Just What is (and what is wrong with) Political Correctness?

I wonder if you or any here have read anything in Cultural Marxism? Read any Marxist feminism? Read any Critical Theory? Read Marcuse, Adorno, Fromm, W Reich, N O Brown, or the books about the Frankfurt School by Martin Jay or Russell Jacoby?As for an alternative creationist theory, what a strange idea that that is lacking in our arguments here. One thing we do have is an alternative, and we are very insistent on it, only you guys don't like it. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I guess you didn't really read that post you answered, where I said that besides the uses of the term as a deception, it is also used innocently by other groups. That doesn't stop it from being a specifically chosen term for the purpose of deception.

I guess you aren't interested in the facts, but when someone tells you that a term has a specific meaning in a specific historical context, which information comes from people who have occupied that context, as Horowitz did, you just sound daffy shutting your ears to it and making up stuff. Other uses of the word are simply irrelevant. Anybody can use the word. But that does not stop it from having the specific meaning in the specific context I'm talking about.

Oddly enough I suppose, I follow very few of the creationist science threads. Many of them I simply can't follow. I can't follow the quantum theory stuff for instance. I get lost in the whale fossil stuff. I don't know where the "God did it" idea comes in or why people claim it is so common a creationist slogan. My impression is that most of us try to stick to the scientific particulars, however little of it we grasp, and only refer to the Bible as the source of the basic scenario. Well, but I think that's a fair answer. There's nothing logically wrong with criticzing something. That could conceivably in fact motivate people to come up with an alternative. Better you scientists do it than we unscientific creationists.But it's not the same situation as with Critical Theory where the criticism really does dismantle the culture and that's the objective. Come to think of it, I'm surprised there is a complaint that there is no alternative, because they do have this alternative: The PC version of liberalism. That's the objective of it all. ????? Actually I haven't seen it, I only see us accused of it. Dont' know what you mean by little details. Creationists have an alternative only it's not worked out in the specifics. That's why we're here fooling around with it.I don't remember Lind saying homosexuals are good in PC land. I guess I'll have to reread the essay. I just thought the idea is that all these "liberation" movements (exploitations and twistings of the civil rights movements) have an identifiable source in cultural Marxism.I try to label specific ideas as PC rather than people, but I may err in that.

The teacher was enormously popular. He flattered us all, told us we were so smart (it was an "accelerated" class for the best and brightest) he didn't need to spend much time teaching us geometry, so he could prattle on in his comedy routine most of the time. He preached against McCarthyism and he preached against religion (all those idiots who expected to get "a loge seat in heaven"). We idolized him.{Edit: His name was Mr. Crawford and my best friend and I, drunk on "Brave New World" dubbed him "Our CrawFord."}Sorry I misunderstood that you were asking me to produce the right wing stuff from Horowitz. I'll check later.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.