As IF Times

Source: Caddie Steve Williams defends using “slave” to describe working for Tiger

While it may appear that Williams’ use of the word ‘slave’ is an international scandal, in fact only about 14 people care and those are likely the friends of this article’s author.

It’s not clear from the article exactly who was offended by the use of the ‘s’ word. If the author is to be believed, the world is aghast at the horrific use of this word and surely a groundswell of anger will rise forcing Williams’ firing as a caddie.  He implies that the populace will denounce Williams as if he were Charlie Hebdo depicting Mohammed.  While he may get sympathetic audience in certain circles, oh let’s say at the University of Missouri, most readers will likely just move on to the fantasy football stats.

As rabidly fanatical as Muslim zealots may be, their outrage is mostly confined to anything which they feel is an insulting depiction of their prophet Mohammed.  Feel free to disparage their lifestyle, treatment of women or personal proclivities, but don’t make fun of the Prophet.

The PC zealots however have a much broader net of unacceptable words, phrases and expressions and it keeps expanding.  Williams’ use of the ‘s’ word was an innocuous description of how he felt about his role with Tiger, but unbeknownst to him, that word is on the growing list of offensive adjectives and nouns.  At the very least, someone should publish a complete guide to offensive words; call it the Snowflake dictionary.  They can publish it and distribute copies so that like minded bearded people can gather in groups and shake it at offenders while chanting “death to America”.  Ok, well not everyone needs a beard.

You can’t make this stuff up.  Only in the mentality of the Orwellian named Progressive mindset can you justify the restrictions of the use of language.  As this tidal wave of PC moves forward, future generations will be robbed of some very colorful descriptions of things as they are banished by the word police.  Gone will be Chinese fire drill, Russian roulette, Irish spring, Greek wedding, gypped, Tasmanian devil, French kiss.  Those are obvious, and in fact, we’ve already been conditioned to use ‘chairperson’, ‘significant other’ and ‘partner’.  We’ve already done away with fat, crazy and stupid, especially if it applies to one person.

But what about “healthy” because it offends disabled people; hard worker because it’s offensive to slaves; “winner” because it’s offensive to losers; and I’m not making this stuff up,  ‘girl’ .  The word ‘dumb’ is rapidly on its way out even though most people’s use of it has nothing to do congenital deficiency.  We expect that Disney will have to go back and reshoot all their cartoon elephant programming.

Not known to most people is the fact that the expression “politically correct” was first invoked by…Mao Tse Tung, he of the re-education camp fame.   That should tell you all you need about the nature of the ideology pushed upon us today.

link Cleaver: If Obama wasnt president, we would be ‘marching on the White House’ – The Hills Blog Briefing Room.

Apart from the racism that this sentiment represents, the truly astounding aspect of this announcement is the blatant stupidity and naivete.  It’s all but saying that policies coming out of the White House are horribly wrong and ineffective, especially to the Black community.  Hello! Rational people have been saying that for years and only now it’s become obvious? 

Barack Obama is the standard bearer for a number of constituencies which pushed him into the world’s highest office.  By liberals of course who were keen to demonstrate their willingness to embrace a non white candidate.   By youth because he was someone closer to their age than option B at the time.  By Latinos and other minorities because he represented a possible movement towards their sensibilities.  But especially by Blacks since he was one of their own and finally, some measures would be taken to address their issues of inequity in society.

It would be useful to look at history and note that some of the biggest human tragedies happened because of misplaced idealism granted to a member of that particular society.  By some counts the death of between 45 and 75 million Chinese by starvation during the Great Leap forward was orchestrated by…a Chinese, Mao Tse Tung, surely one of the biggest mass murderers in the history of man.   We’re not sure if those who died were pulling for the homey in Peking.  Josef Stalin didn’t care too much about the native blood since he was responsible for about 23,000,000 people’s death through starvation.  Kim Il Sung and his son Kim Jong Il haven’t exactly treated their own countrymen particularly well either, apparently disposing of  over 2 million of them over their terms in office.  During the terror reign of Idi Amin in Uganda, apart from being one of the 300,000 or so killed while he ran that country, you’d have a good chance of being eaten as well.

We could go on to list statesmen such as Saddam Hussein, Charles Taylor, Pol Pot and Ho Chi Min.   The point is, having a common racial heritage in all of these cases didn’t prevent people from being victimized in their own countries.  People who think that just because they happen to share a trait with someone in charge puts them on the insider’s list for favours are…well, they’re just dumb.  Would anyone ascribe any more trust to someone who was left handed just because they also happened to be a lefty? Or redheaded? Or bald? 

On the religious front, I’m sure lots of people happily absorbed all the earnest pleadings of James Bakker and Jimmy Swaggert before it was discovered that in fact they were the wolves among the lambs.  We know that Bernie Madoff was considered a mensch in the Jewish community until somebody asked for a cheque.  

The kind of identity politics being played out today ironically reduces the chances of anything being done which can benefit the most people.  Somebody will always feel aggrieved and the irrationality of their tribalism prevents the ability for society to move forward in a cohesive way.  It makes no sense to support someone who is unsupportable.   The bottom line is, if he’s a goof to you, he’s a goof to all.