resource Center. Web. 15 Feb. 2011.
Michiko Kakutani's essay “The Word Police” is a refreshing look at a literary world policed by the Politically Correct (P.C.). She pokes fun at the efforts of P.C. policepersons such as Rosalie Maggio, author of The Bias-Free Word Finder, a Dictionary of Nondiscriminatory Language . But in mocking authors like Maggio, Kakutani emphasizes that efforts of the P.C. police are often exaggerated to the point of silliness and can even become a linguistic distraction from the real issues. In fact, such filtering or censorship of words can lead to larger problems within the English language: “getting upset by phrases like ‘bullish on America' or ‘the City of Brotherly Love' tends to distract attention from the real problems of prejudice and injustice that exist in society at large” (686). According to Kakutani, over-exaggerated political correctness just serves in complicating our words and diluting the messages. But really, the problem in P.C. advice on word-choice is the exaggeration of inclusive ness. Kakutani addresses the P.C. police's righteous motive: “a vision of a more just, inclusive society in which racism, sexism, and prejudice of all sorts have been erased” (684). But where does one draw the line between writing inclusively and walking on eggshells? What is politically correct? Must writers assume the worst of their audiences when debating whether to mutate the spelling of “women” to “womyn” in order to avoid sexist language? The truth is, writing purely inclusively is an arduous task; it requires consistent and careful consideration of many exterior elements such as audience, literary content, and societal context. An examination of these elements reveals just how difficult ...
In American politics today, issues such racism, misogyny, homophobia, and xenophobia are a few of the many topics some of the main talking points that for left wing political activists discuss. It seems as if racially motivated protests have been becoming increasingly prevalent. The creation of safe spaces has become quite a common practice , especially in intellectual environments, to prevent people from being offended or “triggered” by others opposing ideologies arguments, ideas, or statements. During the recent presidential election, cycle mainstream media appeared to be more concerned about Donald Trump not being completely politically correct rather than Hillary Clinton’s extreme carelessness in regards to properly handling classified
...on the word Christian. For example an article from Aftonbladet that has the title “Kristna i USA rasar mot den svenska homopolitiken”. Does that mean that 77 % of the American Christian population is outraged towards the Swedish politics on homosexuality? No, once you read further you will find out that it is the small extremist Westboro Babpist Church that has released a statement.
The Progressive Era was a time of great reforms in government and in factories. There were a few different forms of Progressivism: the muckrakers (from a character in John Bunyan's book Pilgrim's Progress) were the type of Progressives who exposed corruption. For example, Collier's and McClure's journalists, some of them secretly went as far as moving into the slums to get the full sense of what life was like for the downtrodden, and shed light on what the slumlords were allowing to happen in their buildings. Women's Suffragists were progressive, as well, they picketed, wrote letters, to officials at all levels of government, staged women's suffrage parades, sent out pamphlets, and made speeches to anyone who would listen, and eventually, in halls of government, in from of Congress. One other type of progressive was those who were for the temperance movement (their goal was to ban alcohol, they saw it as corrupting society). Settlement house workers were progressives, too, their cause fought to improve immigrant relations in the United States. Progressives sought to change society, for the better, through their activism. Progressives hoped for stronger local governments at the level of the American people. Theodore Roosevelt's “Who is a Progressive” speech he stated that “A well-meaning man may vaguely think of himself as a Progressive without having even the faintest conception of what a Progressive is" (Bowels, 2011). Additionally, Roosevelt would consider a person progressive if he or she had sympathy for the common man and was a forward-thinker.
People of LGBT community keep on facing numerous discrimination and hatred from our society throughout their life. Our society is often unknown and ignorant about the right of LGBT community, therefore, confused about how to respect or welcome them into our society. Because of our unfamiliarity and of lack of knowledge about this LGBT community, sometimes, our occasional effort to respect this community turns into a discriminatory statement towards that community. For instance, our president Donald J. Trump’s statement on LGBT society just points a finger on us of how much we actually know about this society when he states, “There can be no discrimination against gays. I’m against gay marriage”. It shows how confuse we are about the rights of LGBT society that even our president couldn’t make it clear whether he is against discrimination or against the equality of this particular society. There are several other instances when our view on this society as a monstrous one creates many societal discriminations. In many instances, LGBT couples don't offer to enjoy the societal advantages like any other opposite-sex married couples, and consequently, go through several societal discriminations and denied many societal rights and justices. Furthermore, in
The Effects of Religious Intolerance in Societies In the world we are in today, every continent, city, and smallest village has some sort of belief set. Religious belief frequently has the most impact over societies with religion’s ability to mold social laws, boundaries, and sometimes hold entire sway over government systems. However, because religion is left to interpretation of its audiences, religion itself can only be as peaceful or as violent as its followers make it. When religious beliefs are paired with religious intolerance, and people are willing to act on that intolerance, religious beliefs can take a turn towards violence, death, and destruction. Religious intolerance is being unwilling to tolerate another's religious beliefs or practices or lack thereof.