On PC

Political correctness is common sense, because instinctively calculating one’s odds in the social world when reflecting one’s opinions in the public sphere seems optimal. It’s common sense, because we should be wary of the sensitivity and emotions of others when we voice our opinions. To be politically correct is to conform to the belief that language that could be used to offend certain political sensibilities should be omitted. After all, that is why it is so prevalent and so adhered to—being PC was born out of a necessity: to defend those who were prejudiced against from hatred and ignorance.But that does not by any means mean that we should allow it to mask opinions and much less mask the opinions of others. Dealing with it is something with which I, along with other Op-Ed writers, struggle. The fact that a writer has to fear representing her opinion in ink is inherently defeating the purpose of an opinion, much less the purpose of free press and the purpose of a newspaper. A student reported that the 9/11 article published in The Exonian two weeks ago was not "intelligent," on account of its publication on the very date itself and its possible sensitivity. We’ve seen censorship happen in numerous other countries around the world, and we’ve looked on them with such pity and concern for human rights that we begin to forget that we are unconsciously doing the same thing.College campuses are notorious as strongholds of political correctness. Seeing a world renowned professor resign in the news because of a single "offensive" comment holds this to truth, and it doesn’t surprise me anymore, because of it’s newfound frequency. At Exeter, which is just as large of an educational institution, it evolves into greater fear that cloaks us and veils our true opinions in the fear of social backlash. It’s not very often, if almost impossible, to see an opinion in The Exonian that is unorthodox. Believe me, unconventional opinions do exist, but they exist within the confines of private discussions, and they realistically should. Who would want to publish something that they understand will receive acrid criticism?Any writer will think about these things for the sake of their own sanity. But those who aren’t fervent writers will still understand that it’s just as obvious in everyday life. Chaplains in the U.S. Army are forced to perform gay marriages even though it goes against their personal beliefs as Roman Catholics. Those who refuse lose their jobs and are condemned to being labeled for the rest of their lives as "homophobic." We are told not to say "Merry Christmas," but to say "Happy Holidays," and not to chant "USA, USA, USA" because of its potentially offensive nature. If the subjective nature of offensiveness was not obvious enough already, it’s coverage in writing is even more diabolical. Do we really have to consider patriotism categorically as a supremacist chant? Political correctness won't let you have the answer."The greatest enemy of clear language is insincerity." These are the words of George Orwell, a writer who most of us are familiar with because of his dystopian novella. In this book, 1984, Orwell’s fictionally created society has employed a method of censorship known as "newspeak." Only approved words and phrases may be used in the context of newspeak in the world of 1984. Surely the severity of the real situation doesn’t even come close to matching the society that we are able to voice our opinions in, but modern writers fear can relate to a certain degree. Honest opinions are marred by the disincentives that political correctness brings, and passionate people are crushed by politically correct ideology that often at times masks the harsh, but real truth.By no means am I encouraging you to provide prime candor in the name of free speech. After all, in today’s society, it’s simply impractical. 