1. Abstract
After deciding on the theme “Visions of Justice” as a chapter, we invited individual chapter members to share questions related to the theme with which they grappled personally. The query that resonated the most with our chapter was, “Is Political Correctness a ‘Band-Aid’ for Justice?” The recent prevalence of social justice movements in the United States, such as Black Lives Matter, #metoo, as well as the subsequent reactions among conservatives to both phenomena, piqued the interests of our chapter. Our tumultuous current political climate, with its complicated relationship to identity politics, fascinated our chapter members because of its presence in the public sphere, as well as its effect on our chapter members’ conceptions of self. The research that we conducted was informed by a collective desire to understand more about political correctness; we sought to define the term, as well as to assess the changing contexts of its use. Our chapter expressed a need for a public forum in order to share our findings with the wider Borough of Manhattan Community College (BMCC) community. We determined that a panel of scholars conducting an open-forum discussion demonstrated the best way to contextualize our research and invite the community to participate in our project. Ultimately, nearly seventy students, staff, and community members attended our event. Exploring the current use of political correctness with the help of our expert panelists, as well as wrestling with questions from the community, enabled all present to engage in conversation about, and gain a deeper understanding of, political correctness. We assessed the forum’s efficacy in raising awareness within our community through a survey that we asked attendees to complete. We believe that our forum enabled the BMCC community to engage in a comprehensive exploration of political correctness, as well as enhanced the ability of event attendees to dialogue confidently and empathetically in conversations about the topic with themselves, and with others.
2. Theme: Visions of Justice
The Alpha Kappa chapter selected Theme 6, “Visions of Justice,” for our fall 2018 Honors in Action project based upon the interests of, and relevance to, chapter members.
When we presented the Honors Guide themes to the chapter and asked for member feedback, “Visions of Justice” emerged as a clear favorite. As college students, our members are often crafting their own ideas of identity, while defining their role in the larger community. “Justice” is a natural extension of this process, as our members are comprised largely of marginalized groups: students of color, immigrants, and queer-identifying individuals. Members expressed concerns surrounding their navigation in society, and were especially interested in justice as it related to the current political climate. Our members are inundated with information every day via the news media, and they struggle to understand terms discussed in the public sphere, and how the latter relate to their own individual lives. Political correctness was a topic that our chapter approached with both curiosity and trepidation, and as we pondered the meaning of political correctness, we discovered feelings surrounding the topic were strong enough to fuel quite contentious conversations within our chapter. The visceral emotional reaction provoked by such conversations informed our decision to focus our research question around political correctness. The research question, “Is Political Correctness a Band-Aid for Justice?,” encapsulated our chapter’s interest and readiness to explore the relationship between political correctness and justice. We questioned whether political correctness might, in fact, foster a superficial sense of justice that was not fully realized, or even whether the concept was counter-productive in regards to the fight for justice. More generally, we sought to fathom why political correctness, more generally, engenders such controversy.
3. Project Objectives
Our aim was to seek a clearer understanding of political correctness and its use in the public sphere for our members, our larger academic community at BMCC, and beyond. We hoped that our research and event would enable us to discuss political correctness in an informed and humble way, as well as help us cultivate the dexterity to think critically about the ramifications of political correctness in the world today. Our goal was to deliver information to the BMCC academic community, while inviting members of the latter to investigate their own perceptions, as well as air their own opinions, grievances, or expectations regarding political correctness.
4. Research
We began our investigative process by splitting into groups at our chapter meetings based upon the research interests of our PTK members. Each group was responsible for conducting research into a facet of political correctness that was suggested by our members and determined to be amenable to the group. The research groups covered the linguistic dimensions of political correctness, the term’s uses within the political sphere, psychological interactions involving the assertions of political correctness, media coverage of the issue, and sociological origins and implications of the term. Each chapter member was asked by the officers to present two academic or news sources related to his or her particular group’s topic. At the following week’s meeting, each group presented its collective findings to the larger chapter. In the weeks to come, we discussed our personal conceptions of political correctness as informed by the research. We found that most members’ conceptions of political correctness did not align necessarily with the definitions of political correctness found in our research, and that even scholars researching political correctness debate vigorously ideas about political correctness’ utility and purpose.
