The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.

org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

(http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/ )

Back (http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/article/w hats-left/)|Section (http://w w w .clarem ont.org

/crb/w hat-is-inside/essays-269/)|Table of Contents (http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/ issue/fall-
2016/)|N ext(http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/article/voice-of-civilization/ )

By:Angelo M .C odevilla (http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/contributor-list/ 116/ )

1 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

D O W N L O A D A R T IC L E P D F (H T T P :// W W W .C L A R E M O N T .O R G / D O W N L O A D _ P D F.P H P ?F IL E _ N A

Posted:N ovem ber 8,2016

This article appeared in:Volum e XVI,N um ber 4 (http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/ issue/fall-2016/ )

Com rade,your statem ent is factually incorrect.

Yes,it is.But it is politically correct.

he notion ofpoliticalcorrectness cam e into use am ong Com m unists

in the 1930s as a sem i-hum orous rem inder that the Partys interest is
to be treated as a reality that ranks above reality itself.Because all
progressives,Com m unists included,claim to be about creating new
hum an realities,they are perpetually at w ar against natures law s and lim its.
But since reality does not yield,progressives end up pretending that they
them selves em body those new realities.H ence,any progressive m ovem ents
nom inalgoaleventually ends up being subordinated to the urgent,
all-im portant question ofthe m ovem ents ow n pow er.Because that pow er is
insecure as long as others are able to question the truth ofw hat the
progressives say about them selves and the w orld,progressive m ovem ents
end up struggling not so m uch to create the prom ised new realities as to
force people to speak and act as ifthese w ere real:as ifw hat is correct
politicallyi.e.,w hat thoughts serve the partys interestw ere correct
factually.

Com m unist states furnish only the m ost prom inent exam ples ofsuch
attem pted groupthink.Progressive parties everyw here have sought to
m onopolize educationaland culturalinstitutions in order to force those
under their thum bs to sing their tunes or to shut up.But having brought
about the opposite ofthe prosperity,health,w isdom ,or happiness that their
ideology advertised,they have been unable to force folks to ignore the gap
betw een politicalcorrectness and reality.

Especially since the Soviet Em pires im plosion,leftists have argued that

Com m unism failed to create utopia not because ofany shortage ofm ilitary

2 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

or econom ic pow er but rather because it could not overcom e this gap.Is the
lesson for todays progressives,therefore,to push P.C.even harder,to place
even harsher penalties on dissenters? M any oftodays m ore discerning
European and Am erican progressives,in possession ofgovernm ents and
societys com m anding heights,know ing that they cannot w ield Soviet-style
repression and yet intent on beating dow n increasing popular resistance to
their projects,look for another approach to crushing culturalresistance.
Increasingly they cite the nam e ofAntonio G ram sci(18911937),a brilliant
Com m unist theoretician for w hom culturalhegem onyis the very purpose
ofthe struggle as w ellas its principalinstrum ent.H is w ritings envisage a
totalitarianism that elim inates the very possibility ofculturalresistance to
progressivism .But ow ing m ore to M achiavellithan to M arx or Lenin,they are
m ore than a little com plex about the m eans and are far from identicalw ith
the raw sort ofpow er over culture enforced by the Soviet Em pire or,for that
m atter,that is rife am ong us today.

M y purpose here is to explain how progressives have understood and

conducted their culturalw ar from the days ofLenin,and how G ram scis ow n
am biguous w ritings illustrate the choices they face in conducting that w ar in
our tim e and circum stancesespecially w ith regard to politicalcorrectness in
our present culture w ar.

Culture W ars

Every form ofprogressivism bases itselfon the claim ofa special,scientific,

know ledge ofw hat is w rong w ith hum anity and how to fix it.The form ula is
straightforw ard:the w orld is not as it should be because societys basic,
structuralfeature is ordered badly.Everything else is superstructural,
m eaning that it m erely reflects societys fundam entalfeature.For M arx and
his follow ers that feature is conflict over the m eans ofproduction in
present-day society.From the daw n oftim e,this class w arfare has led to
contradictions:betw een types ofw ork,tow n and country,oppressors or
oppressed,and so on.The proletariats victory in that conflict w illestablish a
new reality by crushing allcontradictions out ofexistence.O ther branches of
progressivism point to a different structuralproblem .For Freudians its
sexualm aladjustm ent,for follow ers ofRousseau its socialconstraint,for

3 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

positivists it is the insufficient application ofscientific m ethod,for others it

is oppression ofone race by another.O nce controlofsociety passes
exclusively into the hands ofthe proper set ofprogressives,each sects
contradictions m ust disappear as the basic structuralproblem is
straightened out.

