The psychology of political correctness

It's been a long time since I've heard the argument "life begins at conception." I don't think it's at all relevant to the conservative's reason for rejecting abortion as murder. By the time most abortions are performed they are definitely murder of human life so the conception stage is quite irrelevant. Even at three weeks the growing embryo has begun to form human organs. Merck Manual on stages of fetal development: At twelve weeks it is recognizable on sonogram as human, fingers and toes and all.Abortion isn't performed at the zygote stage, because at that stage pregnancy usually isn't even suspected yet, and if miscarriage spontaneously occurs it's nobody's fault. I don't see why the stages matter, however, since if you leave it alone instead of aborting it the healthy embryo WILL become a human being, because, in Wikipedia's words, it "contains all of the genetic information necessary to form a new individual."It's just willful self-deception that justifies killing it at any stage. Many women who have consented to an abortion become depressed when they understand the reality that liberals have denied.While I'm at it, the denial of abortion as murder is just one of the ways liberalism is morally deficient. Gay marriage is another, so obviously a travesty of nature and a corruption of the most ancient tradition of marriage perofmed in all cultures. Stem cell research involves justifying the murder of an unborn child in the name of compassion toward someone else. Denial of the death penalty for murderers shows a lack of compassion for the murderer's victim(s) and for society in general. (I'm not talking about mistaken prosecutions). Some extreme forms of environmentalism interfere with human livelihood and would reduce nations to poverty if some globalists have their way, and some deny the poorest people basic comforts because they can't afford the new methods of, say, heating. The list could of course be expanded. Liberals are only fair-minded and compassionate because they are blind to context and consequences. (I'm not justifying cavalier conservative attitudes, however, which can also be blind to consequences. Careful stewardship of resources is morally required too).

You are right. I overlooked the contraception argument because Protestants don't usually object to contraception, and I read RAZD as talking about abortion. But of course he probably did have contraception in mind. So yes, the same argument applies that if you leave it alone it will grow into a human being, if it doesn't spontaneously abort. So I'm happy to extend the argument. I've actually always agreed with the Catholics about this and objected to the Protestant rationalization of controlling nature.

Political Correctness originated with Cultural Marxism and is an attack on freedom of thought and speech.I've understood for years that the term "Progressive" used as a political slogan originated with the Communist Party in the USA as a euphemism to hide their true politics. Google references at least show that the terms are associated.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Propaganda. Something the CP is particularly known for.

I have yet to figure out how your mind works. In fact I'm sure I'll never figure it out. All I know is that most of the time I can't make any sense at all out of your responses. The TERM Progressive as a political label is what I was talking about and I didn't get the connection from the CP itself but probably from some neoconservatives calling them out for the euphemism designed to bamboozle us dumb Americans.Now if this doesn't answer you it's probably because I don't have a clue what you were trying to say, so I'm going to sleep and forgetting about it.

None of the above is PC, very far from it.PC is leftist, and comprises opinions that nobody feels free to contradict because doing so would brand you as a racist or homophobe or Islamophobe etc., the exact opposite of the above statements which in fact often get you so branded. Nobody has a problem contradicting the above statements, it’s very PC to contradict them.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

No, that is not true. I guess only conservatives really know what PC is, liberals make it up to suit themselves. But PC is a specific way of thinking that originated in Cultural Marxism, that labels conservative opinion as racist, homophobic, Islamophobic and similar things to discredit their opinions by guilt, and shut them up. THIS is the essay that originally defined the term. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The term "Progressive" has nothing to do with any particular issues as I was talking about it. It is a term that was invented by the CP in the USA as a way of hiding the fact that whatever issues originated with them came from the Communist Party. The links on google suggest Progressive has an independent life from the CP, though they at least show that there is a connection; but various ex-CP members have said it came directly from the CP propaganda machine. I'm not talking about particular political issues, just the term as a euphemism for Communism.If the term has been used in other contexts, that doesn't change the fact that it was specifically used by the CP to cover its tracks.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The fact that the term is used for other purposes doesn't change the fact that the CP specifically chose it to cover their own tracks and hide the Communist origin of their operations. Whatever other uses it has been put to, it functioned and still functions as a euphemism for the Communist Party and its works.

