From: hasn@midway.uchicago.edu (Sheheryar Hasnain)
Subject: Re: The PC Issue
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 16:50:31 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.112640.1@eagle.wesleyan.edu>, mzener@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
> 
> hasn@midway.uchicago.edu (Sheheryar Hasnain) writes:
> 
> > Is caring about how the other party, especially one that
> > has historically been incredibly oppressed and trodden upon 
> > in the US and within other colonized  territories, feels too much to
> > ask?
> 
>    No.  But it is too much to _demand_.  And if speech codes and historical
> revisionism isn't a demand, then nothing is.

S: But isn't the system based upon "Demand and Supply".  Actually I'm kidding 
(even though I am an economist, a marxist economist but still an economist).
However there is some truth to the Demand and Supply stuff.  That IS how
the system is designed. Also Maybe blacks and women wouldn't have gotten the
 vote unless they "demanded" that right.  So maybe it isn't too much to demand
respect. We'd earn it but I hear theres a recession!(Joke,  & I dont think
anyone was offended!)
> 
> >  ....  The problem has really become a "rights vs responsibility" issue.
> > You are standing up for your rights, and the "system" is designed to support
> > your stand.  What all of us forget is that we also have "responsibilities"
> > towards each other.  These include taking into account how the other feels
> > when making particular remarks, supporting certain policies or cracking some
> > jokes.  Some people arn't laughing.  
> 
>    They don't have to laugh.  They don't have to agree to my policies.  It's
> never nice to insult someone, even unintentionally.  Let us remember, however,
> that there is no Constitutional right to be happy.  The system is designed to
> supprt individual's rights -- even if the individuals are racist idiots, evenm
> if the individuals are idiots trying NOT to be racist.  If my opinions offend
> you, then you are welcome to disagree, you are welcome to debate and to argue. 
> You are most wholly unwlecome to censor.

S:  The constitution is a historical document which first and foremost 
states that all "men"  are created equal.  But I won't go into my issues with
the constitution of the US but I will say that it is a document that has 
only limited "real" value in this day and age.  But I don't want to get into
that.  Of course you have the "right" to do this and a "right" to do that.  I
would never want to deprive you and other non-PCers of their freedoms as far
as rights go.  But unfortunately I don't go by the constitution when I feel
that we should have a right to be happy.  I, personally am quite a moderate
PCer interms of the"language."  Yet if somebody feels better using that 
language I dont feel particularly threatened or imposed upon because it
isn't exactly putting chains around me.  Again, put the constitution aside,
write your own, and think "responsibility."  We all know our "rights."  


>    The First Ammendment to the Constitution is a wholly unsubtle document. 
> There are no escpae clauses, no "ifs" and no "unlesses."  We are all allowed to
> express our opinions, and a person's _true_ responsibility is to let other
> people do so.

Is that really a person's "true responsibility"?  I don't think that it is
"my responsibility" to sit calm while some skinheads in London shout out
racist insults at me and the cops cant do a thing about it.  I prefer to 
push the responsibility off on the person expressing their opinions.  
Or maybe have that responsibility push on them by law. I mean
come on.
> 
> > I really dont think Pol. Correctness is oppressive.  
> 
>    If you AGREE with PC doctrine, you're safe.  Try saying "maybe Clarence
> Thomas was a good choice," "Maybe the Rodney King jurors _were_ fair," or
> "maybe radical feminism is going in the wrong direction" and see how open
> minded your fellow PCers are with you.

Generally if someone would say the above I, or fellow PCers 
would merely inquire as to why they felt that way. 
And we would talk about it over a drink. Yes PCers do discuss
stuff!
>  
As far as Dinesh D'sousa goes, it isn't hard to put forward justifications
or arguments for just about anything.  To put it simply, I and my collegues
(most at least!) disagree with him.
> 
> Max Zener
> 
> Sheheryar
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct