Yes, This Is Political Correctness Gone Mad

I am usually a supporter of ‘political correctness’, especially when it concerns speech. I think it is far better for someone who says something offensive to be criticised and recieve a social sanction for being ‘politically incorrect’ than for them to suffer any kind of legal censorship.
It is therefore incumbent upon me to condemn genuine acts of ‘political correctness gone mad’ when they occur. These are usually instances of local government officials take progressive legislation too far. There have been two ridiculous cases of this kind in the past week: A man won an employment tribunal case against Trafford Housing Trust after they saw he had posted comments against gay marriage on his Facebook Page; and a foster-couple in Rotherham had a couple of kids removed from their care when it was discovered they were members of UKIP.
I note that the authorities acted on information gleaned from the aggrieved people’s private lives. The couple’s membership came from a “tip off” apparently, and the demoted Christian man was posting on his own Facebook wall. Both these things acts of political expression took place in that liminal space that is not private but not necessarily fully public either. But the fact that the employers and Rotherham Council have been punishing these people, based on their actions and beliefs expressed in this mid-way space, is highly disconcerting. This is the sort of thing we need human rights legislation for – to protect the overreach of the state and employers into areas that are not their business. It’s ironic that the concept of human rights is also often derided as ‘political correctness’. Had Rotherham Council and Trafford Housing Trust had a better understanding of free expression, freedom of association and the right to a private life, they may not have made the mistakes that made the headlines.

3 Replies to “Yes, This Is Political Correctness Gone Mad”

  1. You may be a little quick in assuming that we have the full details. It’s not as if social services perform a low detail superficial activity. One wonders if they have (incorrectly) used this reason to act because they have knowledge of other unreported incidents.
    Don’t be fooled at the speed at which the other parties responded – Rotherham is in an election campaign, with a bye election in a few days time.

    1. Meh. The head if the service in Rotherham seems happy to standby the official, flawed, reasoning. Others I have spoken to also felt that there was “more to this story” and hat the UKIP thing was an excuse gone wrong. But I don’t have much time for that, which is essentially lying.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.