Article Title:"Political Correctness" or Populist Cant?
Category:Comment
Author or Credit:Craig Young
Published on:28th July 2010 - 09:59 am
Published by:GayNZ.com
NDHA link:http://ndhadeliver.natlib.govt.nz/ArcAggregator/arcView/frameView/IE3535607/http://www.gaynz.com/articles/publish/31/article_9109.php
Note that the National Library of New Zealand (NDHA) website uses both cookies and frames. The first time you click on a link it first may take you to the archived front page of gaynz.com. Close the window and try again. This is because the NDHA website uses cookies and you cannot access an indiviual page without visiting the front page first
Story ID:9109
Text:Whenever the Christian Right, other social conservatives or fellow travellers get upset with social change, out comes the hackneyed catchphrase "politically correct." To be blunt, this is yet another example of related Christian Right or social conservative 'class warfare.' It is the product of their inability to develop skilled scientific or medical professionals who could make any difference in any social or bioethical policy debate that us significant to them, with the erstwhile exceptions of voluntary euthanasia and drug policy. As a consequence, they perceive themselves as vulnerable or in crisis whenever the balance of evidence-based medical or scientific influences tips in our direction whenever it comes to public policy. As a result, out comes the cliché, precisely because of tactical reasons. Subjective and prescientific religious dogma has lost its place in public policy to secular scientific and medical evidence-based research. Consequently, the Christian Right and friends resort to the term "political correctness," implying that past habit, routine, prejudice and subjective religious dogma are somehow "legitimate" because they're 'traditional.' Once upon a time, slavery and anti-Semitism were 'traditional' institutions as well. Longevity does not imply legitimacy. In short, whenever the Christian Right and allies use the term 'political correctness' to describe social policy innovation, what they're really saying is that they're unable to deal with the transition of social and moral authority from religious and subjective to scientific and evidence-based public policy because they're scientifically illiterate and are forced to rely on unsubstantiated habit, routine and prejudice. However, populist anti-intellectualism and hatred of mainstream evidence-based scientific and medical research is no sound basis for stable public policy. Look at the evaporated Christian Right campaign against Section 59 Repeal now, for instance. And consider the apocalyptic proclamations of impending anarchy that have met each successive stage of LGBT legislative reform. Haven't happened, have they? Thus it will be when battle is finally joined when it comes to adoption law reform. Craig Young - 28th July 2010    
Disclaimer:This page displays a version of the GayNZ.com article with all formatting and images removed. It was harvested automatically and some text content may not have been fully captured correctly: access this content at your own risk. A copy of the full article is available (off-line) at the Lesbian and Gay Archives of New Zealand. This online version is provided for personal research and review and does not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of PrideNZ.com. If you have queries or concerns about this article please email us
Reproduction note:Just before GayNZ.com closed in May 2017, the website owners wrote this article about reproducing content from the website: "our work has always been available for glbti people to use and all we ask is that you not plagiarise it... if you use it anywhere please attribute it to GayNZ.com and where there is an authors name attached please acknowledge that writer."