Political Correctness Primer – Part 2 – Implementation

This is the second part of a series of postings dealing with political correctness.  In the first part, the historical background of political correctness was discussed, including the Frankfurt School and the development of Cultural Marxism following WWI, and the merger of that movement with the former pro-Soviet Marxists in the 1960s. The development of Postmodern ideology in the 1970s was also explored, and the resulting formation of multiculturalism and identity politics to produce neo-Marxism.  It was noted that the “long march” of all these threads through Western culture is nearly completed.

In this posting, the various aspects of the operation of political correctness within our culture and political landscape are explored.

Section 2: Implementation of Political Correctness

It’s vital to achieve an understanding of how political correctness is implemented; what are the goals and objects?  What about its tactics such as propaganda and coercion?  What kind of people are drawn to political correctness, and how does it compare with Christianity?

Goals and Objectives of neo-Marxism

The ideology inherent in the citations of the founders’ thinking (found in Part 1) yield several layers of intent: goals, objectives to meet the goals, and strategy (i.e., political correctness) to achieve the objectives.  Note that at the root of both the goals and objectives is the acquisition and maintenance of power – both political and cultural.  Further, these goals and objectives are hidden from most people.

Goals – the goal is essentially to create a utopian society which is classless and egalitarian.  Karl Marx expressed the vision this way:

From each according to one’s abilities; to each according to one’s needs.

At the surface, that might seem like a benign vision, but what he did not say — but should have — is something like the following: “…enforced by a totalitarian and murderous cadre of elites.”  In the Soviet Union between 1919 and 1959, upwards of 50 million Russian citizens were killed to achieve that goal.  In Mao’s China, the number approaches 100 million; with similar slaughter in Viet Nam, Cambodia, North Korea, etc.  Not benign at all.

Objectives – The primary objective of neo-Marxism and thus political correctness is the destruction of Western Civilization, and that includes at least three major sub-objectives: the destruction of Christianity, the weakening of the nuclear family, and the abolition of free speech.

Cultural Marxism co-founder Georg Lukacs expressed it succinctly in the early 1920s:

“The question is, who will free us from the yoke of Western Civilization?” [22]

And Antonio Gramsci left no doubt about his view of Christianity as the enemy of Cultural Marxism:

The new [Marxist] world must not only move beyond — it must learn to despise the claims and constraints of Christianity.

A review of 20th-century communism exposes how comprehensively these objectives were pursued, with violence as the primary technique.  For example, under Lenin the exceptionally high abortion rates created a precipitous population decline such that Stalin for a period temporarily put a stop to the slaughter.  Additionally, divorce was made as simple as possible, and promiscuity was encouraged.

Further, as Cultural Marxism gained ascendancy in the US in the 1960s, the leaders of the movement personally set examples of extreme promiscuity, including orgies and encouraging all to participate in same-sex activity. [23].  They were intentionally setting an example for the larger culture to follow: promiscuity, which targeted the heart of Christianity and the traditional family.

Reminder: the true goals and objectives of neo-Marxism are deliberately hidden, even from most of their supporters.

How Political Correctness Works

 “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it…. [T]here is no point to tactics unless one has a target upon which to center the attacks…. The organizer who forgets the significance of personal identification will attempt to answer all objections on the basis of logic and merit. With few exceptions this is a futile procedure.”

Saul Alinsky: (1960s-1970s)

Activist, “Rules for Radicals” author [24]

With some of the foundational concepts of neo-Marxism outlined, and goals and objectives of the ideology understood, we now need to turn to the mechanics of political correctness.  Psychology professor Jordan Peterson of University of Toronto has defined what he calls “The PC Game” which he characterized as “… a biased compression algorithm, designed to oversimplify the world and artificially buttress emotional well-being …”.

Here are his rules:

  1. Identify an area of human activity
  2. Note a distribution of success
  3. Identify winners and losers
  4. Claim that the losers are losing because they are oppressed by the winners
  5. Claim allegiance with the losers
  6. Feel secure in your comprehensive explanation of the world
  7. Revel in your moral superiority
  8. Target your resentment towards your newly discovered enemies
  9. Repeat. Forever.  Everywhere.

From a Jordan Peterson video.

Political correctness can be looked at as serving two primary functions: propaganda, and coercion.


