Mapping the world's opinions

(1 of 3 Positions) Next >>

PC's suppression of ideas can lead to their internal polarisation

Political correctness merely prevents people using offensive words, the motivation behind them remains, and views become more harmful once suppressed

<< Previous (2 of 3 Arguments) Next >>


Enter the background of the argument here ...

The Argument

Views and feelings do not go away when people are told it is unacceptable for them to say, think or share them. These opinions, while stifled are not forgotten, instead, they intensify and potentially grow to prove harmful. The frustration at the injustice of not being able to express ones views has been shown to magnify people's views and led them to become toxic over time - not forget them. Very simple, almost classic evidence of this can be seen across history; broadly when a society is oppressed or its views are censored, the people revolt against politicians as their views begin to fester. Arguably, Donald Trump's success stems predominantly from his lack of political correctness and the lack of filter between his mind and his words. A large proportion of Trump's support comes from people with highly unpolitically correct views ('APPP poll found that a third of Trump voters support banning gays and lesbians from the country. Twenty percent said Lincoln shouldn’t have freed the slaves.'). They felt that Trump was finally there to speak clearly and address issues (such as immigration) that no other politician was prepared to address with such a brutal approach .

Counter arguments

Political correctness does not polarise ideas by suppressing them, rather it makes people reconsider whether they are in fact saying something of prejudice or which is inappropriate. Political correctness is useful for that reason, it raises awareness about the severity of extreme or polarised opinions and the opinions that target minority groups. Political correctness makes people aware of the severity of their opinions and that marginally prejudiced opinions can lead to terrible things in the long-run. For example, Anti-semitism manifested itself through jokes and alienation before it lead to Jews being scapegoated before it led to the Holocaust.


Enter the formal premises of the argument here ...

Rejecting the premises

Enter the technical rejections of the premises here ...


Content references here ...


Do you agree?

Sign up or log in to record your thoughts on this argument

Explore related arguments

This page was last edited on Monday, 1 Jul 2019 at 13:55 UTC