Back to Red Disability political articles "Political Correctness" is a term which you have probably heard quite a lot, and over the years its meaning has been expanded to the point where it sometimes seems almost meaningless. In fact, the term is now often used by horrible right-wingers to decry any attempt to end oppression and discrimination. Every time an effort is made to stop people with disabilities or any other minority group from being excluded from parts of society, the capitalist Establishment and its supporters start bleating that we are "too busy being politically correct", as if to imply that we are spoiling everybody's fun. (The fact that restrictions on what we can and cannot do, and being forever subject to negative remarks and attitudes, is spoling our fun - and our chances of living a decent life - never seems to register in their tiny minds!)
But basically, Political Correctness is to do with the use of non-offending language with relation to political issues, such as disability. So what's my view on the matter ?
Obviously, I'm against the use of blatantly disabled-ist words such as s*****c or m****l - even when relating to people whose disabilities would have, in the past, been described medically by using those words. (For example, I was very glad when the S******s Society changed its name to Scope). Words such as crippled, retarded and others should be avoided at all costs - maybe they were considered acceptable in the past, but they give a very negative image of people with disabilities and are often used as a term of abuse.
Sometimes, if a disabled person pisses you off, it may be tempting to go "below the belt" and use derogatory language against him or her. But by doing so, you would be labelling all people with disabilities in a negative way. Besides, there are many expressions which are far more insulting on a personal level, but less politically incorrect.
(For example, I often call the MP David Blunkett a Tory B*****d because of his imposition of tuition fees in universities and his axing of student grants; his blindness, however, is a detail which has no relevance to his politics !)
At the other extreme, people with disabilities are often treated as objects of pity - both in the press, and on telethons such as Children In Need. This is extremely patronizing, and gives the same impression of people with disabilities as inherantly inferior to all non-disabled people.
Language is also important here; words such as "tragic" or "brave", when used to describe someone just because he/she is disabled, are patronizing. However, there are times when people with disabilities's treatment by the system is tragic, and there are times when people with disabilities who fight back against their oppression (such as the DAN members who chain themselves to buses) are, undoubtably, brave.
But political correctness alone is not enough to get a fair deal for people with disabilities.
If a person is turned down for a job or refused entry to a cinema or leisure centre, it makes very little difference whether it is because he/she is a "f***ing s*****c" or "movement challenged". Discrimination is discrimination, whatever the language.
The only way to really secure a fair deal for people with disabilities is to fight to overthrow the capitalist system which oppresses people with disabilities and which creates and encourages discrimination. And to fight for a socialist society where disabled and able-bodied, black and white, male and female, young and old are all equal.
Leading this fight is the Socialist
Workers Party.
Links