The propaganda function of political correctness is vital to its success.  There are two important targets: (1) social justice warriors and their enablers – essentially activists, and (2) the wider culture.  The propaganda serves to recruit support, and retain those already on-board with the ideology.  The support from the wider culture results in political power.

An important aspect of the propaganda is the provision of false narratives that instill faux-moral superiority in its followers (see step 7 above).  But it’s just that: fake.  The real objectives are by definition sinister and evil, no matter the clever wrapping.  It’s really a case of unearned moral superiority: how can students at an ivy league school self-righteously claim to identify with the oppressed when they live in North America, attend a prestigious university, and are texting on their smartphone while flying to Aruba at 35,000 feet in the air?

The phrase “virtue signaling” is sometimes used relative to this propaganda; it is defined as: “…the expression or promotion of viewpoints that are especially valued within a social group, especially when this is done primarily to enhance the social standing of the speaker.

This is not to suggest that all Leftists are themselves “bad” people; many fall into “going along to get along”, and are not aware of the underlying goals and objectives.  Some very gifted and charismatic people – politicians, media, clergy — as well as ordinary unsophisticated people have no understanding AT ALL of the sinister endeavor they are unwittingly supporting.

That is because the propaganda level for political correctness is heavily funded and very skillfully crafted, using state-of-the-art marketing techniques coupled with the street-smart wisdom of people such as political correctness master tactician Saul Alinsky.  His book “Rules for Radicals” continues to be a fundamental textbook for implementing political correctness.  If you have been deceived by the Left’s propaganda, so have most of the rest of the population who support Leftist, Marxist politics; only an elite few really understand its true goals, objectives, and implications.

Postmodern Thought Producing False Narratives Drives the Propaganda

“Logic is not independent of content.”  [25]

“The Revolution won’t happen with guns, rather it will happen incrementally, year by year, generation by generation. We will gradually infiltrate their educational institutions and their political offices, transforming them slowly into Marxist entities as we move towards universal egalitarianism.” [26]

 “The more the concept of reason becomes emasculated, the more easily it lends itself to ideological manipulation and to propagation of even the most blatant lies. … Subjective reason conforms to anything.” [27]

Max Horkheimer: (1920s-1960s)

Frankfurt School [28]

It must be kept in mind that the rhetoric used to justify a particular facet of neo-Marxism may have little relation to objective truth or morality.   That is a result of what can be called “Hork-logic” as cited above. [25]  For neo-Marxists, a thing is “true” if it helps advance to objectives of neo-Marxism and “false” if it does not.  “Hork-logic” is the basis for the pseudo-science of the Left: its false narratives are found throughout the social sciences and — in some cases — even the physical sciences.

In the 1970s, Postmodern thought basically accomplished the same goal as Horkheimer by eliminating logic altogether, along with objective truth.  Of course, for the masses, faux “logic” is needed to construct the narratives supporting the various identity or “victim” groups that were defined.

Black conservative author Shelby Steele, in his 2015 book, “Shame.  How America’s Past Sins Have Polarized Our Country, describes the false narratives of the Left as “poetic truth”, that which supports an ideology, whose ultimate goals transcend the requirement that this kind of “truth” corresponds to objective reality.

“…“poetic truth” disregards the actual truth in order to assert a larger essential truth that supports one’s ideological position. It makes the actual truth seem secondary or irrelevant. Poetic truths defend the sovereignty of one’s ideological identity by taking license with reality and fact. They work by moral intimidation rather than by reason, so that even to question them is heresy.”

The bottom line is that the propaganda aspect of political correctness markets false narratives to acquire and retain followers, and thus power.  An example is the phrase, “Gay gene”, suggesting that a person is born homosexual.  Yet in a 2000 Australian study of 33,000 pairs of identical twins, it was found that when one twin was homosexual, the other was homosexual only 11% of the time.  If there was a “Gay gene” that should have resulted in 100% of the other twin being homosexual.  There have been many other studies in recent years arriving at the same conclusion.

Note: objective truth is not a concern to those who use political correctness; whether half-truths or lies, whatever gets the job done.  The goal is the acquisition and maintenance of power, no matter the method or cost, or the abandonment of objective truth.  In other words, Postmodernism at work.


