Key Takeaways
1. Political correctness is a tool for cultural revolution, not mere politeness
Political correctness is like a man attempting to give himself a nickname. The artifice and transparency of the act make it impossible. The nickname will never stick—unless the man has the power to enforce it.
A subversive strategy. Political correctness is not simply about being polite or inoffensive. It is a deliberate strategy to reshape culture and society by controlling language and thought. By changing words and their meanings, PC advocates aim to change how people perceive reality and ultimately transform social and political structures.
Enforced through institutions. The PC movement gained power by infiltrating key cultural institutions like universities, media, and corporations. From these positions of influence, PC advocates can enforce their preferred language and ideas, often through social pressure, professional consequences, or outright censorship of dissenting views.
Constantly shifting goalposts. A key feature of PC is that its demands are ever-changing. What was acceptable yesterday may be offensive today. This constant flux keeps people off-balance and makes it difficult to resist or critique PC norms.
2. The origins of PC lie in Marxist thought and the Frankfurt School
Gramsci understood that cultural upheaval must precede political revolution.
Roots in neo-Marxism. Political correctness has its intellectual roots in neo-Marxist thought, particularly the ideas of Antonio Gramsci and the Frankfurt School. These thinkers shifted focus from economic revolution to cultural transformation as a means of achieving radical social change.
Cultural hegemony. Gramsci introduced the concept of cultural hegemony - the idea that the ruling class maintains power not just through force, but through cultural dominance. To achieve revolution, he argued, radicals must first subvert and replace the dominant culture.
Critical Theory. The Frankfurt School developed Critical Theory, an approach that subjects all aspects of society to relentless criticism. This laid the groundwork for modern identity politics and intersectionality, which view society through the lens of power dynamics and oppression.
3. Feminism and sexual politics propelled PC into mainstream discourse
The personal is political.
Second Wave feminism. The feminist movement of the 1960s and 70s played a crucial role in bringing PC ideas into mainstream discourse. The slogan "the personal is political" encapsulated the drive to politicize all aspects of life, including private relationships and individual choices.
Redefining language. Feminist scholars and activists pushed for changes in language, arguing that traditional terms reinforced patriarchal power structures. This included:
- Introducing gender-neutral terms (e.g. "chairperson" instead of "chairman")
- Reclaiming and redefining words (e.g. "queer")
- Creating new terminology to describe women's experiences (e.g. "sexual harassment")
Sexual revolution. The broader sexual revolution challenged traditional morality and family structures, paving the way for more radical redefinitions of gender and sexuality in later decades.
4. Universities became breeding grounds for radical ideologies
The radicals of the 1960s did not demand deference to the proclamations of established experts. On the contrary, they attempted to undermine the authority of the establishment by questioning all received opinion.
Campus activism. Universities were at the forefront of 1960s counterculture and activism. This laid the groundwork for the transformation of academia in subsequent decades.
New academic disciplines. The creation of new fields like Women's Studies, Black Studies, and Queer Theory institutionalized PC ideology within academia. These disciplines often prioritized political activism over traditional scholarly methods.
Changing curricula. Pressure to "diversify" curricula led to the sidelining of traditional Western canon in favor of works chosen primarily for their authors' identity or ideological alignment.
Speech codes. Many universities implemented speech codes and bias reporting systems, ostensibly to create a more inclusive environment but often resulting in the suppression of dissenting viewpoints.
5. Free speech absolutism inadvertently aids the PC agenda
Political correctness works to destroy traditional standards of speech and behavior, and it succeeds both when it coerces some people to adopt the new code and when it convinces others to disavow standards entirely; either response overthrows the old order.
False dichotomy. PC advocates often present a false choice between their new speech codes and complete abandonment of all standards. This traps well-meaning defenders of free speech into arguing against any standards at all.
Necessity of standards. In reality, all societies have some standards of acceptable speech and behavior. The question is not whether to have standards, but what those standards should be.
Conservatives' mistake. Many conservatives have fallen into this trap, arguing for absolute free speech rather than defending the traditional standards that PC seeks to replace. This inadvertently aids the PC agenda by helping to dismantle existing cultural norms.
6. PC has inverted traditional morality and redefined key concepts
Political correctness relies on euphemism, soft words used to sugarcoat harsh realities.