No, all you are doing is co-opting the idea to your own purposes because you don't like its true meaning, which is clearly defined by Bill Lind in his classic essay on Political Correctness as Cultural Marxism. Like it or not the term has a specific origin and specific history in Marxism. Sure you can muddy it up to suit yourself but that only amounts to a lie for the purpose of confusion. A typical Marxist tactic by the way.I am not doing anything like PC. I use the term defensively against the leftist accusations that are heaped on me and on conservatives and Christians, not as a weapon as the Left uses it, as personal attack to intimidate. "Haters" is a perfect example of this sort of personal attack, based only on political opinion.The Left labels those who oppose illegal immigration as racists without the slightest justification other than that political opinion, and this is enforced by its refusal even to use the label "illegal" and to substitute the term "undocumented aliens." Typical word magic as the Left loves to use it, which comes down from Cultural Marxism, which comes down from Marxism and the Communist Party."Homophobia" is straight out of the Communist guidebook, part of the Marxist attack on traditional sexual mores, which picked up steam with the Cultural Marxists whose views dominated the universities in the 60s, such as Marcuse's slogan "make love not war" and his book attacking the west, "Eros and Civilization" one of the lines of attack by the Frankfurt School designed to undermine the Judea-Christian morality of the west. It has succeeded.The term "homophobia" originated in psychoanalysis. Freud used it as part of his analysis of some of his patients with repressed homosexual impulses, a German judge named Schreber being a major study of the phenomenon. It was specific to a specific psychoanalytic idea. Freud's theories were anti-western to begin with, but then the Frankfurt School, (Critical Theory, what a joke but that's what they call it, nothing but an attack on western civilization), otherwise known as Cultural Marxism, incorporated his thinking into their Marxist mindset, no longer as a diagnostic category but now a broad attack on people of the "wrong" opinion, and produced "studies" that produced Political Correctness, which includes that label oif opprobrium that is now freely used against opponents of gay marriage to shut us up and get us legally prosecuted. THIS is PC, not your revisionist stuff."Islamophobia" hides the violent nature of Islam because the Left hates the truth of Christianity worse than it hates that violence. I was initially surprised, thinking surely the Left will oppose Islam along with us, but no, the Left equates Christianity with Islam, imputes the same violence to Christians, and you don't even know the purpose of all that is to undermine the West. Or by now you've all been brainwashed to the point that you want to undermine the West because of all the hateful propaganda against it.Does it matter to you that a major role was played in this undermining by the big capitalist foundations, Ford, Carnegie and Rockeffeller, in the early 20th century, which financed the rewriting of American textbooks to gradually change the popular opinion away from the freedoms we thought we embraced to revisionist doctrines that deny those freedoms and bring us in line with Communism? (See interviews with Norman Dodd at You Tube) No, by now Communism is embraced by a great number of people in the west, the propaganda has worked and you don't even have a clue what has been lost or that your opinions have been carefully manipulated. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The BIG BIG capitalists seem to have an agenda to rule us all through their money. Going back centuries even. The foundations got into it later I guess. Surprised me too when I first heard about it. Bizarre, but apparently bringing the whole world under Communism seemed to them to be the way to get control over it all.Dodd was part of the Congressional Reece Committee convened to investigate the tax-exempt foundations. From about 22 on the counter to around 34 he describes how the CEO of Carnegie invited him to send someone to read the minutes of their meetings and he sent one Catherine Casey, a lawyer who believed the foundations only financed worthy projects, and she found out that they actually manipulated things toward World War ! and later toward teaching collectivism in the schools. Dodd claims this discovery destroyed her mind. There's lots more about this on the video but I figured a shorter segment might be enough for the attention span.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Criticizing some Marxist ideas doesn't change the fact that they were Marxists. They originally named their School for Social Research something with Marxist in the title, then realized that would have turned some people off.Of course you think things have improved. Evreybody loves sexual freedom. That's what Cultural Marxism did in a nutshell: it freed our fallen nature from Judeo-Christian morality. I like to call the whole sixties cultural revolution The Sin Liberation Front. Happy happy happy aren't we?ABE: By the way, there is no doubt in the minds of real Marxists that the Cultural Marxists were/are Marxists, even though the purists among them object to the Freudian input. I had a boyfriend years ago (from Germany but Jewish) who became a professor of history and taught courses in Marxism and recommended books for me to read on the Cultural Marxists. I talked to him a couple of decades later and he was still a Marxist but I thought I detected some waffling: life in America is too nice you see, we don't need the Marxism. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Unsupported assertions and innuendo? You leftists are a joke. The guy was on the committee that investigated the Foundations and he's reporting on what they learned. But of course he must be a liar, right? What else?

I suspect you didn't hear enough of it to justify your opinion. The interviewer keeps him from wandering too far off track when it happens, and there are real nuggets of important information in his report, which add up to exactly what is claimed: The (Tax-Exempt) Foundations were definitely engaged in manipulating history and altering textbooks toward collectivism or communism. And probably still are.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Do I have the freedom of avoiding seeing you in your skirt when I'm in your neighborhood, or keeping you from flirting with my grandsons? If not, then MY freedoms have been seriously curtailed by yours.