We here in the United States pride ourselves on our freedom of speech, an invaluable right and great power that the Constitution gifts us. And, as we all know very well from a popular superhero franchise, with great power comes great responsibility. Here’s the thing: if you want to be rude, you have the right to be rude. If you want to be ignorant, failing to back up your claims with any evidence, again, you have the right to do that. However, if you consider yourself someone who values discourse, education, creative thought and kindness in general, you have to think before you speak. Otherwise, you don’t really value knowledge or empathy — and, in a way, humanity.
This column is not a direct response to any one event that has happened at Dartmouth recently. Rather, I am responding to the growing ignorance and widespread complaints about what has been dubbed “PC culture.”
I have endeavored to not discuss Donald Trump in my columns, but I am now caving in. In Rutgers University’s 2016 commencement speech two weeks ago, President Barack Obama stated, “In politics and in life, ignorance is not a virtue.” Obama was indirectly referring to Trump and many of his baseless and contradictory statements. Trump’s response? “This is a primary reason that Obama is the worst president in U.S. history!”
In an attempt to be the devil’s advocate while also generously giving Trump the benefit of the doubt, I would understand Trump’s response if Obama had referred to “ignorance” as simply anything that did not agree with his own beliefs. However, that was not the definition of ignorance that Obama was referring to. In another part of his speech, he says, “It’s not cool to not know what you’re talking about. That’s not keeping it real, or telling it like it is. That’s not challenging political correctness. That’s just not knowing what you’re talking about. And yet we’ve become confused about this.”
I personally was very heavily involved with the sciences throughout high school. Although I am a potential government major now, I have kept my devotion to the scientific method with me. Because of this, I find it very difficult to feel comfortable defending or even confidently having a stance on any issue unless I have spent innumerable hours researching and discussing the topic. This then makes intelligent discourse easier and effective. A dialogue involves more than one party; if you don’t absorb or believe the credulity of what the other person is saying, then is it really any different from talking to a brick? Remember — you may say what you want, but if you want to have an intellectual debate, you need the research. Responders also have this freedom of speech, and they will decide how to react to intellectual ignorance, whether it be calling you out or supporting your claims.
Now, on political correctness. I understand the idea some people have that political correctness is stifling. But many have forgotten the golden rule: don’t do — or say — something to another person that you wouldn’t want someone to do to you. There is a fine line between stating something relevant but “not PC” and simply being rude or ___-ist. It’s difficult to define that line, because the golden rule doesn’t really apply if you can’t imagine being in someone else’s shoes, and it is important that we continuously strive to do so.
It would be very easy for me to simply say “just don’t be rude” and “just be considerate” about this matter. But, again, there is a fine line. And many people cross that line and protest “PC culture” for stifling their own ignorance. But there are also some who may have been wrongfully subdued in the name of “PC culture.” This is why I disdain the term political correctness. There is no all-seeing professor who is grading your metaphorical political paper on its “correctness,” but rather real, living people judging whether what you said was considerate or not. There are ways to have open and engaging discussions, and you can’t prevent everyone’s feelings from being hurt — but you cannot and should not use that fact as an excuse to deliberately be obnoxious or offensive just to exercise your freedom of speech. There are civil ways to engage with others. Also, if someone thinks something is discourteous or hurtful to the people that they care about, they will refrain from doing it. If you’re the one judging them for doing that because you think they are “just being PC,” I recommend that you take a good, long look at yourself.
Personally, I believe that every argument needs a healthy amount of politeness and empathy. You already filter yourself when speaking with people you care about. If you said every thought that popped into your head, there’s a good chance you may not have as many friends as you do now, and this same concept extends to political discussions. You have to grasp that other people may have experienced different and more difficult hardships that you may not have faced yet, or maybe never will. Say what you want, anywhere you want! But empathy is what makes us human, and if you, whether you’re politically far left or far right, are not ready to doubt yourself and your beliefs, then you cannot call yourself an advocate of intellectual discussion and introspection.