Moral inversion. PC ideology often turns traditional morality on its head:
- Pride, once considered a deadly sin, is now celebrated
- Self-restraint and personal responsibility are downplayed in favor of self-expression and victimhood narratives
- Traditional virtues like hard work and self-reliance are sometimes labeled as aspects of "white supremacy"
Redefining terms. Key concepts are redefined to serve ideological ends:
- "Tolerance" is redefined to mean acceptance and celebration, not just allowing differences
- "Equality" shifts from equality of opportunity to equality of outcome
- "Racism" is redefined to include only systemic oppression, exempting certain groups from the label
Euphemistic language. PC often employs euphemisms to obscure or reframe controversial issues:
- "Undocumented immigrant" instead of "illegal alien"
- "Sex worker" instead of "prostitute"
- "Reproductive rights" instead of "abortion"
7. Scientific discourse has been coopted to serve ideological ends
The word "scientific" connotes nonpartisan authority, which is why the radicals have for so long attempted to coopt it.
Politicization of science. Scientific findings and terminology are increasingly used to advance political agendas, often distorting or oversimplifying complex issues.
Climate change debate. The discourse around climate change exemplifies this trend:
- Complex scientific findings are reduced to simplistic slogans
- Disagreement is often framed as "denial" rather than legitimate scientific debate
- Proposed solutions often align with pre-existing political agendas
Gender ideology. Biological facts about sex differences are increasingly downplayed or denied in favor of subjective gender identities, with dissenters accused of being "anti-science."
COVID-19 response. The pandemic saw "science" invoked to justify various policy responses, often with little room for debate or nuance.
8. The personal has become political, eroding private life
When the personal becomes the political, everything gets politicized—with the ironic exception of politics, which actually becomes depoliticized.
Expansion of political sphere. PC ideology seeks to politicize all aspects of life, including personal relationships, consumer choices, and cultural preferences.
Loss of private space. This erosion of the distinction between public and private life leaves individuals with little respite from political judgments and pressures.
Depoliticization of governance. Ironically, as everyday life becomes more politicized, actual governance becomes increasingly technocratic and removed from democratic debate.
Social media amplification. Social media platforms have accelerated this trend, turning personal opinions and choices into public statements open to scrutiny and cancellation.
9. Conservatives have failed to effectively counter PC ideology
Conservatives have failed to thwart political correctness because most do not understand what it is. They have portrayed political correctness and its derivatives, including "wokeism" and "cancel culture," as "censorship," which we must oppose in the name of "liberty."
Misunderstanding the threat. Many conservatives have mischaracterized PC as simply a form of censorship, rather than recognizing it as a comprehensive ideological challenge to traditional Western values.
Ineffective responses. Conservative responses have often been ineffective:
- Focusing solely on defending abstract principles like "free speech" rather than specific cultural values
- Ceding ground on language and allowing PC terms to become normalized
- Failing to offer a compelling alternative vision of society and culture
Institutional weakness. Conservatives have largely failed to maintain influence in key cultural institutions like universities, media, and the arts, leaving these spaces dominated by PC ideology.
10. PC seeks to rewrite history and redefine reality itself
If political correctness could abolish the most fundamental distinction in human nature, then nothing could escape its transformational reach.
Historical revisionism. PC advocates often seek to rewrite history to align with their ideological goals, such as the 1619 Project's attempt to reframe American history primarily through the lens of slavery and racism.
Rejection of objective reality. PC ideology often challenges the very notion of objective truth, arguing that all knowledge is socially constructed and shaped by power dynamics.
Gender and biology. The most extreme example of this is the attempt to redefine biological sex as a social construct, separate from objective physical reality.
Linguistic manipulation. By controlling language and redefining key terms, PC advocates aim to shape how people perceive and think about reality itself.
Last updated:
FAQ
What's Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds about?
- Focus on Political Correctness: The book explores the rise of political correctness and its impact on free speech and cultural standards in America. Michael Knowles argues that it is a tool used by the Left to control language and thought.
- Critique of Conservatism: Knowles critiques conservatives for failing to effectively combat political correctness, suggesting their vague appeals to free speech are inadequate.
- Historical Context: The author provides a historical overview, tracing political correctness back to Marxist thought and cultural movements, discussing key figures and events that shaped current political discourse.
Why should I read Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds?
- Urgent Cultural Relevance: The book is essential for understanding the current cultural and political climate in America, with high stakes for free speech and traditional values.
- Insightful Analysis: Readers gain insights into the mechanisms of political correctness and its effects on language and thought, with a thorough examination of tactics used by the Left.
- Call to Action: It serves as a rallying cry for conservatives to reclaim cultural heritage and engage in the battle for free speech, offering practical advice on confronting political correctness.
What are the key takeaways of Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds?
- Understanding Political Correctness: Knowles defines it as a standard of speech and behavior aligned with leftist ideology, censoring traditional language and redefining reality.
- Cultural Hegemony: The book explains how the Left has infiltrated institutions to reshape societal norms, leading to a shift in acceptable discourse.
