skip to content
Montek Devlog

A Critical Examination of Political Correctness

/ 4 min read

political correctness, freedom of speech, cancel culture, ethics, discourse

Introduction

The interplay between political correctness, freedom of speech, and the rise of cancel culture is a complex and increasingly contentious issue. These three concepts are often intertwined, with discussions of one frequently invoking the others. In this project, I examine the intricate relationship between what I refer to as the “big three” and explore their role in shaping modern discourse. I will refer to incidents where all three are relevant as “free speech incidents,” recognizing that these incidents often involve elements of each concept.

1. Defining the “Big Three”

Before delving into the relationship between these concepts, it is crucial to clarify their definitions and offer my interpretation of each.

1.1 Freedom of Speech

The ethical basis for freedom of speech finds its roots in philosophical traditions. However, it is important to distinguish between the moral principle of free speech and its legal protections. As Amnesty International defines it, freedom of speech covers “ideas of all kinds, including those that may deeply offend” [2]. When transformed into law, this abstract philosophical ideal becomes more concrete, with certain expressions legally restricted. In Canada, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms enshrines the right to freedom of expression, but excludes forms like hate speech, obscenity, and defamation [3].

1.2 Political Correctness

Political correctness is typically understood as language or behavior intended to minimize offense [5]. However, I view political correctness more as a phenomenon than merely an instance of speech. Political correctness reflects the core values of a group or society, establishing norms for acceptable speech. It has several key properties: (1) it always exists within any group, (2) it applies only within that group, (3) it represents the group’s common values but not necessarily the values of every individual within it.

1.3 Cancel Culture

Cancel culture refers to the trend of publicly calling out individuals for inappropriate speech or actions, often resulting in social rejection or a loss of status [7]. While it serves as a means of holding individuals accountable for their behavior, cancel culture can also suppress free expression, particularly among those without the power to defend themselves.

2. The Interrelationship Between the Terms

Now that the “big three” have been defined, let us explore how they intersect.

2.1 Freedom of Speech and Political Correctness

At their core, freedom of speech and political correctness are inherently at odds. Freedom of expression offers individuals the right to voice their opinions, but political correctness imposes societal expectations on what can be said without causing offense. This conflict often arises from differing interpretations of the limits of free expression.

2.2 Political Correctness and Cancel Culture

Cancel culture is closely tied to political correctness, as the former often arises from the latter. When individuals are “cancelled,” it is typically because their behavior violates the political correctness upheld by a group. In diverse and equality-focused societies like Canada, minor offenses are frequently called out, further fueling cancel culture.

2.3 Freedom of Speech and Cancel Culture

While political correctness sets the stage for cancel culture, the latter most directly threatens freedom of speech. Cancel culture can foster a climate of self-censorship, where people avoid expressing opinions that might lead to backlash.

3. Cohesion of the Terms

Political correctness sets the standard for acceptable speech, cancel culture enforces these standards, and the fear of cancellation suppresses free expression. Together, they create an environment of heightened sensitivity and reduced open discourse.

4. Conclusion and Solutions

Solving the tensions between political correctness, freedom of speech, and cancel culture is difficult, but there are ways to mitigate their negative effects. Individuals must learn to navigate social consequences, and the intensity of cancel culture should be moderated.

References

  1. J. W. Howard, “Freedom of speech,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freedom-speech/#WhatFreeSpee (accessed Mar. 3, 2024).
  2. Amnesty International, “We’ve been defending the right to freedom of expression since 1961,” https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/freedom-of-expression/ (accessed Mar. 3, 2024).
  3. Government of Canada, “Section 2(b) – freedom of expression,” Charterpedia, https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/check/art2b.html (accessed Mar. 3, 2024).
  4. Encyclopædia Britannica, “Political correctness,” https://www.britannica.com/topic/political-correctness (accessed Mar. 3, 2024).
  5. Global News, “Most Canadians say political correctness has ‘gone too far’: Poll,” https://globalnews.ca/news/2908808/most-canadians-say-political-correctness-has-gone-too-far-poll/ (accessed Mar. 3, 2024).