The Cambridge Dictionary defines “politically correct” as “someone who is politically correct believes that language and actions that could be offensive to others, especially those relating to sex and race, should be avoided.”
Lessons are given to diplomats, sportsperson and corporate managers on how to speak, behave and act when they go to another country so as to not offend their hosts. By way of example, criminals are called “unsavoury characters” while “clumsy” is referred to as “uniquely coordinated”!
The question that is now being asked in various quarters is whether what is politically correct for one group of people is necessarily correct for another?
Trump Has His Own Way
Paul Krugman wrote that "the big threat to our discourse is right-wing political correctness, which – unlike the liberal version – has lots of power and money behind it. And the goal is very much the kind of thing Orwell tried to convey with his notion of Newspeak: to make it impossible to talk, and possibly even think, about ideas that challenge the established order".
President Trump is redefining the ways in which he will engage with world leaders and influential people, much to the chagrin of many politicians, journalists, commentators and those who did not vote for him.
His tweet on his forthcoming meeting with the President of Mexico, “If Mexico is unwilling to pay for the badly needed wall, then it would be better to cancel the upcoming meeting”, must have sent shock waves across the diplomatic establishment of the US. Those diplomats are probably used to working through the labyrinthine corridors of diplomacy to set up meetings and where a cancellation is deemed to be a diplomatic slap on the face.
Why Trump chose to speak to Prime Minister Modi before he spoke to the “more important” leaders of Russia, China, Japan and other European nations is another example of how he is his own man who will govern the way he chooses.
On the other hand, crude cartoons and statues, insulting posters at rallies and abusive comments against the democratically elected President are telecast on major media channels, without thinking for once, whether these are politically correct!
Uncouth Language by Politicians
President Rodrigo Duterte of Philippines unabashedly used very flowery undiplomatic words for President Obama. He has not shied away from sharing his scorn for drug abusers, and proudly claiming how he killed people or how he stated, “he should have been first”, when asked a question on rape. The Philippine lawmakers shrug off his comments and simply say, “get used to this language”.
Arvind Kejriwal, the Chief Minister of Delhi, does not bat an eyelid before he hurls abuses at the democratically elected Prime Minister of the country or the Election Commission. He is cheered by the liberal and intellectual media that would accept such statements from him but not from other political parties.
Comments are made by political leaders across parties about religion, economically weaker sections of society and women, which are normally frowned at by most people. Yet no action is taken, given that there will always be a constituency to whom such comments will appeal.
Are these leaders and so many like them around the world saying things that the people want to say themselves, but are afraid due to fear of castigation?
Being Politically Correct
For too long, the political and media elite have defined the way we should speak and be spoken to. For how long will this small group of powerful individuals influence the way we speak and behave? There are no longer any holy cows in dialogue and communication. Mobile phones have changed the way we speak and the social media is changing the way we express ourselves.
With social media empowering the masses, trolling, which hitherto was seen as politically incorrect (exceptions were always made for a few journalists), the new age political leaders have understood the importance of “talking” directly to their voters through Twitter and Facebook and there is nothing anyone can do about this.
President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964 said, “I’m here to tell you that we are going to do those things which need to be done, not because they are politically correct, but because they are right.”
So is the age of being “politically correct” over?
Is our right to freedom of speech in conflict with the very definition of political correctness? Should we now be looking at whether the content of the speech is truthful and correct rather than analyse each and every word spoken on whether it offends some people? Should we fall prey to moral policing of our acts and communication simply because it happens to offend a few?
New Elephant in the Room
If there is an elephant in the room, should we not feel comfortable talking about it? Should we really suppress our concerns, dreams, worries, feelings, fears, aspirations, hopes and anxieties? Should we stop asking questions about another culture simply because we “may” offend someone?
We are witnessing a paradigm change in the manner in which we will hear our leaders speak in the future. We are seeing a new normal being defined in speech and communication. Let us judge these comments based on the content and not based on who has spoken and how these comments were delivered.
(Ashutosh Garg is the founder-chairman of Guardian Pharmacies and an author. He can be reached @gargashutosh. The views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)
Also Read: Economic Barriers in Trump Era Spells Collateral Damage for India
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)