Because political correctness is totalitarian, there is a need to silence opposing viewpoints.  In communist regimes of the 20th century, the silencing was straight-forward: either kill or imprison those who disagreed: there was no provision for debate.  However, under neo-Marxism, shaming has been a principal technique: words as weapons, such as “racist”, “misogynous”, “homophobic”, “transphobic”, “Islamophobic”, etc.

More recently – at least on university campuses – neo-Marxism has defined a host of “microaggressions” that are used in shaming. Also, “trigger warnings” are demanded by students and their provocateurs; warnings that something “upsetting” might be uttered during an upcoming lecture or event.  For those fragile students that might be triggered, safe spaces are created, sometimes with soft furniture, pillows, and childhood games to be played, as well as cookies to be eaten.

In addition, there is also the concept of “privilege”.  If you are “privileged,” political correctness says you must confess that before you can utter commentary on an issue.  Of course, the privileges are themselves dictated by political correctness.  There is such a thing as “White privilege” or “Male privilege”, but not “Black privilege” nor “Female privilege”, etc.  That’s because in identity politics, only the oppressor groups are “privileged”.  Note that today’s “privilege” confessions have an eerie similarity to the formal self-criticism mandated in 20th century totalitarian Marxist regimes such as Mao’s China and the Viet Cong.

Shaming words, safe spaces and privilege confessions all have the same purpose: to demolish opposing points of view, by silencing free speech.   And this is consistent with Postmodernism’s criticism of Western Civilization as “phallogocentric”; in other words, anti-Logos; against spoken truth that creates order out of chaos.  So Postmodernism rejects both logic and dialogue.

Coercion via Legal System to Suppress Free Speech

Recently a more sinister form of coercion has been put into law throughout the West: speech codes, enforced by fines and imprisonment. The 21st century West is edging closer to the violent totalitarianism of 20th century Marxism. For example, as of this writing, if you refuse to use one of 31 (or maybe 70) desired pronouns for “non-binary” (i.e., neither male nor female) Transgender people — replacing he/she and him/her — the government in some jurisdictions will essentially ruin you financially, and possibly imprison you.  This goes beyond “hate speech” (what you can’t say) to “compelled speech” (what you MUST say).

And in some cases, the “aggrieved” person who reports you to the government will receive a financial windfall from your conviction.  In 20th century Marxist regimes, these people were called “paid informants”.

Demonstrations: Combining Propaganda and Coercion

One of the fundamental strategies of political correctness is the use of demonstrations, and these endeavors combine both propaganda and coercion.  In the speeches and the chanted slogans, details of the narrative are proclaimed, fostering anger and resentment towards the established policies, with the goal of deepening the fervor and commitment of the followers via group virtue signaling, as well as creating fear and uncertainty among the non-Left.  Often found in the slogans are references to anarchy: “tear this [whatever] down“, as well as Marxism: “There is on-ly one sol-u-tion, Com-mu-nist rev-o-lu-tion“, etc.  It’s difficult to imagine either the woeful ignorance of the 20th century, or the reprehensible malevolence of any who utter such slogans.

The coercion sometimes goes beyond threatening chants to physical intimidation: forming human chains on major highways, occupying buildings or public places, setting fire alarms, blocking doors to lecture halls, shouting down conservative speakers, vandalism, etc. The recent rise of the actions of the Antifa (i.e., anti-Fascist) groups is a perfect example: using a false narrative (“We’re against Fascism”), combined with Fascist-type intimidation and violence.  What is of course bizarre is that Fascism itself is a form of Leftism; Benito Mussolini, Woodrow Wilson, and Adolph Hitler all supported aspects of Fascism.  (See Jonah Goldberg’s 2009 book, Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Change, and Dinesh D’Souza’s 2017 book, The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left).

Note incidentally that Leftist demonstrations are often heavily funded from outside sources, and may include paid demonstrators, with transportation provided for those from out-of-town.

It may be suggested that the Right also holds rally’s, etc., but the difference is that the coercion element is missing, plus the propaganda elements will tend to be based on objectively true, rational — if politically incorrect — proclamations.

What Kind of People Believe in Political Correctness?

If political correctness – perhaps after reading the above – seems somewhat sinister to you, then you are a level-headed, rational person.  But there ARE people – perhaps 50% in the US in 2017 – who buy into this neo-Marxist ideology, either intentionally or as a result of propaganda.

