Dalrymple's Quote on Political Correctness
Don't Play Their Game
Thoughts on Theodore Dalrymple's Quote
The English cultural critic Theodore Dalrymple (Anthony Malcolm Daniels, Dalrymple being a pen name) had this to say about the current infection of political correctness, with which we are currently saddled.
“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
― Theodore Dalrymple
To me, this has the ring of truth. The communists, as are all totalitarians, are constantly seeking to increase their hold on the individual, and psychological warfare is a key component. The psychological burden of what Dalrymple describes would be terrible. It would give one a constant reminder of his chains, like having a constant toothache. It is a technique of control, the general idea being of creating a situation where you are always concerned with not upsetting the powers, and being aware that they rule. The IRS comes to mind.
A take away from this is that we each have the power to play the game by uttering the obvious lies, but not allowing oneself to be affected thereby. Not easy, but if the majority of the population could do it there would be no effect; everyone just knows that everyone is just playing the game. (If this reminds you of masks, you're not alone.)
Another technique is to blame people for some bad situation or wrong, either real or imagined. We are all then expected to decide to change opinions, apologize for wrong think and worry about what others think of us. A way to counter this is to never apologize unless an actual wrong has been committed, and never accept the Lefts definitions of good and evil. Christophe G. Adamo has written a book countering such things:
https://www.amazon.com/Rules-Defeating-Radicals-Countering-Strategy/dp/1733218203
and an introduction is given below:
General Michael Flynn and Sergeant Boone Cutler have written a book explaing that we are in an information war, called 5G war, with powerful people trying to increase their control.
Dalrymple's quote reveals a mind game that derives its power from the feelings of its victims. So as said above, we all have the power, at least to some extent, of not allowing it to affect us. Easier said than done. One of Saul Alinsky's rule for radicals is that power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have. They want us to think that political correctness has power over us. Their can be real world consequences with today’s cancel culture such as job loss, being de platformed and now even de-banking. The best thing would be if no one played that game. Everyone is frightened of being called a racist or whatever the latest thing is, but we outnumber the enforcers, and simply realizing that it is a technique of control goes a long way to loosening it's grip.
Remember that you should not feel guilt for things you have not done. Political correctness is based on the assumption that you are, in fact, guilty, or at least can be made to feel so. (Are you guilty of slave owning?) Political correctness derives its power from the fact that there can be real world consequences for going against it. We need to understand how to short circuit that power so that it will cease to be a weapon. Many people are unaffected by it simply due to where they live and work. Rural areas, small towns, etc., it is often just not an issue.
One of Alinsky's Rules for Radicals is to use ridicule. Of course he meant to use it to promote leftism, but that doesn't mean it's not useful. If someone says something politically correct they may be laughed at or derided as immature. Jokes are good; if woke jokes making fun of the woke began circulating much as the old blonde jokes it would have a dampening effect. Blondes do not deserve such ridicule, but the woke do. Blondes jokes can be found and the internet and repurposed.
If we had many more but smaller corporations, as well as small family owned stores, service companies and manufacturers the power of political correctness would be weakened. If your boss is a jerk you just go to a new job. This situation developed because people would be concerned about the power of large corporations, so they would demand that the government Do Something. The rules and regulations thereby induced would make life much harder for small companies than for large, who would just filled up a room with lawyers and accountants. (Don't throw me into that briar patch!) This consolidated power in both corporations and government. We need rules that give the economic advantage to smaller companies, and tend to cause a large company to fission into smaller ones. It also needs to be easy to start a new company; you want to make it easy for a group of bright, young executives and engineers to leave their parent company and start their own, infuriating their old bosses. (I used to tell people that as long as the corporations support the Republicans the Democrats will do their bidding.)
Consider a different but related situation. After the Newtown school shootings Connecticut passed a law that all “assault rifles” had to be registered. Roughly five percent of such owners complied, leaving the state government with a problem. Roughly 200,000 owners ignored the law. A group of armed people of a number roughly the size of the armed forces of Great Britain resided in their state and simply said no. Some wanted the police to go after them, but trying to round up 200,000 armed persons was not appealing. Besides, a lot of the police were the worst offenders, and did not register theirs. A similar situation developed in New York state, with a number estimated at about a million. Surely we can do the same over the issue of thought crimes.
Become more competent and free. The more you can do to increase your personal freedom the less you may be affected by PC. Being able to live on less money, having useful skills, being armed, etc. Try to increase your personal courage, increase you willpower, become physically stronger and in better shape. Knowing marshal arts as well as some war fighting skills. (One way to undermine the Second Amendment is to deny the people military training.) Also, have faith in God and always pray for wisdom, strength and courage. (I wrote a short substck essay on power versus freedom at:
Thoughts on Power versus Freedom
Some Thoughts on the Issue of Power Versus Freedom I would often ask friends and co-workers this question; “Which would you prefer, a 100 dollar per month increase in your take-home pay, or a 100 dollar a month decrease in your cost of living”. I would make it clear that the the decrease in cost of living required no changes on his part. This would usual…
Any of these things undermines their power to control and hence the power of political correctness.
Stay Brave, Stay Free.
Lots to think about here. I'm still mulling over the main theme about possible reactions to Political Correctness. But to comment on this,
"If we had many more but smaller corporations, as well as small family owned stores, service companies and manufacturers the power of political correctness would be weakened."
Yes! Decentralization of big business would have manifold benefits. Economies of scale aside, more and smaller is the way that businesses would work best. The 'corporation' is not a natural structure; it was invented by government regulators to give businesses special advantages, such as tax breaks and indemnity from prosecution by government .