But w herever progressives have gained pow er,allm anner ofcontradictions

have rem ained and new ones have arisen.Progressive m ovem ents have
reacted to this failure by becom ing their ow n reason for being.Theoretically,
the Revolution is about the pow er and necessity to recreate m ankind.In
practice,for alm ost allprogressive m ovem ents it is about gaining pow er for
the revolutionaries and m aking w ar on those w ho stand in their w ay.For
exam ple,transcending private property,the division oflabor,and political
oppression w as never M arxism -Leninism s core m otive any m ore than
w orker/peasant proletarians w ere ever its core protagonists.In fact,
Com m unism is an ideology by,of,and for ideologues,that ends up em pow ering
and celebrating those very ideologues.This is as true ofprogressivism s other
branches as it is ofM arxism .

Lenins sem inalcontribution w as explicitly to recognize the revolutionary

partys param ount prim acy,and to turn the partys pow er and prestige from a
m eans to revolution into the Revolutions candid end.Lenins w ritings,like
M arxs,contain no positive description offuture econom ic arrangem ents.
The Soviet econom y,for allits inefficiencies,functioned w ith Sw iss precision
as an engine ofprivilege for som e and ofm urderous deprivation for others.
The Com m unist Party had transcended com m unism .The key to
understanding w hat progressive parties in pow er do is the insight,
em phasized by elite theoristslike Vilfredo Pareto and G aetano M osca,that
any organizations practicalobjectives turn out to be w hat serves the
interests and proclivities ofits leaders.

W hat serves progressive revolutionariesinterests is not in doubt.Although

each ofprogressivism s branches differs in how it defines societys
structuralfault,in its ow n nam e for the hum an reality that it seeks to
overcom e,and in the m eans by w hich to achieve its ends,progressives from
the 19th century to our tim e are w ellnigh identicalin their personal

4 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

predilectionsin w hat and w hom they hate even m ore than in w hat they love.
They see the culture ofw hat M arxists callbourgeois m oralityas the
negation oftheir identity and authority.That identity,their identity,is to be
prom oted,endlessly,by endless w arfare against that culture.That is w hy the
culturalcam paigns ofotherw ise dissim ilar progressives have been so sim ilar.
Leninist Russia no less than various W estern dem ocrats have tried to
eradicate religion,to m ake it difficult for m en,w om en,and children to exist
as fam ilies,and to dem and that their subjects join them in celebrating the
new order that reflects their identity.N ote w ell:culturalw arfares
substantive goalis less im portant than the affirm ation ofthe w arriorsow n
identity.This is w hat explains the anim us w ith w hich progressives have
w aged their culture w ars.

Yet,notw ithstanding progressivism s prem ise that individualm inds m erely

reflect societys basic structure and hence are incapable ofreasoning
independently about true and false,better and w orse,reality forces
progressives to adm it that individuals often choose how they think or act
despite lacking the structuralbasis for doing so,or that they act contrary
to the econom ic,social,or racialclassesinto w hich progressive theories
divide m ankind.They callthis freedom ofthe hum an m ind false
consciousness.

Fighting against false consciousness is one reason w hy Com m unists and

other progressives end up treating culturalm atters supposedly
superstructuralas ifthey w ere structuraland basic.They do so by
pressuring people constantly to validate progressivism s theories,to
concelebrate victories over those on the w rongside ofhistory by exerting
controlover w ho says w hat to w hom .

The Soviet M odel

The Soviet regim e aim ed at the forcible transcendence ofbourgeois culture

by using its totalitarian pow er to the m axim um .By destroying nearly all
churches,killing nearly allpriests,punishing even the hint ofdissent,as w ell
as by m aking rejection ofbourgeois culture a condition for ascending to the
ruling class,it succeeded in pushing the old culture to near-destruction.But,

5 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

rather than establishing a new and better culture,m uch less the finaland
best,this step turned out instead to destroy the very basis ofSoviet pow er.

