Michael William - The Genesis of Political Correctness: The Basis of a False Morality

In his essay 'The Origins of Political Correctness' the American writer William Lind advances the case that political correctness is a Marxist offshoot originally developed by the Frankfurt School in the l930s. William Lind concludes his essay by warning:

America today is in the throws of the greatest and direst transformation in its history. We are becoming an ideological state, a country with an official state ideology enforced by the power of the state. In 'hate crimes' we now have people serving jail sentences for political thoughts. And the Congress is now moving to expand that category ever further. Affirmative action is part of it. The terror against anyone who dissents from Political Correctness on campus is part of it. Its exactly what we have seen happen in Russia, in Germany, in Italy, in China, and now it's coming here. And we don't recognize it because we call it Political Correctness and laugh it off. My message today is that it's not funny, it's here, its growing and it will eventually destroy, as it seeks to destroy, everything that we have ever defined as our freedom and our culture.

The purpose of this book is to add to the understanding of William Lind's thesis and to set out key aspects of political correctness that are particularly relevant. This examination will necessitate an understanding of that aspect of Marxism from which political correctness is drawn. The book will be written primarily from an English perspective. England is different from the USA as it has been a settled society for many centuries, whereas the USA has been a country that has encouraged large scale immigration and so has a more fluid cultural mix. With England, it is only relatively recently that mass immigration has been vigorously promoted.

William Lind defines political correctness as 'cultural Marxism'. This book will define it as being 'the mechanism for the enforcement of neo-Marxist ideology'. This neo-Marxist ideology is focused on culture and is fixated with race, feminism, and gay rights in particular. It is also firmly opposed to nationhood, at least as far as Western countries are concerned, and with regards to the English in particular.

The book will expand upon what William Lind has said; it will set out basic, relevant aspects of Marxist ideology, and it will examine three key works in the evolution of political correctness: The Authoritarian Personality ; Repressive Tolerance, and Citizenship and National Identity: Some Reflections on the Future of Europe (Citizenship and National Identity). The latter item, unlike the two others, is focused on Europe (not the USA), although the matters raised are relevant to the USA. Furthermore, the latter item involves an ideological battle, the outcome of which is still uncertain, whereas the other two items have generally been an outright victory for the politically correct, and the thrust of the arguments contained within them are now accepted as being the norm that is to say that, in as much as there was a battle between conservatives and the politically correct over the ideology in the first two items, the conservatives lost. In the latter item, the conservatives are losing (one could argue that the politically correct are wiping the floor with the conservatives), but the battle is not yet over; the reason for this is that the adverse economic and social consequences of what is being imposed on European countries (not least the mass unemployment, insolvent banks, teetering national defaults, and the anger at the harm done by mass immigration) is impacting so quickly and so devastatingly that an outright victory for the politically correct has not yet been possible. A key part of this is the drive towards an EU superstate. It is not that the conservative viewpoint has been successful in combating the drive to establish an EU superstate; it is more that the superstatist drive has run into a hostile public opinion. This hostility is due, in part, to the democratic deficit of the EU and its manipulation of referendum results (people have to keep on voting until they vote in favour of whatever EU proposal is being proposed), which obviously renders the EU governing class detached from the people. It is also due, in part, to the damage done to ordinary peoples' lives by the superstate agenda and its attempted enforcement. It is often overlooked, or not understood, that the looming EU superstate is at least as much a product of political correctness as it is an issue in its own right. The desire to destroy nations and nation states has been a key, integral part of communist ideology since that creed's inception.

Marxism rejects the idea that Western society is good and rejects capitalism. Neo-Marxism likewise rejects Western society but instead focuses on culture and condemns the West for the supposed oppression of non-Western peoples. This leads to the supposed oppression of ethnic and other minorities in Western countries and the supposed need for political correctness as a solution to this alleged oppression. England is different from the USA in this important aspect as the USA did treat its black population as slaves and then discriminated against them. Consequently, political correctness can exploit this historical fact (however, this does not apply to all ethnic minorities nor all immigrants, who were not all affected by the USA's slavery). In England, there was no substantial ethnic minority population until after World War II (WWII), when mass immigration began. So the promotion of ethnic minorities and so-called positive discrimination, or affirmative action as it is described in the USA, is a mechanism for the promotion of the interests of immigrants ahead of the indigenous population. In England, the English are to be treated as second class citizens and discriminated against. The English now find, for example, that they are denied social housing, that schools and the NHS are under strain, and that their job prospects are more difficult, all because the ruling class have deliberately opened Britain's borders and allowed uncontrolled mass immigration. If mass immigration continues, then the English will become a minority in England in around 40-50 years. There is almost no discussion of this.