Can I even talk about this without triggering a series of shallow debates? Whenever you talk about the extreme views of a religion posed on others it always turns into a religion-VS-religion debate. When you talk about insane political views forced onto the People it always turns into a Left-VS-Right debate. When you talk about racial views by politicians, policemen or business owners it always turns into a racial debate. So I am going to ignore ALL of these groups so that my point can be understood and taken for what it is.

We all know that things are getting quite insane in modern society (here in North America at least.) The laws, bylaws and regulations imposed on the People to deny their freedoms to express their thoughts, beliefs and traditions (whatever they may be) has gone to such an extreme level as only the most paranoid or cynical individuals could have foreseen such a time as this thirty years ago.

These days, riot police gear up and march down public streets, not to stand guard in case rioters start rioting, but to await their order to charge into and brutalize innocent, law-abiding, tax-paying citizens for practicing their right for peaceful protest. This has of course happened before in our histories, but in my lifetime I have never seen this before. In my country (Canada) I have never heard the police publically admit to acting as provocateurs, mainstream media complain about national-level election fraud or the head of the secret service warn the public that their political leaders are falling under the persuasion of foreign governments. Things didn’t used to be this harsh, this extreme.

School boards and governments are bringing in regulations to restrict practices—and even themes and words—that are considered offensive to other people. If someone stands up with their friends and says they are offended by something, it seems that everyone must bend over backwards to accommodate them. To what end? Until we are all dressed in gray, our faces and hands covered? Until we all speak like robots, using only government-approved words?

I may be offended by a giant shrimp monument built at my favorite park because maybe I’m allergic to shrimp and they look ugly to me. So, I hate shrimp and am therefore offended by large fountain over my favorite pond being shaped like one. I cannot imagine storming off and barging into the mayor’s office, slamming down my fists on his table and demanding that the shrimp be removed from the park. I cannot imagine then storming out, forming a group of protestors and then marching down the streets—not to fight world hunger or something important to the world I live in—but to get the shrimp removed from the park.

I cannot imagine reporters coming to me and then for me to answer them: “I am outraged to see a shrimp in my park because I am offended by it being here! I do not care if other people like the shrimp, nor do I care that this is a Democracy and that everyone is entitled to their opinions, tastes and beliefs too! I do not like it and these people I rallied up agree with me, so just take down the blasted shrimp!”

How insane would I have to be? What kind of drug would I have to be on? What kind of hypnosis would I have to be under to actually think and act this way? It baffles the mind!

Now we hear about “tolerance”. Besides the fact that “tolerance” implies that compassion is not required, this socio-political term makes about as much sense as any other we hear from the “politically correct” movement. This movement is what strips away people’s freedom to think, feel and express anything which this crowd regards as “intolerant”. It’s like trying to force everyone into a box, in neat order and arms bound, so that no one can disagree.

From this movement we have another term: “agree to disagree”. When I first heard this term in high school I was baffled by its meaning. I thought: “I DO agree to disagree, isn’t that what an argument IS? We’ve agreed to disagree!” If you take the expression literally it actually means the exact opposite of what it actually means. The term is a deliberate deception. It makes sense at face value, therefore you cannot disagree with it, but it implies that “rising above” the argument is the civilized way of handling the situation—not just by not getting angry, but by actually stepping away from the debate all together. Somehow by not resolving anything we have cleared up the problem. The implication here is that the disagreeing IS the problem, not the issue itself.

OK, so what if the courts were to make child prostitution legal? It would be inappropriate to argue against it, because it’s just your silly opinion after all and the important thing is that we all get along. Can you see the obvious mind control mechanism in this form of thought?

Getting back to “tolerance”: if a division of people have a view that is offensive to you, you should keep your mouth shut. To do otherwise means that you are intolerant (discriminate against race, religion, etc.) A good citizen is a tolerant person who never expresses an intolerant thought. Maybe a group of Nazis are plotting to take over your country and they want to execute suspected criminals because they believe they have been appointed by God to do so. Be tolerant, now!

I am using extreme and obvious examples that we could all agree with in order to make my point. “Political correctness” is used to weaken the minds of individuals, to silence them either through creating social scorn or by convincing them that they are bad people to express thoughts which differ from the norm (the “norm” being a manufactured theory which people feel required to follow suit with but often will privately express disapproval of (we are not really androids but many will play the part.)

The term “tolerance” is just one example of how “political correctness” ignores compassion (something real and tangible) and replaces it with pure theory and speculation. Someone may be outraged by an atrocity and speak passionately against it—a real example of humanity at its raw, honest best. But if the words which come out are “intolerant” (whether by intention or bad word usage) the “politically correct” crowd moves in on them and starts the name calling: “racist”, “bigot”, “hater”, “moron,” etc., ignoring A. his intention, B. his honest emotional reaction and C. his right as a human being to express how he thinks and fees as one.

I am by no means intending to promote discrimination here. I am as much angered by racism, sexism and gay-bashing as anyone else. I believe in humanity, and that is why I am saying this. Our very humanity is under attack by a system which forces us to work for IT, instead of vice-versa. The psychological effects of “political correctness” is not an awakened sense of compassion for other human beings but a fear to express what you really think, and how you feel like expressing it: a suppression of your individuality.

“Money talks” and it talks pretty loud in a Capitalist world when the people are afraid to even form opinions anymore. We are bombarded by marketed images of their idealized modern family—one which finds pleasure through purchasing new things and has no fear or concern of the collapsing economy, spiritual depravity or gross corruption around them. “Everything is OK, no reason to frown—go to the mall and spend! spend! spend! Don’t worry about your financial futures, you’ll all be looked after by Big Brother! We’re looking after your interests!”

School taught us how to process information and do what we’re told instead of thinking for ourselves. “Political correctness” is the proverbial nail-in-the-coffin for independent thought and common sense. Spirit, passion and freedom are being sacrificed for the ideals of a world much easier managed by the heartless, greedy corporate leaders: men who suck away the last of earth’s natural resources and oversee the destruction of our cultural traditions and independent attitudes which would only give us the spirit to defy their insanity.

So, if someone fighting to have your shrimp removed upsets you, tell him what you really think of him!

Originally posted by InfoKartel
Don't make me laugh. The OP is a pitiful excuse for a free mind. It's an egoistic, self-defeatist mindset that works its way into the victim position without ever having looked beyond borders! Or others! The incapability to understand that things are as they are and you have to make the best of it whichever way you can is apparently a lesson lost on you guys. Yet the insistence to keep whining and crying about culture when I bet not ONE of you can give a proper example of what culture really is. And I double-bet that not one of you can put matters into historical context, hence the incessant crying about the shrimp statue.

You're just making a fool of yourself. The shrimp statue was an obviously made-up, intentionally silly example.

And your gross assumptions about me couldn't be more wrong. You don't know me at all, nor do you seem to have made any attempt to understand why I would make that post. I care about the world around me (which obviously confuses you, but it comes with being human/sane) and I am trying to make a difference. You should research subjects like "evolution" and "personal development" to understand the meaning/value in promoting growth of thought/awareness.

At the very least I'm giving people food for thought and there is nothing wrong with that. I welcome debate, but your replies are made with such poor understanding of what I said and where I'm coming from. If you actually read the post it might have helped some.