Back in the 1950s during the McCarthy era, Soviet communist supporters were divided into three tiers: (1) card-carrying party members, (2) fellow-travelers, and (3) useful idiots.  In today’s PC environment, #1 includes the George Soros’s and other trans-national globalist, progressive elites, #2 includes faculty members in universities especially in the social “sciences”, along with human resource managers in business, and most in the news media and entertainment complex; also, managers in various governmental agencies and probably at least half of the judiciary, all of whom are helping to implement politically correct policies.

For tier #3, there are several categories: (3a) low-information people (such as university students), easily swayed by the incredibly sophisticated propaganda from tiers #1 and #2; and also (3b) politicians and people of all walks of life who “go along to get along” – they just don’t want to be boycotted or called “homophobic”, “Islamophobic”, “misogynist” or “racist”.  This group must of necessity deal with “double think”; they can’t let the powers that be (i.e., the #1’s and #2’s) know they actually don’t buy in.  One note about the low-information people: while they are deceived, many are well-meaning, and have the best interests of the culture at heart.

However there’s a third version (3c), and they are better classified as “enthusiastic” followers.  University of Toronto Psychology Professor Jordan Peterson has been doing psychometric studies of people who are positively aligned with political correctness, and using extensive surveys of thousands of subjects he has discovered two distinct groups of PC followers with somewhat different psychological profiles: PC-Egalitarians and PC-Authoritarians.

Sample PC-Egalitarian beliefs:

  • Unequal outcomes constitute de facto discrimination/oppression
  • Government intervention must counteract unequal outcomes
  • Oppressed/victim groups must be treated in a mother/infant type of relationship, where the infant can never be criticized or held responsible
  • Support oppressed/victim groups and identity politics, ignoring individual differences within these defined groups, and demonizing group members who don’t toe the line (e.g. Black Conservatives).
  • Create post-hoc justification for PC-Authoritarian beliefs and actions
  • Train PC-Authoritarians to be successful activists

Sample PC-Authoritarian beliefs:

  • Censorship for offensive/racist/sexist discriminatory language/ideas, in books (including dictionary), movies and art.
  • Punishment for racist, sexist or homophobic slurs, or denial of Holocaust
  • Authoritarian justice, whereby – for example – an alleged perpetrator of sexual assault should have to prove his/her innocence; in general, suspects are assumed to be guilty unless proven innocent
  • Disallow criticism of status and rights of women under Islam because it is racist and disrespectful of multiculturalism.

Thus, the PC-Egalitarians are the theoreticians for and enablers of the PC-Authoritarians.  PC-Authoritarians are often referred to as “Social Justice Warriors”.

Note: See the Social Justice Warriors section which provides a description of the personality types and “lived experiences” that are most strongly associated with PC-Egalitarians and PC-Authoritarians.

Political Correctness and Christianity

When one considers its origins (i.e., Cultural Marxism) from a Judeo-Christian perspective, political correctness must be considered as evil.  Evil, because its goal is to use deceptive propaganda (to gain and retain adherents) and coercion (to nullify opposition) to achieve the anti-Christian and anti-family goals of neo-Marxism.  However, some aspects of political correctness may appear on the surface to be beneficial or at least benign.  Yet those aspects which are truly beneficial would also result from Christianity.

Consider an example of homosexuality via the following Venn diagram:


Note that both Marxism and Christianity support behavior respectful to homosexuals on the part of “straight” people: an area of overlap.  However, in the Marxist-only sector, there are speech codes, prohibition of criticism of the homosexual lifestyle, suppression of publication of negative health effects of homosexual behavior, demonization of those who support transformational counselling, and attempts to silence or twist the expression of Biblical statements on homosexual behavior.

By contrast, in the Christianity-only sector, there is “love the sinner, not the sin” affirmation, the offering of transformational counselling for any who want help, ensuring that knowledge of negative health effects is available, and most importantly prayer for those caught in the lifestyle.  Christianity elevates and redeems; Marxism corrupts and enslaves.

This concludes Part 2.  Here are links to the other postings in this series:

Part 1 Historical background
Part 2 Implementation (this posting)
Part 3 Concepts and Actions
Part 4 Examples and Conclusions



Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>