The Insidious Effect of Political Correctness by Dr. Ben Carson

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
by Dr. Ben Carson – from Townhall -
Dr. Ben Carson.jpg

"When I was in high school in Detroit, there was a great deal of emphasis on clothing. As I became increasingly interested in fitting in with the “in crowd,” fashion supplanted academic achievement in my hierarchy of importance. My grades plummeted, and I became a person who was less pleasant and more self-absorbed.

My mother was disappointed because she thought I had enough insight and intelligence to avoid the flypaper trap of acting like everyone else.

Fortunately, after wasting a year pursuing acceptance, I realized that my dreams went far beyond silk shirts and sharkskin pants. I decided to forsake the “in crowd” and redoubled my academic efforts in time to rescue my sinking grade-point average and gain admission to an Ivy League university.

To say that the “in crowd” was disgruntled when I abandoned their association would be a gross understatement. It eventually became clear to them that I would not rejoin their ranks under any circumstances, and they left me alone.

Despite the insults hurled at me, at the time of graduation, my classmates voted me “most likely to succeed.” This indicated that they knew the prerequisites for success but were unwilling to fulfill them, and they wanted others to remain shackled to their underachieving lifestyle.

Political correctness (PC) operates in much the same fashion. It is in place to ensure conformity to the prescribed expressions and lifestyles dictated by the elites.

There are rewards of acceptance and praise for members of the “in crowd” as they attempt to silence or destroy any who dare think for themselves or express opposing views. Similarly, the purveyors of PC seize upon a word or phrase, which they emphasize in an attempt to divert attention away from the actual issue that doesn’t fit their narrative.

I have stated in the past that Obamacare is the worst thing to occur in our country since slavery. Why did I make such a strong statement? Obviously, I recognize the horrors of slavery. My roots have been traced back to Africa, and I am aware of some horrendous deeds inflicted on my ancestors in this country.

The purpose of the statement was not to minimize the most evil institution in American history, but rather to draw attention to a profound shift of power from the people to the government.

I think this shift is beginning to wrench the nation from one centered on the rights of individual citizens to one that accepts the right of the government to control even the most essential parts of our lives. This strikes a serious blow to the concept of freedom that gave birth to this nation.


Some well-known radicals have publicly written and stated that in order for their idea of a utopian, egalitarian society to emerge in the United States, the government must control health care, which ensures the dependency of the populace on government. Historical analysis of many countries that have gone this route demonstrates the obliteration of the middle class and a massive expansion of the poor, dependent class with a relatively small number of elites in control.

This is sobering information, and those who want to fundamentally change America would much rather demonize someone who is exposing this agenda than engage in a conversation that they cannot win. Others join in the fray, happily marching in lockstep with those who are attempting to convert our nation to something we won’t recognize, having no idea that they are being used.

Vladimir Lenin is sometimes credited with coining the phrase “useful idiots” to describe such individuals.

It is time in America for the people to open their eyes to what is happening all around them as our nation undergoes radical changes without so much as a conversation out of fear of being called a name, of facing economically adverse actions or of enduring government harassment, characterized by the perpetrators as “phony scandals.”

Political correctness is antithetical to our founding principles of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Its most powerful tool is intimidation.

If it is not vigorously opposed, its proponents win by default, because the victims adopt a “go along to get along” attitude. Major allies in the imposition of PC are members of the media, some of whom thrive on controversy while others are true ideologues.

The true believers would be amusing if it were not so sad to behold them dissecting, distorting and repeating words in an attempt to divert attention from the rise of government control.

The American people must learn to identify and ignore political correctness if we are to escape the bitter ideological grenades that are destroying our unity and strength. Political correctness is impotent if we the people are fearless. Let us emphasize intelligent discussion of issues and leave the smear campaigns to those with no constructive ideas."

http://amac.us/insidious-effect-political-correctness
 

Attachments

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Carson has said, by the time I reached ninth grade, mother….received nothing but food stamps. She couldn’t have provided for us and kept up the house without that subsidy.” “As I’ve said, we received food stamps and couldn’t have made it without them.” Carson, in his book, tells how his grades improved tremendously when a government program provided him with free eyeglasses because he could barely see.
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
Sigh. More fodder for the right. More of the same echo chamber bullshit and profound lack of awareness.