- The Role of Language: Language is highlighted as a powerful tool in shaping thought and culture, with the warning that abandoning traditional standards leads to a cultural vacuum filled by radical ideologies.
What are the best quotes from Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds and what do they mean?
- “If they can control the words we use, they can control the thoughts we think.”: This encapsulates Knowles's thesis that language shapes ideology, emphasizing the defense of language against politically correct redefinitions.
- “The answer is always more speech, not less.”: Knowles advocates for open dialogue as a solution to political correctness, believing that silencing dissent empowers radicals and stifles discourse.
- “The personal is political.”: Critiqued as a means of politicizing private life, Knowles argues this ideology undermines the distinction between personal choices and political discourse.
How does Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds define political correctness?
- Standard of Speech: Defined as a set of standards aligning with leftist ideology, enforced through social pressure and institutional power.
- Censorship vs. Redefinition: Distinguishes political correctness from censorship, asserting it involves redefining language to fit ideological narratives, often contradicting traditional meanings.
- Historical Roots: Traces origins to Marxist thought and cultural movements, suggesting it is a strategy to undermine Western civilization.
What strategies does Michael J. Knowles suggest for combating political correctness in Speechless?
- Engage in Open Dialogue: Encourages conservatives to engage in discussions rather than retreat into silence, advocating for more speech to counter radical ideologies.
- Reclaim Language: Advocates for reclaiming traditional language and standards, urging conservatives to use clear and direct speech without fear of backlash.
- Educate and Inform: Stresses the need for education on free speech principles and the dangers of political correctness, calling for efforts to inform the public.
How does Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds critique the conservative response to political correctness?
- Inadequate Defense: Argues conservatives have failed to mount an effective defense, often resorting to vague slogans about free speech lacking substance.
- Surrendering Ground: Suggests conservatives have surrendered cultural ground by adopting politically correct language or failing to challenge it, emboldening radicals.
- Need for Tactical Aggression: Calls for a more aggressive stance from conservatives in the cultural battle, warning that without a clear response, they will continue to lose ground.
What historical examples does Michael J. Knowles provide in Speechless?
- The Rise of Political Correctness: Discusses its emergence in the late 20th century, particularly on college campuses, highlighting key events and figures.
- Cultural Marxism: References the Frankfurt School and Antonio Gramsci as influential in shaping political correctness ideology, explaining their cultural strategies.
- Contemporary Incidents: Cites examples like campus protests and backlash against conservative speakers, illustrating real-world implications of the ideology.
How does Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds relate to current events?
- Cancel Culture: Connects political correctness to cancel culture, where individuals face repercussions for dissenting views, arguing it's a result of the ideological framework.
- Free Speech on Campuses: Discusses battles over free speech on campuses, emphasizing the importance of defending it as a bulwark against political correctness.
- Cultural Shifts: Analyzes how political correctness has influenced broader cultural shifts, warning these threaten American democracy and free expression.
What role does gender ideology play in Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds?
- Critique of Gender Constructs: Critiques the understanding of gender as a social construct, arguing it undermines biological realities with evidence and case studies.
- Impact on Society: Discusses how gender ideology influences public policy and education, warning of confusion and harm, especially among children.
- Historical Examples: Uses cases like John Money and the Reimer twins to illustrate consequences of ignoring biological truths, serving as cautionary tales.
How does Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds address the concept of free speech?
- Free Speech vs. Censorship: Argues political correctness creates a hostile environment for free speech, emphasizing the importance of protecting it as a democracy cornerstone.
- Heckler’s Veto: Discusses the "heckler's veto," where protests silence speakers, arguing it undermines free expression and must be challenged.
- Call to Action: Encourages readers to defend free speech and resist political correctness pressures, advocating for a cultural shift prioritizing open dialogue.
What is the significance of the title Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds?
- Loss of Voice: Reflects the idea that political correctness renders individuals speechless, unable to express true thoughts and beliefs.
- Cultural Commentary: Comments on the broader implications of silencing dissenting voices, serving as a rallying cry for those marginalized by political discourse.
- Call to Action: Urges readers to reclaim their voices and engage in cultural battles, emphasizing the need to speak out against silencing forces.
Review Summary
Speechless by Michael Knowles receives mixed reviews. Supporters praise it as an insightful critique of political correctness and leftist ideology, lauding Knowles' research and writing style. Critics argue the book is biased, inconsistent, and promotes harmful ideas about marginalized groups. Some reviewers find it thought-provoking but lacking in solutions. The book's discussion of language, culture, and conservative values resonates with many readers, while others view it as inflammatory and poorly argued. Overall, reactions are polarized along ideological lines.
Similar Books
Download PDF
Download EPUB
.epub
digital book format is ideal for reading ebooks on phones, tablets, and e-readers.