Progressive regim es dem and that persons w ho express them selves in public
(even in private)affirm any and allthings that pertain to the regim es identity
lest they lose access to jobs or privileges,and be exposed to the shunning or
ire ofregim e supportersifnot treated as crim inals.But even totalitarian
regim es can rew ard or punish only a few people at a tim e.Tacit collaboration
by m illions w ho bite their lip is even m ore essentialthan lip service by
thousands offavor seekers.H ence,to stim ulate at least passive cooperation,
the party strives to give the im pression that everybodyis already on its
side.

But w hy then did the Com m unist Party alw ays spare a few churches? W hy
report criticism s ofitselffrom abroad? W hy,from tim e to tim e,did the party
publicize dissidents from its ranks? W henever the party w ould m ount a
cam paign on behalfofone ofits cultural-politicalcauses,it w ould designate
a few persons to personify the opposition,and direct allsocially acceptable
organs and spokespersons to unload their w orst upon them .W hy,from the
Soviet U nion to China to Cuba,w ould the party schoolits young cadres by
taking them to observe and m ock church services attended by poor,old,
socially repulsive outcasts? In part,because each sm iting ofculturalenem ies
reinforced the cadres identity.It m ade them feelbetter about them selves,
and m ore pow erful.H ad there been no rem nants ofthe old society,or
dissidents,the party m ight have m anufactured them .

But continued efforts to force people to celebrate the partys ersatz reality,
to affirm things that they know are not true and to deny others they know to
be trueto live by liesrequires breaking them ,reducing them to a sense of
fearfulisolation,destroying their self-esteem and their capacity to trust
others.G eorge O rw ells novel1984 dram atized this culture w ars ends and
m eans:nothing less than the substitution ofthe partys authority for the
reality conveyed by hum an senses and reason.Big Brothers agent,having
berated the hapless W inston for preferring his ow n view s to societys
dictates,finished breaking his spirit by holding up four fingers and
dem anding that W inston acknow ledge seeing five.

6 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

Thus did the Soviet regim e create dysfunctional,cynical,and resentful

subjects.Because C om m unism confused destruction ofbourgeois culture
w ith culturalconquest,it w on allthe culturalbattles w hile losing its culture
w ar long before it collapsed politically.As Com m unists identified them selves
in peoples m inds w ith falsehood and fraud,people cam e to identify truth
w ith anything other than the officials and their doctrines.Inevitably,they
also identified them w ith corruption and privation.And so it w as that,
w henever the authorities announced that the harvest had been good,the
people hoarded potatoes;and that m ore and m ore people w ho knew nothing
ofChristianity except that the authorities had anathem atized it,started
w earing crosses.

The Road N ot Taken

Few progressives have been hum ble enough to understand the Soviet
experience and hence to search for a better path to replacing bourgeois
culture w ith their ow n.Antonio G ram sciblazed such a trail,but,given its
am biguities,progressives have follow ed it in very different directions.

G ram scistarted from m ixed philosophicalprem ises.First,orthodox

M arxism :There is no such thing as hum an nature,fixed and im m utable,he
w rote.Rather,hum an nature is the sum ofhistorically determ ined social
relationships.The m odern princes job is to change it.W holly unorthodox,
how ever,w as his scorn for M arxism s insistence that econom ic factors are
fundam entalw hile allelse is superstructural.N o,stufflike that is for
com m on folk,a little form ulafor half-baked intellectuals w ho dont w ant
to w ork their brains.For G ram sci,econom ic relations w ere just one part of
socialreality,the chiefparts ofw hich w ere intellectualand m oral.H e
retained Aristotelian roots.For him ,physicalscience is the reflection ofan
unchanging realityin w hich teleologyand finalcausalityexist.But
orthodox M arxism and Aristotle com e together in w hat he calls the
dialectic,the point ofw hich is to create a new reality out ofthe old.

G ram scico-founded Italys Com m unist Party in 1921.In 1926,M ussolinijailed

him .By the tim e he died eleven years later,he had com posed tw elve prison

7 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

notebooks.In private correspondence,he criticized Stalins literary judgm ent

and deem ed his attacks on Leon Trotsky irresponsible and dangerous.But
publicly,he supported every turn ofthe Soviet Party lineeven giving his
party boss,Palm iro Togliatti,authority to m odify his w ritings.Im prisoned
and in failing health,he w as intellectually freer and physically safer than ifhe
had been exposed to the intra-Com m unist purges that killed so m any ofhis
com rades.