Seems that the author is subject to this "useful idiot" perpetration himself. Note how he simply parrots what any one of a hundred other rightists say.

First - indeed "political correctness" is a sort of problem but he manages to insinuate that it is the left that perpetrates it. I probably have to remind you of the right's insistance that Obama wear a flag lapel pin, or hold his hand to his heart during the pledge. This is the same political correctness that the right rails against.


I wonder what rightist think tank or front organization paid this guy to say the same things in the same way while claiming that the other side are only followers. Obviolusly, this person's "eyes" are open to what is happening all around him, right? so it is only everyone else who does not hold the views that he has conformed to must be unaware. Of course the poster speaks to us from on high, claiming that others are being used even as it seems as though he is speaking the identical rhetoric that the health insurance companies have been seeding throughout opinion pieces, blogs, and the media. But no, he is the independent thinker.

The author claims that the ACA is the most horrible thing since slavery:


  • The purpose of the statement was not to minimize the most evil institution in American history, but rather to draw attention to a profound shift of power from the people to the government.

    I think this shift is beginning to wrench the nation from one centered on the rights of individual citizens to one that accepts the right of the government to control even the most essential parts of our lives. This strikes a serious blow to the concept of freedom that gave birth to this nation.

    This happens to be EXACTLY what big business wishes us, and him to believe. In reality, this author and it seems, the poster of this article have no idea where our or how our rights are being diminished,and it has little to do with the ACA. If he, or the poster would actually take a look at things they would discover the truth, but that would require individual thought and action, not the parroting of the same things we have heard about the ACA we have been hearing for years now.
    No, he is a part of what is destroying our unity and strength. Do these people really believe that the ACA is the evil that is robbing us of our freedom? How very sad for them.​




 

canndo

Well-Known Member

  • Some well-known radicals have publicly written and stated that in order for their idea of a utopian, egalitarian society to emerge in the United States, the government must control health care, which ensures the dependency of the populace on government. Historical analysis of many countries that have gone this route demonstrates the obliteration of the middle class and a massive expansion of the poor, dependent class with a relatively small number of elites in control.

    And the government controls health care how exactly? And who are "some well-known radicals"? pretty sleazy.





 

BigNBushy

Well-Known Member

  • Some well-known radicals have publicly written and stated that in order for their idea of a utopian, egalitarian society to emerge in the United States, the government must control health care, which ensures the dependency of the populace on government. Historical analysis of many countries that have gone this route demonstrates the obliteration of the middle class and a massive expansion of the poor, dependent class with a relatively small number of elites in control.

    And the government controls health care how exactly? And who are "some well-known radicals"? pretty sleazy.




Government controls things it gives money to. I think it was in the 1980's the federal government decided the drinking age should be 21 instead of 18 or 19 like most states had at the time. But states decide the drinking age, not the federal government.

The federal government asked and most states changed the law to 21, but many stayed lower. So what does the government do? They threatened to withold money from projects in states that refused to comply, specifically from their highway budgets. They played hard ball.

Already many doctors won't accept Medicare or medicaid because the federal government will not pay as much as some things cost.

So when Obamacare is in full force, and all the old, sick, poor people go and get exchange plans, and young healthy people stay uninsured because the penalty costs less than the insurance, the federal government will have to step in to keep the insurance companies solvent. They will have to step in to force providers to accept less money for their services. They will step in to fine the shit out of those without insurance.

You just lost a lot of the ability to control your own destiny right here folks.
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
Government controls things it gives money to. I think it was in the 1980's the federal government decided the drinking age should be 21 instead of 18 or 19 like most states had at the time. But states decide the drinking age, not the federal government.

