Political Correctness

Contrary to Lisa Martinez’s view (Campus Correspondence, Dec. 5) the term “politically correct” isn’t too authoritarian. It is a fitting description of a very authoritarian trend: multiculturalism. In the words of “1984” author George Orwell, its purpose is “to provide a medium of expression for the worldview and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc,” or, in this case, cultural relativism.

For example, American Indians are now called “Native Americans,” even though the dictionary defines as “native” anyone who was born in a given country. This choice of words seeks to instill the view that whites and others somehow do not have the same right to this country as the Indians.

Martinez herself is well versed in this politically correct newspeak. She characterizes last spring’s riots at UCLA as a “struggle to broaden the university’s curriculum.” This terminology ignores the view held by many of us at UCLA that a Chicano studies department will actually impoverish the curriculum by needless duplication and diversion of resources.

Logical thinking requires that words be defined objectively, not according to the latest political fashion, and this is what political correctness opposes.

RON M. KAGAN

UCLA Graduate Student

Martinez can’t just whitewash her way out of the charge that political correctness hides a multitude of liberal sins. Specifically, she candy-coats the violent, illegal actions taken when “Chicano activists” seized and damaged UCLA property by calling the fracas a “struggle.” She objects to campus conservatives’ description of the perpetrators as “PC fascists,” but she fails to explain why vandalism and hooliganism in the pursuit of a political goal are not the hallmarks of a fascist. If Martinez were so concerned with “honesty,” she could have started with herself.

ROBERT McMILLAN

Garden Grove