G ram scis concept ofculturalhegem onyalso sw ung both w ays.Its

em phasis on transform ing the enem y rather than killing him outright w as at
odds w ith the Com m unist Partys brute-force approach.H is focus on cultural
m atters,reversing as it did the standard distinction betw een structure and
superstructure,suggested beliefin the m inds autonom y.O n the other hand,
the very idea ofpersuading m inds not through reasoning on w hat is true and
false,good and bad,according to nature,but rather by creating a new
historicalreality,is precisely w hat he shares w ith M arx and other
progressives indeed w ith the fountainhead ofm odern thought,N iccol
M achiavelli.

G ram sciturned to M achiavellim ore than to M arx to discover how best to

replace the existing order and to secure that replacem ent.C hapter V of
M achiavellis The Prince stated that the only secure w ayto controla people
w ho had been accustom ed to live under its ow n law s is to destroy it.But
M achiavellis objective w as to conquer people though their m inds,not to
destroy them .In Chapter VIofThe Prince he w rote that nothing is m ore
difficult than to establish new m odes and orders,that this requires
persuadingpeoples ofcertain things,that it is necessary w hen they no
longer believe to m ake them believe by force,and that this is especially
difficult for unarm ed prophets.But M achiavellialso w rote that,ifsuch
prophets succeed in inculcating a new set ofbeliefs,they can count on being
pow erful,secure,honored and happy.H e clarified this insight in D iscourses
on Livy Book II,chapter 5:w hen it happens that the founders ofthe new
religion speak a different language,the destruction ofthe old religion is
easily effected.The M achiavellian revolutionary,then,m ust inculcate new
w ays ofthinking and speaking that am ount to a new language.In the

8 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

D iscourse U pon O ur Language,M achiavellihad com pared using ones ow n

language to infiltrate the enem ys thoughts w ith Rom es use ofits ow n troops
to controlallied arm ies.This is the tem plate that G ram scisuperim posed on
the problem s ofthe Com m unist revolution a tem plate m ade by one
unarm ed prophetfor use by others.

M achiavelliis the point ofdeparture in a section ofG ram scis Prison

N otebooks that describes how the party is to rule as the m odern prince.But
the m odern princes task is so big that it can be undertaken seriously only by
a party (in som e 50 references he leaves out the w ord Com m unist),w hich
he defines as an organism ;a com plex,collective elem ent ofsociety w hich
has already begun to crystallize as a collective w illthat has becom e conscious
ofitselfthrough action.This prince,this party,has to be the organizer and
the active expression ofm oraland intellectualreform that cannot be tied to
an econom ic program .Rather,w hen econom ic reform grow s out ofm oral
and intellectualreform ,from germ s ofcollective w illthat tend to becom e
universaland total,then it can becom e the basis ofthe secularization ofall
life and custom .

The party-prince accom plishes this by being Jacobin in the historic and
conceptualsense.G ram sciw rites:that is w hat M achiavellim eant by reform
ofthe m ilitia,w hich the Jacobins did in the French Revolution.The party
m ust gather consensus from each ofsocietys discrete parts by persuading
inducingpeople w ho had never thought ofsuch things to join in w ays of
life radically different from their ow n.The party develops its organized
forceby a m inutely careful,m olecular,capillary process m anifested in an
endless quantity ofbooks and pam phlets,ofarticles in m agazines and
new spapers,and by personaldebates repeated infinitely and w hich,in their
gigantic altogether,com prise the w ork out ofw hich arises a collective w ill
w ith a certain hom ogeneity.But note w ellthat the Jacobins used no little
coercion to achieve their nation in arm s.

W hich is it then for G ram sci? D oes the party inspire or perhaps cajole
consensusor does it force it? H is answ er is am biguous:M achiavelliaffirm s
rather clearly that the state is to be run by fixed principles by w hich virtuous
citizens can live secure against arbitrary treatm ent.Justly,how ever,

9 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

M achiavellireduces allto politics,to the art ofgoverning m en,ofassuring

their perm anent consensus.The m atter,he w rites,m ust be regarded from
the double perspective[that] corresponds to the double nature of
M achiavellis centaur,beastly and hum an,offorce and consensus,of
authority and hegem onyoftactics and strategy.Indeed that is M achiavellis
point:w hatever it takes.

