Norman Fairclough discusses the interplay of language, culture, and politics in â??Political Correctnessâ??: The Politics of Culture and Language. None could exist or move forward without the other two, and he wonders how they have come to rely upon one another so heavily and obviouslyâ??as seen in the term â??political correctness.â?? He brings up the idea that calling someone out on their lack of â??PCnessâ?? is simply checking their language in the hopes of altering culture. At the same time, the PC-aware person is not necessarily asking for a change of meaning, only a change of word. There is implicit understanding that the non PC term was not ill-chosen, but is not supported by the polite people in the culture.
The term â??political correctnessâ?? was probably chosen because America is very focused on politics, believing it to be the source of change. For legitimate change to happen, it must be grounded and authorized by the political system either through a law or amendment.
The controversy surrounding â??PCâ?? is that it is gradually shifting from a morality check that people issue to one another, to an ironic standard to be scoffed at. If something is too â??PCâ?? nowadays, it is too afraid to say what it means, to bring up the tough subjects, to offend someone. What was once an aid towards inclusive thinking through inclusive language is now exclusive because it doesnâ??t allow us to talk about some topics for fear of saying the wrong thing. It is too easy to be labeled prejudiced because of an ignorantâ??or innocentâ??choice of words, which makes some subjects completely taboo.
Fairclough writes that, â??processes of cultural and discursive intervention, including what is referred to as â??PCâ??, can be seen in these terms as attempts to change discourses on the assumption that changing discourses will, or may, lead to changes in other elements of social practices through processes of dialectical internalizationâ?? (23). Here is where the connection to class comes in, although it is more related to my literature review topic than anything (which I didnâ??t realize when I began). We have seen how some wordsâ??like â??umâ??â??have been demonized by society and the educational system. â??PCnessâ?? is trying to do the same thing, but with a purpose. If you change the way someone thinks about the language of, say, prejudice, then you can change they way they talk about it. If you change the way someone talks about something, then you can change the way they think about it, as well. By reclaiming the words one uses, you reclaim their meaning and can take away the negative connotations. The controversy surrounds the true internalization of this and whether one can really change the way people think by changing their language or whether the idea of â??PCâ?? has just made some subjects taboo, which sweeps them under the rug rather than facing them.
check out the article here