|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 11:45 am Post subject: The Right-Wing Political Correctness Thread |
|
|
I have altered this thread (why create a new one?), for all examples of right-wing political correctness.
You know political correctness. Its when people have to be careful what they say, or how they say something, in response to political or group pressure.
Florida's climate change ban may be the best and most pernicious example of that: the governor of a state suppressing a scientific term because it goes against his political beliefs.
------------------------------------------------------
Original post:
Florida employee 'punished for using phrase climate change'
This board enjoys discussing the bane of political correctness. I hope this article does not disappoint.
Quote: |
An employee of Florida’s environmental protection department was forced to take a leave of absence and seek a mental health evaluation for violating governor Rick Scott’s unwritten ban on using the phrases “climate change” or “global warming” under any circumstance, according to a complaint filed against the state.
Longtime employee Barton Bibler reportedly included an explicit mention of climate change in his official notes from a Florida Coastal Managers Forum meeting in late February, during which climate change, rising sea levels and the possible environmental impact of the Keystone XL Pipeline were discussed.
On 9 March, Bibler received a formal reprimand for “misrepresenting that ‘the official meeting agenda included climate change’”, according to a statement from Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (Peer), a nationwide non-profit that champions public employees’ rights and providers resources and guidance to whistleblowers using its network of members across the country.
Bibler was instructed to stay away from the office for two days and told he could return to work only after a mental health evaluation from his doctor verified his “fitness for duty”, the complaint said. In the letter to Florida’s inspector general, Candie Fuller, the state’s Peer director calls for a full investigation to the matter.
Bibler told the Miami Herald that he “didn’t get the memo” about the gag order, so when he introduced himself by congratulating other officials on the call for the “exciting” work they were doing to address climate change, the “reaction was mostly shock”.
News of the governor’s ban on the phrases first surfaced in early March, when the Florida Center for Investigative Reporting found that the ban came from the top after Scott took office and appointed Herschel Vinyard Jr as DEP director. |
Ironically, climate change may solve at least one of America's problems: Florida itself.
Last edited by Plain Meaning on Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
No_hite_pls
Joined: 05 Mar 2007 Location: Don't hate me because I'm right
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The idiocracy is in charge in Florida.
Last edited by No_hite_pls on Sun Mar 22, 2015 8:11 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Making the fellow get a mental health evaluation for daring to say "climate change" seems almost Orwellian. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003 Location: Sonic Space
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It does not disappoint. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Brooks
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
|
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2015 2:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Floriduh, indeed.
How backward. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:11 pm Post subject: Emily Blunt makes a joke |
|
|
Emily Blunt apologises over US citizenship joke after Fox News tells her to leave Hollywood
Quote: |
London-born Blunt angered Fox News after joking about re-considering her citizenship following the first GOP debate, saying on the Today show: “This was a terrible mistake! What have I done?”
. . .
A Fox News morning show took particular offence to Blunt’s comments, with anchor Anna Kooiman directly addressing the 32-year-old actress: “Well you know what, why don’t you leave Hollywood, California and let some of the American women take the roles that you’re getting because American citizens are watching your movies and lining your pockets.”
. . .
On Thursday, Blunt addressed the incident, telling NBC’s Today: “It was not the intention to hurt anybody or cause any offence, so I really apologise to those that I cause offence… It was just an off-hand joke. I think I’ll probably leave the political jokes to late night or something.”
She also clarified her feelings on her new citizenship, saying: “It’s really meaningful. You know, I mean, my two favourite people in the world are American – my husband and my daughter. It was kind of a special day. Yeah, it was great.” |
What have you done, indeed, Emily? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
trueblue
Joined: 15 Jun 2014 Location: In between the lines
|
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I wonder if some folks here even have an idea of what the left/right wing paradigm really is? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Fallacy
Joined: 29 Jun 2015 Location: ex-ROK
|
Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2015 2:01 am Post subject: RE: The Right-Wing Political Correctness Thread |
|
|
trueblue wrote: |
I wonder if some folks here even have an idea of what the left/right wing paradigm really is? |
This is how that political continuum was explained to me recently:
Quote: |
The right is right, and the left is wrong. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Political Correctness for Antonin Scalia
Glenn Greenwald wrote: |
These two conservative professors [Randy Barnett and Nick Rosenkranz] are not ironically invoking a caricature of left-wing PC “safe space” rhetoric in order to ridicule it. They clearly really mean what they have written; they believe that they and conservatives students have been brutalized and victimized by hearing criticisms of Antonin Scalia; and they are seriously demanding “remedies” be imposed to punish the offending professor.
The significance of this goes far beyond what New York’s Jesse Singal correctly describes as two conservative professors “adopting campus lefty-speak in the service of a conservative argument.” Singal is right that their argument is grounded in “a particularly high-strung idea about dissenting views [that] has taken hold: namely, that dissenting views on hot-button issues don’t just lead to bad policy but actually do psychological harm to students who are exposed to them, or even exposed to the knowledge that they are being expressed somewhere on campus.” As David Perry notes, Georgetown Law’s Black Law Students Association did quickly note the glaring irony.