The key to G ram scis generalities and subtleties is to be found in his gingerly
discussion ofthe relationship betw een the party and Christianity.Although
other politicalparties m ay no longer exist,there w illalw ays exist de facto
parties or tendenciesin such parties,culturalm atters predom inatehence,
politicalcontroversies take on culturalform s and,as such,tend to becom e
irresolvable.Translation:the progressive party-state (the party acting as a
governm ent,the governm ent acting as a party)cannot escape the role of
authoritativeperhaps forcefulm ediator ofsocietalconflicts having to do
w ith culturalm atters and m ust see to it that they are resolved its w ay.

Specifically:as G ram sciw as w riting,M ussolinis 1929 Concordat w ith the

Vatican w as proving to be his m ost successfulpoliticalm aneuver.By
rem oving the form alenm ity betw een the Church and the post-French-
Revolution state,m aking Catholicism the state religion and paying its
hierarchy,M ussolinihad turned Italys m ost pervasive culturalinstitution
from an enem y to a friendly vassal.Thousands ofpriests and m illions oftheir
flock w ould bend thoughts,w ords,and deeds to fit the party-states
definition ofgood citizenship.G ram scidescribed the post-C oncordat
Church as having becom e an integralpart ofthe State,ofpoliticalsociety
m onopolized by a certain privileged group that aggregated the Church unto
itselfthe better to sustain its m onopoly w ith the support ofthat part ofcivil
society represented by the Church.A m orally and intellectually
com prom ised Church in the fascist states hands,M ussolinihoped and
G ram scifeared,w ould redefine its teachings and its socialpresence to fascist
specifications.The alternative to this subversiondenigrating and restricting
the Church in the nam e offascism w ould have pushed m any Catholics to
em brace their doctrines fundam entals ever m ore tightly in opposition to the
party.The Concordat w as the effective tem plate for the rest ofw hat
M ussolinicalled the corporate state.

10 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

G ram scicalled the sam e phenom enon a blocco storico,historic bloc,that

aggregates societys various sectors under the party-states direction.The
intellectuals,said G ram sci,are the bloccos leading elem ent.In any given
epoch they w eld w orkers,peasants,the church,and other groups into a unit
in w hich the people live and m ove and have their being,and from w ithin
w hich it is difficult ifnot im possible to im agine alternatives.Pow er,used
judiciously,acts on people the w ay the sun acts on sunflow ers.W ithin this
bloc,ideas m ay retain their nam es w hile changing in substance,w hile a new
language grow s organically.As G ram scinoted,M achiavellihad argued that
language is the key to the m astery ofconsciousnessa m astery m ore secure
than anything that force alone can achieve.But note that M achiavellis
m etaphors on linguistic w arfare allrefer to violence.H ow m uch force does it
take to m ake this historic bloc cohere and to keep recalcitrants in it?
G ram scis silence seem s to say;w hatever m ay be needed.After all,M ussolini
used as m uch as he thought he needed.

In sum ,M ussolini,not Stalin;forcefulseduction,not rape,is G ram scis

practicaladvice regarding culturalhegem ony.H e im putes this preference to
M achiavelli,w ho w ants to create new relationships am ong forces and m ust
occupy him selfw ith that w hich should be.But this is not an arbitrary
choice,nor is it m erely desire,love w ith the clouds.A politicalm an such as
M achiavelliis a creator and inciter w ho does not create from nothingness,
nor does he m ove in the em pty w hirlofhis desires and dream s.H e grounds
him selfon the effectualtrutha relationship offorces in constant m ovem ent
and equilibrium .G ram scim eans to replace W estern culture by subverting it,
by doing w hat it takes to com pelit to redefine itself,rather than by picking
fights w ith it.

G ram scis Choice

The G ram scian vision ofhegem ony over culture is not a panacea.In practice,
todays progressive intellectuals are in the sam e fix as M arx,Lenin,or
M ussolini:societys socioeconom ic forces are not beating dow n the doors to
join any G ram scian historic bloc,any m ore than the w orkershad rushed
to be the M arxist revolutions battering ram .Todays progressive intellectuals,

11 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

deeply engaged in culturalw arfare,face the sam e choices as Lenin or

M ussolini:w eld together societys disparate culturalsectors authoritatively
and judiciously,or destroy them .The choice is basically betw een M ussolinian
seduction or Leninist rape.

This difference in preference is,roughly,w hat divides continentalEuropean

G ram scians from Anglo-Am erican ones.

