The problem with politically correct extremism
The oft-repeated phrase “political correctness” has become the death knell for meaningful debate within American society.
The P.C. madness sweeping the nation was exemplified last Tuesday when UCLA’s student government passed a unanimous resolution to ban usage of the term “illegal immigrant.” The resolution refers to the word illegal as the “i-word” and claims its usage “endangers human rights.”
The only concept endangered here is the freedom of speech.
The resolution points out that “racially derogatory language … has historically bolstered the foundation for racially harmful actions including … hate crime and violence.” Before we dash to bash certain phrases on college campuses, let’s take a step back and analyze whether they are in fact racially derogatory, or simply a blatant truth.
The legal and conversational definition of illegal immigrant is, “a non-citizen who has entered the United States without government permission.” Hmm, nothing in that definition seems to sound a battle cry to incite racial violence. Rather the definition seems quite sensible and devoid of any implicit racially demeaning undertones.
So what brought about this student government resolution? Was it widespread negative racial profiling, socially marginalized groups or perhaps violent hate crimes? None of the above, just the enforcement of federal law.
The University of California recently appointed former U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano as their President. While Napolitano was the Secretary of Homeland Security, a record number of illegal immigrants were deported. Instead of being regarded as efficient and committed to upholding federal law, she is being demonized by the “politically correct.”
The most disturbing aspect is that the student government at UCLA is supporting undocumented (key phrase there) students who expressed their concerns and fears with the recent appointment of Janet Napolitano. The students in question conveniently managed to document their complaint but not their citizenship. The backwards result of this being a campus resolution forbidding calling an illegal act illegal. If this sounds like utterly absurd logic—it is.
The freedom of speech on a college campus, a place where discussion and educational growth through diversification should be encouraged, is being strategically hushed under the ruse of improving campus safety. Undoubtedly if issues such as the high rates of illegal immigration into the United States could be openly discussed without fear of being politically incorrect, more solutions would be presented to the problem.
America’s focus should be on diminishing the $113 billion a year that illegal immigration is estimated to cost federal and local taxpayers, as reported by the Federation for American Immigration Reform. Instead we prioritize maintaining political correctness so extreme as to forbid merely identifying a demographic by their legal definition. All this is done to avoid offending those who have no qualms about breaking our federal laws. And there the backwards logic rears its ugly head once again.
The same ideology applies to all aspect of American culture. Banning issues from discussion to avoid ruffling feathers is simply putting a muzzle on the freedom of speech. By attempting to portray all cultures and races and beliefs as either one in the same or off limits, we are stifling the diversity that makes this nation great.
In place of passing needless resolutions prohibiting addressing illegal acts for what they are, time should be spent streamlining the citizenship process and other activities that will yield productive results. Encouraging discussions not based off of being political correct, but on respect for differences, an attachment to truth, and accurately addressing the social issues of modern society should be the ideal.
Whitney Greer is a sophomore English major from Medford, Ore.
