Civitas, was earlier this week calling for an end to Political Correctness (PC), because they argued, it has allowed the creation of "Muslim Ghettos". Anthony Browne, author of a pamphlet on PC, written under the aegis of Civitas, claimed that PC closed down debates, labelled groups as victims and banned dissent. I've always thought that PC was a device created by others to argue in defence of those who are purportedly marginalised by society. It has its benefits but it has also its abuses. In reality, can't it be argued that the motive for the call for less Political Correctness is almost always made by those who are in the upper echelons of the social food chain, to make generalisations about the those in the lower echelons without the danger of censure? You don’t hear about the Black or Asian communities calling for a need for less PC so that they can comment on the flaws (White Ghettoes?) of the indigenous community without being labelled racists.
And while on Civitas, Chris Dillow, economist and author of the informative and tidily written Stumblings and Mumblings, takes umbrage at the claim made by Civitas that John Stuart Mill was a Tory.
Now, Mill was many things, almost all of them good. But an inspiration to the stupid party? Surely, only a very small minority of them, and on a very partial reading of his works.Here I would like to take the un-PC opportunity to call Civitas a stupid and opportunistic bunch of patriarchial cretins. Tory by definition and, therefore, not at all like John Stuart Mill.