5. Sources
Source 1
Bourdieu, P. (1977). The economics of linguistic exchanges. Social Science Information,
16 (645). doi:10.1177/053901847701600601
Bourdieu writes about three facets of language: the recognition of the legitimacy of language used, the value and power of that speech (the meaning), and the “symbolic capital” of that speech. Bourdieu describes words as operating in a marketplace in which terms that are connected to certain groups carry different capital. The symbolic capital of the speech is inextricably linked to the power dynamics between the speaker and the listener. Bourdieu writes, “Language is not only an instrument of communication or even of knowledge, but also an instrument of power. A person speaks not only to be understood but also to be believed, obeyed, respected, distinguished… those who speak regard those who listen as worthy to listen and those who listen regard those who speak as worthy to speak” (Bourdieu, 1977, p. 648). These ideas translate well to our ideas about political correctness: who is given the power to speak? Can words be divorced from their meaning? Do words have power? For Bourdieu, speech cannot be divorced from context, and that context involves power.
Source 2
Baier, K. “Justice and the Aims of Political Philosophy,” Ethics 99, no. 4 (1989): 771-790.
In this article, Baier purports that political philosophy is determined by the society in which depend it exists. The long-term goal, he writes, is to maintain stable social unity. The aim of government is to create “an overlapping consensus” which is the most efficient way for stable social unity (Baier, 1989, p. 771). Baier writes that in order for there to be a conception of justice, four conditions must be satisfied it must satisfy various parameters of amenability and avoid extremism. Overlapping consensus is one way that government panders to the wider societal audience without committing to anything specifically; the concept of justice is presented without temporal manifestation. According to Baier, gaining the support of an overlapping consensus is significantly easier than satisfying the conditions necessary for justice.
Source 3
Pinta, J. A., & Yakubu, J. D. (2014). Language Use and Political Correctness for Peaceful Coexistence: Implications for Sustainable Development. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 4(5). doi:10.5901/jesr.2014.v4n5p79
Pinta and Yakubu assert that language creates meanings and ideas. The choice of words informs the state of both the individual and the environment. Derisive connotations in speech could have a real detrimental effect on wider conceptions of groups, specifically marginalized groups. We, as a society, must nurture our language to develop better relationships with those around us. Pinta and Yakubu don’t exactly agree that people need to censor themselves, but they argue that one must be cognizant of the implications of words used. The authors do mention that derogatory words associated with a group of people had lead to many violent acts in Nigeria, the country in which this research was conducted. Pinta and Yakubu use this example to explain how the employment of derogatory terms can create harmful ideas which later manifest in harmful action.
Source 4
Agnew, L. (2009). Teaching Propriety: Unlocking the Mysteries of “Political Correctness”. College Composition and Communication,60(4), 746-764.
This article is an exploration of teaching pedagogy which acknowledges that standards of propriety and, further, political correctness are grounded in historically exclusionary patterns of behavior tethered to class. Agnew calls for educators to provide students with intellectual alternatives beyond “everyone has a right to an opinion” (Agnew, 2009, p. 748). Agnew purports that the powerful reaction of students at her institution to perceived censorship are borne of a legacy of “taste and propriety” that have negated the agency of students rather than empowering students to engage in rhetorical inquiry (Agnew, 2009, p. 747).
Source 5
Goncalo, J., Chatman, J., Duguid, M., & Kennedy, J. (2015). Creativity from Constraint? How the Political Correctness Norm Influences Creativity in Mixed-sex Work Groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 60(1), 1-30.
This article describes an experiment in which researchers studied the effect of a clearly delineated politically correct standard on mixed-sex work groups. The researchers found that the PC standard boosted creativity in the group overall as participants felt more comfortable sharing ideas when they were cognizant of the behaviors expected of the group members.
Source 6
Mounk, Y. (2018, October 30). Americans Strongly Dislike PC Culture. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/large-majorities-dislike-political-correctness/572581
Mounk, a political scientist by training, questions the idea that political correctness is supported by youth and those considered “woke,” and that the term is hated by older conservative white people. Mounk’s study complicates this conventional wisdom by noting: “It turns out that while progressive activists tend to think that only hate speech is a problem, and devoted conservatives tend to think that only political correctness is a problem, a clear majority of all Americans holds a more nuanced point of view: they abhor racism yet disagree that political correctness represents a promising way to overcome racial injustice” (Mounk, 2018, p. 1).