For some reason, national pundits who love to denounce “PC” campus censorship and parade around as free speech crusaders obsessively focus on left-wing censorship while ignoring other kinds of campus viewpoint-suppression that are far more common. As I’ve documented repeatedly, the most common form of campus censorship — punishment and other official limitations imposed on activists working against Israeli occupation of Palestine — is almost always completely ignored in this pundit debate.
Indeed, it’s common for those seeking to suppress left-wing views on college campuses to invoke exactly the same “safe space” rhetoric. As we noted last week in reporting on the growing criminalization of the BDS movement, the University of Illinois student who led the campaign to have Steven Salaita fired for his pro-Gaza tweets, himself a former AIPAC intern, told the New York Times when justifying this campaign: “Hate speech is never acceptable for those applying for a tenured position; incitement to violence is never acceptable. … There must be a relationship between free speech and civility.” Another “pro-Israel” student demanding Salaita’s firing said, “It’s about feeling safe on campus.” This is seen over and over: “PC” censorship is almost always depicted as a left-wing phenomenon even though it is directed at least as commonly at the Left as it is wielded by them.
. . .
So, yes, by all means, we should be mocking these right-wing professors for invoking the most extreme and dubious version of the “safe space” rationale that dictates that adult students must never be exposed to arguments they find upsetting. But, more importantly, we should realize the actual game that is being played here: to distort public discourse on highly consequential matters by banning dissent on the grounds that it is “cruel,” “traumatizing,” and “uncivil.” |
Read Randy Barnett and Nick Rosencranz's open letter
Quote: |
Nick also reminded the Dean about the recent controversy at Yale, which began with an email as well. In that case, a faculty member sent an email to the student body that some subset perceived as a “micro-aggression”: perhaps adults can be trusted to choose their own Halloween costumes. In our case, a faculty member sent out an email to the student body — in violation of Georgetown policy — which was clearly the most grievous imaginable macro-aggression against all conservative students and faculty: in effect, your hero was a stupid bigot, and we are not sad that he is dead.
In the Yale case, students protested and demanded substantial change, and the President of Yale took several dramatic actions to remedy what he perceived to be a climate of intolerance on campus, issuing this extraordinary statement. Nick argued that this incident calls for remedies at least as substantial, and an equally powerful statement. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
stilicho25
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
|
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Of course, once speech is weaponized its going to be used to punish those you hate. Insanity of course, but its going to be hard to stop. It's too convenient a weapon for both sides. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Swartz
Joined: 19 Dec 2014
|
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now here's a laugh, Kuros reading (((Glenn Greenwald))) and the Intercept and thinking he's getting some anti-establishment viewpoint. Hopelessly hoodwinked at every turn.
Quote: |
conservative professor … (((Nick Rosenkranz))) |
Quote: |
right-wing campus suppression … of anti-Zionist Jews. |
Quote: |
Criminalization of BDS movement … not left wing |
You gotta be kidding me. See the ruse here? Listen to one of their own describing how they do this; it's not difficult to understand, but some goyim dupes just don't want to learn.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2uJmkm3siY
Quote: |
“PC” censorship is almost always depicted as a left-wing phenomenon even though it is directed at least as commonly at the Left as it is wielded by them. |
Boosheet. Does anyone actually believe this? The left is the group trying to limit free speech under the guise of hate speech. Don't be fooled by dual-citizens who try to tell you otherwise. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stilicho25 wrote: |
Of course, once speech is weaponized its going to be used to punish those you hate. Insanity of course, but its going to be hard to stop. It's too convenient a weapon for both sides. |
Randy Barnett and the Rubio supporter are both lawyers so they cannot help but weaponize words. As "academics," if you want to call law school professors that (maybe only as to the negative connotations), they are thin-skinned. Hence the display here.
Nonetheless, it is really a distillation of the rhetorical display we see when power is attacked. Scalia cannot be called a bigot! He was an eminent member of an eminent body and he just passed! Clinton has her own version of this. The police their own version. Those defending power morph substantive criticism into an attack on something sacred and a violation of a norm, even though political speech really has no bounds under the concept of free speech as protected by the common law and the Constitution. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Wed Feb 24, 2016 6:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Plain Meaning wrote: |
Those defending power morph substantive criticism into an attack on something sacred and a violation of a norm... |
For the sake of completeness, it's worth bearing in mind that those ostensibly attacking power in our society frequently do the same thing in the reverse, elevating trivial conduct into a supposed attack on something sacred and the violation of a norm. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Titus2
Joined: 06 Sep 2015
|
Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This thread will not last long. There's not that much to say. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|