The church of political correctness controls national discourse

The church of political correctness controls national discourse, by Michael Sexton. Political correctness has grown so extreme, now even some in the mainstream media want to tag and label it.

The politically correct class (PCC) in Australia bears many similarities to an evangelical religious movement and it is perhaps no accident that its rise has coincided with a sharp decline in the membership of traditional Protestant church groups.

The desire to belong to an organisation with a coherent body of beliefs and to spread this gospel to others has always been a strong one for many people. …

Their views costs them nothing:

[N]one of [the views of the PCC] involves any economic costs to those who hold them. The PCC is generally wealthy and concerned to stay that way. Most of its members are not particularly interested in the distribution of society’s resources.

Political correctness is not party-political, or up for debate:

There is also some overlap between these views and the policies of the Greens, although the PCC generally prefers not to be identified with any particular political party.

[T]he PCC is not interested in debating [their views]. Like many religious movements in history, it considers that anyone who rejects even one of these doctrines is not merely misguided but part of an evil conspiracy and deserving of suppression.

The PC crew are small but noisy:

The PCC is relatively small in a numerical sense and many of its tenets are not supported by popular sentiment in the wider community. But its influence is considerable because of where its members are located.

This is because its members dominate large sections of the media; most teaching staff in universities; all legal professional bodies; the senior ranks of the federal and state bureaucracies; and the management of several large corporations.

Your career suffers if you oppose the PCC:

It is not true, of course, that every person in these organisations shares all or even some of the PCC doctrines. But any dissenters must be well aware that their career prospects could be seriously harmed by expressing a contrary opinion.

This is particularly true for people at the start of their careers and not yet established in a secure position. And it is again reminiscent of many religious groups: it is not enough to accept most but not all of the doctrines. Disagreement with any one of them leads automatically to exclusion from the group. As in many previous periods of history, silence is often the safest course of action.

It’s worse in Australia than elsewhere:

It is true that there are some strong strains of political correctness in other countries, including Britain and the US, but Australia seems to have led the way in this exercise and produced a much greater stifling of public debate on social and political questions.

We have to kill the institutions to rid them of political correctness:

The difficulty about reversing this situation is that once people in organisations realise that a particular set of views is expected of them, they are unlikely to advertise any contrary opinions, so the present system is self-reinforcing.

The contributors to the Wentworth Report are mainly anonymous:

There are still contrary voices in Australia to this stifling regime, but any dissenters need to have an established position in society so that they are immune from persecution by these grimly determined and utterly humourless zealots.