synthroid normal range

Political Correctness Primer – Part 4 – Conclusions

This is the fourth part of a series of postings dealing with political correctness.  In Part 1, the historical background of political correctness was outlined, in Part 2, the various components of the implementation were explored and in Part 3, some concepts and actions within our culture and political landscape were addressed and critiqued.

In this part, summary remarks are made concerning what has been covered in the first three postings, with suggestions provided as to how best to respond to political correctness.  Note that this posting is an open thread, with the possibility of additional conclusions being discussed in the future.

A Caution

It must be kept in mind that even though political correctness is filled with false narratives and illogical assertions, some of the focus is on people who are troubled – political correctness labels them as victims of oppressors.  However, setting aside that labeling, there are people who are suffering, and that suffering is being exploited by the Left.  For example, for many in the LGBTQ “class”, the personality issues they are dealing with are unwanted: they would give anything to be set free, although because of the pressure from the Left, they are often disinclined to express that desire.

Similarly, there are important issues dealing with race, ethnicity, religion and gender, and we have to be able to strip away the neo-Marxist assessments and remedies, and fashion and implement Christian-based approaches.  A good example — in the case of abortion — are the many crises pregnancy organizations created by Christians that have undoubtedly saved millions of lives.

So while we must firmly and intelligently push back against the devastation wrought by neo-Marxism, we must also continue to be sensitive and act compassionately to those who are in need of help.

Tenets of a Viable 21st Century Conservatism

University of Toronto Psychology Professor Jordan Peterson has been an out-spoken opponent of neo-Marxism and postmodernism, and a strong and articulate advocate for free speech.  While he considers himself to be a “classical liberal”, he finds himself strongly aligned with contemporary conservatives.

In a recent speech at Carlton Place, a suburb of Ottawa, he discussed 12 tenets that conservatives should be able to embrace in the ongoing battle for the survival of Western Culture:

  1. The fundamental assumptions of Western civilization are valid.
  2. Peaceful social being is preferable to isolation and to war. In consequence, it justly and rightly demands some sacrifice of individual impulse and idiosyncrasy.
  3. Hierarchies of competence are desirable and should be promoted.
  4. Borders are reasonable. Likewise, limits on immigration are reasonable. Furthermore, it should not be assumed that citizens of societies that have not evolved functional individual-rights predicated polities will hold values in keeping with such polities.
  5. People should be paid so that they are able and willing to perform socially useful and desirable duties.
  6. Citizens have the inalienable right to benefit from the result of their own honest labor.
  7. It is more noble to teach young people about responsibilities than about rights.
  8. It is better to do what everyone has always done, unless you have some extraordinarily valid reason to do otherwise.
  9. Radical change should be viewed with suspicion, particularly in a time of radical change.
  10. The government, local and distal, should leave people to their own devices as much as possible.
  11. Intact heterosexual two-parent families constitute the necessary bedrock for a stable polity.
  12. We should judge our political system in comparison to other actual political systems and not to hypothetical utopias.

In addition, he strongly urges opponents of neo-Marxism/postmodernism to speak the truth – the Logos, which transforms chaos into order — as best one can, regardless of the consequences.  To not speak also has consequences.  He says, “It is not safe to speak. But it is less safe NOT to speak.”


In the above, the following has been shown concerning political correctness:

  • Its origins come from the Frankfurt School and Cultural Marxism
  • The architects of Cultural Marxism and its “children” disciplines such as postmodernism, Feminism, etc. saw the destruction of Western Civilization as a necessity to achieve their utopia
  • Among the primary objectives of political correctness are the destruction of Judeo-Christianity, the traditional family, and free speech.
  • Political correctness uses two primary techniques to achieve the transformation of Western Culture: (1) propaganda, consisting of false narratives to recruit and maintain followers, and (2) coercion, to silence the opposition and enforce egalitarianism.
  • Political correctness makes extensive use of postmodern thinking, whereby objective truth, logic, and rationality are dismissed as oppressive constructs.
  • Political correctness uses identity politics to divide the culture into oppressor and victim groups, assuming all people in these groups think and experience life in identical fashion; individuality is not tolerated.

Whenever political correctness appears in your life, ask the question: what is the real objective, and how are they selling it?  In truth, it is ALWAYS about achieving the socialist utopia via the destruction of Judeo-Christian worldview, and the selling is always a smoke screen providing fictitious (although very effective) justification, while hiding the true objectives.  Once this concept is understood, all politically correct utterances are seen in bold font for what they really are.  We must take advantage of our constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech to protect freedom of speech, and speaking the truth in love, see an end to the advance of neo-Marxism in our country.

Finally, note that there is scripture which establishes the exact context for neo-Marxism and its child, political correctness:

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”  (Ephesians 6:12)

Certainly, an entity that consistently seeks the destruction of Christianity is — by definition — a part of the principalities, powers, rulers of darkness and spiritual wickedness in high places.


This concludes Part 4.  Here are links to the other postings in this series:

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





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>