Source 7
Sanders, S. (2015, June 5). “Free Speech vs Hate Speech.” It’s Been a Minute with Sam Sanders, NPR. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2018/06/01/616085863/free-speech-vs-hate-speech
In this podcast Sam Sanders talks with author Nadine Strossen about conceptions of hate speech and how it is protected as free speech. They discuss Strossen’s book, “Hate: Why We Should Resist It With Free Speech, Not Censorship,” and her analyses of weaponized speech.
Source 8
Chow, K. (2016, December 14).“‘Politically Correct’: The Phrase Has Gone From Wisdom to Weapon.” Codeswitch, NPR. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2016/12/14/505324427/politically-correct-the-phrase-has-gone-from-wisdom-to-weapon
This article discusses how the term ‘political correctness’ originated in the 1960’s with civil rights movements. This history of the term detailed how the phrase has been misappropriated by political conservatives and used in a manner that is antagonistic, rather than accepting, as originally intended.
6. Action
Our chapter decided that a forum would be the best way to share our research with our community, while deepening our own understanding of the topic. Our research informed the selection of six experts from our own BMCC academic community: Dr. David Bahr, journalist and associate professor; Dr. Lisa Robbins-Stathas, a psychologist and professor whose research focuses on women’s role in the family; Ivana Durovic, a linguist and instructor; Dr. Paoyi Huang, an associate professor and sociologist who studies marriage migration in Taiwan; Dr. David Caicadeo, a psychologist who studies the Latino experience in the United States; Dr. Jaime Weida, a professor of English and safe space advocate. Our research informed the choice of these panelists. We sought experts from diverse fields and backgrounds whose research aligned with the facets of political correctness that we had investigated as a chapter.
Within our broader question of political correctness’ status as a “Band-Aid” for justice, we formulated some more questions in order to foster more nuanced discussion:
- How might we separate hate speech from free speech?
- The term “hate speech” is weaponized by champions of political correctness as a form of censorship. Agree or disagree?
- In considering the relationship between political correctness and social justice, which of the following statements would you agree with most and why?
- Political correctness is a form or expression of justice.
- Political correctness lays the groundwork for justice.
- Political correctness is a Band-Aid for justice.
These questions were all informed by our research. We sought to encompass the broad perspectives surrounding the utility and validity of political correctness that we discovered in our research, and to provide questions that would stimulate our panelists to engage with terms that our members and academic community members confront in the media every day. Crucially, our forum included a forty-five minute question and answer session in which event attendees were invited to engage with our experts and each other. Audience members were invited to ask questions to clarify their own understanding, as well as to challenge the viewpoints discussed in the panel. The civil discussion that our chapter fostered encompassed varying viewpoints in a way that deepened the knowledge of the group as a whole, rather than dividing the community across political lines. The ability to have a discussion that did not devolve into binary and hostile allegiances was, we feel, a great achievement for our chapter, as well as for the wider BMCC community.
7. Outcomes
As members of Phi Theta Kappa, we had the opportunity to engage in interesting and sometimes difficult, conversations regarding concepts of political correctness and justice week after week. We were excited to present a panel of experts to our larger community at BMCC in order further investigate the topic. Dozens of students, faculty, and community members attended our panel talk. The six panelists were able to articulate their different viewpoints, based on their expertise, while answering the three questions we had prepared for them. The question and answer session that followed the panelists’ round table discussion proved especially stimulating, as the audience members took the opportunity to ask questions and propose their own ideas. In order to gauge the response of the event attendees to our event, we distributed surveys to all those present in the audience. Of twenty-eight surveys completed, thirteen attendees reported feeling either more comfortable or more equipped to discuss political correctness after our panel. The remaining fifteen reported no change in their perceived ability to discuss political correctness. The comments we received were generally positive; one attendee wrote, “loved the difference in panelists, the discussion and mix of ideas to better ourselves and future generations.” Though our opinions surrounding political correctness and its use today still vary, the Alpha Kappa chapter is proud of having fostered an environment that promoted learning through civil discussion.
