The Price of Being Politically Incorrect

A female Caucasian law student from Harvard was discussing the issue of race with a group of friends and expressed some of her views, including one where she thought that black people have lower IQs than white people. After returning home, the woman was still unsatisfied and sent her opinion to another woman in an email, again stating that blacks had lower IQs than whites. She added, “I think my babies will be geniuses and beautiful individuals whether I raise them or give them to an orphanage in Nigeria.”

Unfortunately, the two women had a falling out and the recipient of the email decided to make it public, stirring up great controversy at Harvard Law School. It enraged the Black Law Student Association (BLSA), which posted the letter all over the nation’s law schools and law websites. Their intent, obviously, was to obstruct this woman’s future career in law. She was allegedly employed at the office of an experienced judge, but the incident may destroy this top law student’s prospects for landing a good job that she was on the verge of acquiring. It may also seriously affect her career in law.

The BLSA was motivated by the belief that if this woman got a job in law, she would not be impartial when it came to cases involving race. In light of America’s long history of discrimination and oppression toward blacks, this sentiment is understandable.

America is a nation of free speech — and the woman in question certainly had the right to express her views — but the issue here was that America also has a very firm stance on political correctness when it comes to issues of racial prejudice and discrimination. Being politically incorrect comes at a heavy price. (Of course, the email was private and shouldn’t have been made public, and this story is a warning to those who blindly confide in friends. But that’s a different topic).

This isn’t the first case of paying a heavy price for violating the standard of political correctness. Harvard’s former president, Lawrence Summers, was strongly criticized by the American media (and of other Western nations) for gender discrimination when he suggested that women were not as strong as men in mathematics and hard sciences. He was forced to apologize and resign his post, becoming the shortest-serving president in the university’s history.

The issue of international relations is similar. Helen Thomas, the most experienced White House reporter, angered American pro-Israeli groups, reporters and politicians when she uttered strong anti-Israeli comments in an interview outside the White House. Not only did the White House spokesperson state that Thomas should be reprimanded, the White House Correspondents Association, in a rare move, issued a statement expressing their disapproval. For her political incorrectness, Thomas was forced to apologize and resign.

Next came Octavia Nasr, a Lebanese senior editor for CNN. She posted a Twitter comment expressing sadness and respect for Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah, one of Lebanon’s top Shiite leaders, who passed away on the 4th. Fadlallah was also an early mentor of the militant group Hezbollah, which the US views as a terrorist group. Nasr, who had worked at CNN for over 20 years, paid for her political incorrectness with her job.

Particularly remarkable was the dismissal of General Stanley McChrystal, America’s commanding officer in Afghanistan. He was fired not just because of his “big mouth” and criticism of the White House, but for being politically incorrect; as Obama put it, it “undermines the civilian control of the military that is at the core of our democratic system. And it erodes the trust that’s necessary for our team to work together to achieve our objectives in Afghanistan.” McChrystal had no choice but to depart in disappointment.

“Political correctness” derives from a 19th century American concept of justice, referring to the necessity for legal language to be “politically correct” and comply with the law and the Constitution. During the 1980s, the concept evolved and expanded into “speech which corresponds to overwhelming opinion or popular custom.” All speech which did not conform was politically incorrect. In America, politically incorrect speech is legal and enjoys constitutional protection, but, because it does not conform to mainstream standards, it comes at a heavy price.