Since modernity broke apart the moral universes of action and motivation (of faith and works)...
...it cannot put Humpty together again.
Political Correctness (PC) therefore can find no satisfactory basis for moral action.
The moral universe of PC subsists on two distinct realities - good causes and good intentions, but never the twain can stay stuck-together.
A collection PC socially-approved acts confronts the individual; and it is up to him to manufacture his own subjective motivations for these acts (and pass them off to himself and others as convincingly as possible).
Or else he starts with his motivations - his sympathies and desires - and manufactures more-or-less plausible symbolic acts by which these motivations are (supposedly) implemented; and it is up to the intellectual elite to manufacture some more-or-less plausible evidence that these acts flow from these motivations and are (or have potential to be) effective in the real world.
Somehow, motivations and acts never add-up to a morally cohesive world.
The sympathetic motivation to (for instance) relieve the suffering poor in Africa and the social-status-earning acts of raising and spending aid money 'for' Africa never add-up to virtue: the suffering of the Africans is exacerbated and made permanent, the sympathy is swamped by guilt.
Wishful-thinking 'love' for abstract Africans is swamped by hatred of nearby ideological opponents among the elite who challenge the genuineness of PC motivations and the effectiveness of PC actions.
The spontaneous up-welling of self-disgust at self-pride seeks its opposite not in humility but in guilt-ridden submission.
The guilt-ridden and submissive state of numbed paralysis is utterly demotivating and destructive of the capacity to act.
And therefore natural vitality up-wells to save the individual from despair.
So, wretched submissiveness oscillates with arrogant moral grandstanding.
The peculiarity of Political Correctness comes from its nihilism, its denial of the reality of the real - therefore the continual conflict between the subjectivity of individual motivation and the subjectivity of group-sanctioned rules; between the changeable inner self, and the changeable external sanctions.
Neither inner nor outer subjectivity arise from depths, and any connections between the inner and the outer are abstract, arbitrary, willed - and evanescent.
Act stands as a symbol, and the symbolic meaning is subject to continual change.
(PC is intrinsically self-transcending - each new wave continually superseding and leaving-behind the previous rule and sanction system.)
Even as act is intended to be an objectification of subjective motivation, it remains objective only for as long as the social consensus holds; and the social consensus does not hold, but instead 'progresses'.
Since progress is defined in terms of leaving-behind, the good is that which has left-behind the wicked; the wicked is that which has been left-behind by the movement of progress.
If being left-behind is due to ignorance or incompetence, then that is okay - tolerated, even indulged and made the object of missionary work ('consciousness raising') - which is itself (somewhat) morally gratifying (being both socially approved and in-line with motivations); albeit missionary work (in a world where nothing is real or permanent or lastingly superior) is also disgustingly arrogant, self-superior and guilt-inducing.
But if being left-behind is wilful, if being left-behind is a matter of refusing and resisting the next step in the march of moral progress - then this is plain wicked and hatred-justifying.
Which is pleasant for PC - because hatred for the informed and wilful reactionary is its main under-pinning motivation - hatred is what gets it out-of-bed on cold winter mornings.
Under a system of PC, here and now in the West, the individual must adjust, again and again, to the widening wave of socially-defined progress, of moral denial, extrapolation and inversion.
Such repeated and unending adjustment is the individual's non-negotiable moral duty as a responsible adult member of the ruling elite.
So, the essence of PC morality is to keep-up with moral progress - to match one's inner motivation with the changing nature of socially-approved action (i.e. socially-approved by the ruling elite).
And the moral exemplar, the hero of PC ethics, is he whose convincingly-stated motivations are slightly ahead of the current state of socially-sanctioned actions, perceptibly 'advanced': further along in the direction that social progress is trending.
Nice work if you can get it.
According to studies, those who have (concerning in this particular case PC) "unacceptable" thoughts, impulses and predispositions; guilt about it; feelings of inadequacy; etc. are more likely to be first and second degree punishers of deviants, non-PC people and not enough PC people. This serves as a "redeeming from their secular sins" and it needs regular repetition. This mildly costly signal shows to the surrounding people their social worth and props up momentarily their self-image as good and adequate PC people.
"Under a system of PC, here and now in the West, the individual must adjust, again and again, to the widening wave of socially-defined progress, of moral denial, extrapolation and inversion."
- This corresponds to the methods of many cults, slightly less intense version of it. Cults have special words and phrases, beliefs, rules, rituals, ways of thinking and doing, etc. that are changed constantly. The followers must constantly be on the edge, constantly learning the new things, always busy, no time and energy for own thoughts. The followers are constantly running to to keep up with the changes. There is no permanent logic in these changes, capricious they are. The followers must constantly listen and watch the leaders, and learn. The leaders test the followers loyality, eagerness, fanaticism and interest by checking if the followers have learned the new things. Those who submit to this most are rewarded and perhaps promoted, failures are punished and may lead to e.g. exclusion from the cult or exclusion from responsible positions in the cult.
The cult way of thinking and doing are so strange and so different from the normal or other outside ways, that the follower in the end can't and don't want to communicate with outsiders, and he doesn't understand them. Every meaning outsiders try to communicate to the follower is given the cult meaning and interpretation, whatever it is at the moment, but always radically different than outsiders'. The followers learn various methods of thought stopping and distraction if unacceptable outsider thinking occurs in their minds.
Post a Comment