The federal government asked and most states changed the law to 21, but many stayed lower. So what does the government do? They threatened to withold money from projects in states that refused to comply, specifically from their highway budgets. They played hard ball.

Already many doctors won't accept Medicare or medicaid because the federal government will not pay as much as some things cost.

So when Obamacare is in full force, and all the old, sick, poor people go and get exchange plans, and young healthy people stay uninsured because the penalty costs less than the insurance, the federal government will have to step in to keep the insurance companies solvent. They will have to step in to force providers to accept less money for their services. They will step in to fine the shit out of those without insurance.

You just lost a lot of the ability to control your own destiny right here folks.
You just negated your argument. Government controls things it gives money to, but Doctors are not accepting medicare or medicaid, so doctors are NOT under their control even though they were accepting that money previously.

Do you understand how the ACA works? Government does NOT pay providers. Don't confuse Medicare, medicaid and the ACA. This is a typical misunderstanding perpetrated by those who want to see the aca fail. Who pays providers? Insurance companies do.

So perhaps they DO fine the shit out of those without insurance, they should because those without insurance by virtue of the fact that they do not have insurance wind up "fining" us when they get sick.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Racist................
what's racist about calling ben carson an affirmative action, welfare loving thug from inner city detroit?

it's all true.

he benefited from affirmative action. this is documented fact, he has even said so.

his mom took welfare and food stamps and vision help for ben as a kid, ben said so himself.

he's from inner city detroit, that's just plain old biographical.

and as for being a thug?

http://www.biography.com/people/ben-carson-475422

Both Ben and his brother experienced difficulty in school. Ben fell to the bottom of his class, and became the object of ridicule by his classmates. He developed a violent and uncontrollable temper, and was known to attack other children at the slightest provocation.

The poverty he lived in and the difficult times he experienced in school seem to exacerbate the anger and rage.




just another angry black man.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Despite his academic successes, Ben Carson still had a raging temper that translated into violent behavior as a child. One time he tried to hit is mother with a hammer because she disagreed with his choice of clothes. Another time, he inflicted a major head injury on a classmate in a dispute over a locker. In a final incident, Ben nearly stabbed to death a friend after arguing over a choice of radio stations.

The only thing that prevented a tragic occurrence was the knife blade broke on the friend's belt buckle. Not knowing the extent of his friend's injury, Ben ran home and locked himself in the bathroom with a Bible.






would you look at that thug from inner city detroit? just look at him.
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
what's racist about calling ben carson an affirmative action, welfare loving thug from inner city detroit?

it's all true.

he benefited from affirmative action. this is documented fact, he has even said so.

his mom took welfare and food stamps and vision help for ben as a kid, ben said so himself.

he's from inner city detroit, that's just plain old biographical.

and as for being a thug?

http://www.biography.com/people/ben-carson-475422

Both Ben and his brother experienced difficulty in school. Ben fell to the bottom of his class, and became the object of ridicule by his classmates. He developed a violent and uncontrollable temper, and was known to attack other children at the slightest provocation.

The poverty he lived in and the difficult times he experienced in school seem to exacerbate the anger and rage.




just another angry black man.

Clarence Thomas? I thought we were talking about a doctor.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Calling someone a thug is code for calling someone the n word. That makes you a racist.
words have meanings, ya know.

when you call some kid who is walking home from the store with skittles and iced tea who has never been in a fight in his entire life a "thug", that's pretty clearly coded speech.

when you call someone with a violent and uncontrollable temper who will attack at the slightest provocation a thug, that's a proper usage of the word. especially when that person has tried to smash his momma's head in with a hammer, inflicted a classmate with a serious head injury, and attempted to stab a friend to death over the radio station they were listening to.

see how that works?

i properly apply the word. you and your buddies over in politics 2.1 abuse and rape the word for your own coded racial reasons.

why don't you go scurry back to that shithole where you belong.
 

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
"Political correctness (PC) operates in much the same fashion. It is in place to ensure conformity to the prescribed expressions and lifestyles dictated by the elites."
 
Top