By the 1970s,socialist parties in Europe had achieved som ething like

m onopolies ofpoliticalpow er.But the w orking classescam e to resent the
culturalpreferences that the socialists im posed,in addition to their
unsatisfactory governm ent.In our tim e,socialist parties in Europe pollin the
teens or single digits.Som e progressive politicians have sought the reason
and the rem edy for this by reference to G ram sci prim arily to the
M ussolinian version ofG ram scian politics.The French socialist G aelBrustier
in his book,A D em ain G ram sci(Bye-Bye G ram sci,2015)is prototypical.

The Left,w rites Brustier,is no longer in a position ofculturalhegem ony

because it lost its grip on w hat G ram scicalled the com m on sense,the
com plex ofideas and beliefs that people take for granted.It lost that grip
because it m istook the positions ofpow er that it had conquered for pow er
itself.H ence,w hile the Left nourished illusions about itself,the Right w as
w inning a vigorous culturalw arby profiting from collective anguish
provoked by decline and loss ofclass statusam ong ordinary people.W hile
the Left w as w inning pow er,the Right w as w inning m inds.Brustier
concludes by asking W hat is to be done w ith pow er in w hich no one believes
any longer?

That slap in his com radesfaces is factually m istaken only in that it confuses
the Right w ith the de-cultured m asses ofEuropeans w ho reject the form alor
inform alunipartycoalitions that are the legacy ofthe Lefts cultural-
politicalhegem ony.In fact,as in form er Soviet lands,progressive hegem ony
in Europe produced people w ho believe in nothing.N evertheless,these
people inhabit a w orld very different from that in w hich leftist intellectuals
live.Progressives,Brustier w arns,m ust not attribute this culturaldifference
to false consciousness.H e recalls that G ram scitaught:the people are

12 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

neither blind nor stupid nor slaves.G ram scis w hole point,Brustier rem inds
his com rades,w as to lead classes w ho really are different from the
intellectuals to adhere to them .Therefore,fighting over values is,in itself,a
negation ofculturalhegem ony.H e com plains,that his colleagues m ake
them selves feelgood by singing The Internationale.But by w ay ofansw ering
to the problem s oftoday,they offer only subm ission.Behaving this w ay is
counterproductive.

Brustier cites the disdain in w hich the Socialist Party has held the Catholic
w orldas a typicalerror,spoiling any chance ofculturalhegem ony.This
should have been clear to the Left,he declares,w ellbefore a m illion
Frenchm en dem onstrated in the streets ofParis against the socialist
governm ents extension ofm arriage to hom osexuals in 2013 and 2014.By
prom ulgating that law ,the Left had insulted the w ay in w hich that w orld
m akes sense ofits m em bersdaily experiences.By calling hundreds of
thousands ofyoung people old bigots,it m ade enem ies ofpeople w ho had
not been enem ies before.W hat sense does it m ake,he w onders,to pick
fights w ith people w hom w e cannot coerce? That law m ade the socialists feel
good.But w hat did cham pioning it do to advance the socialist revolution? By
this G ram scian standard,the law is stupid.

But,by that standard,w rites Brustier,the Am erican com rades are even m ore
stupid.Follow ing the advice ofsuch as N oam Chom sky,Am erican Leftists had
gone so far as to recognize a num ber ofenem ies ofthe em pire(the U nited
States)as potentialalliesthis certainly does not correspond w ith the
feelings ofthe Am erican peoples m ajority.By doing such things,argues
Brustier,the U .S.Left is m aking itselfa politicalfringe.

Am erican progressive intellectuals,how ever,see them selves as the soulof

the D em ocratic Party,w hich is at the head ofAm ericas ruling class.N ot yet
having experienced the kind ofrejection that their European counterparts
have,they revelin their success in changing Am erican culture over the past
half-century,and look to G ram scian notions ofculturalhegem ony as
confirm ing their practice offorcing their ow n culturalidentities onto
Am erica.The D em ocratic Partys constituencies already endorse its
intellectualsaim not to convince the rest ofsociety,but to subdue it.For

13 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

them ,this is the Revolution.They have chosen the Leninist rather than the
M ussolinian alternative.

They reason that Am ericas socio-politicalorder is founded on racism ,

patriarchy,genocidalim perialism ,as w ellas econom ic exploitation.G ram scis
historic bloccan com e about through the joint pursuit ofracialjustice,
gender justice,econom ic justice,and anti-im perialism .The Revolution is all
about the oppressed classes uniting to inflict upon the oppressors the
retribution that each ofthe oppressed yearns for.This intersubjective
com m unity includes the severalgroups w hose identity negates a piece of
Am erican culturereligious,racial,sexual,econom ic.Together,they negate it
all.

Regardless ofw hat G ram sciw rote or m eant about using the party-states
pow er over culturalinstitutions to subvert and transform the rest ofsociety,
for the Am erican Left culturalhegem ony m eans using this pow er to suffocate
Judeo-Christian civilization in its severalcradles;to allow in public discourse
only such thoughts as serve the identity ofthe partys constituent groups;
and to denigrate,delegitim ize,and possibly outlaw allothers.In short,it
m eans politicalcorrectness as w e know it.

PoliticalCorrectness

For m ost Am ericans w ho have heard ofG ram scis concept ofcultural
hegem ony,it signifies P.C.s suffocating purpose.But because P.C.consists
precisely ofw hat G ram scicondem ned as picking fights w ith the com m on
sense ofpeople w hom it cannot w holly control,the Am erican Lefts
understanding ofculturalhegem ony suggests that its culture w ar w illnot
end as it intends.

Beginning in the 1960s,from Boston to Berkeley,the teachers ofAm ericas

teachers absorbed and taught a new ,CliffsN otes-style sacred history:
Am erica w as born tainted by W estern Civilizations originalsins racism ,
sexism ,greed,genocide against natives and the environm ent,allw rapped in
religious obscurantism ,and on the basis ofhypocriticalprom ises offreedom
and equality.Secular saints from H erbert Croly and W oodrow W ilson to

14 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

Franklin Roosevelt and Barack O bam a have been redeem ing those prom ises,
placing Am erica on the path ofgreater justice in the face ofresistance from
the m ass ofAm ericans w ho are racist,sexist,but above allstupid.To
consider such persons on the sam e basis as their betters w ould be,as
President O bam a has called it,false equivalence.

Thus credentialed,m olded,and opinionated,a uniform class now presides

over nearly allfederal,and state,governm ent bureaucracies,over the m edia,
the educationalestablishm ent,and m ajor corporations.Like a fraternity,it
requires speaking the inlanguage signifying that one is on the right side,
and joins to bring griefupon outsiderAm ericans w ho run afoulofits
m em bers.Video the illegaltrafficking in aborted babiesbody parts by
governm ent-financed Planned Parenthood,as did D avid D aleiden and Sandra
M erritt,and you end up indicted for a felony as the ruling class m edia tells
the w orld that the video really does not show w hat it show s.

N o m ore than its European counterparts does Am ericas progressive ruling

class offer any vision oftruth,goodness,beauty,or advantage to attract the
rest ofsociety to itself.Like its European kin,allthat Am erican progressivism
offers is obedience to the ruling class,enforced by politicalcorrectness.N or
is there any endpoint to w hat is politically correct,any m ore than there ever
w as to Com m unism .H ere and now ,as everyw here and alw ays,it com es dow n
to glorifying the party and hum bling the rest.

Ifculturalhegem ony m erely m eant achieving the progressive ruling classs

near m onopoly ofAm ericas culturalinstitutions,the conflict ended a
generation ago:the rulers w on.But because the ruling class acts as ifthe old
cultures recalcitrant rem nants m erit ever m ore intensive efforts to crush
them ,culturalhegem ony by P.C.m eans an endless cycle ofinsult and
resentm ent,guaranteeing the conflicts perm anence.By contrast,G ram scis
concept ofculturalhegem ony (follow ing M achiavelli),sought a definitive
victory:the transform ation and synthesis ofsocietys severalculturalstrains
into som ething that so transcends them that no one could possibly look
backw arde.g.,as Christianity obviated the gods ofRom e and ofthe
barbarians alike.M ost im portant,M achiavelli,follow ed by G ram sci,sought
culturalhegem onys sealon pow er as a m eans to a greater end:for

15 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

M achiavelli,that m eant politicalgrandeur like that ofRom e (or m aybe

Renaissance Spain).For G ram sci,it m eant achieving the M arxist utopia.

W hy does the Am erican Left dem and ever-new P.C.obeisances? In 2012 no

one w ould have thought that defining m arriage betw een one m an and one
w om an,as enshrined in U .S.law ,w ould brand those w ho do so as m otivated
by a culpable psychopathology called hom ophobia,subject to fines and
near-outlaw status.N ot until2015-16 did it occur to anyone that requiring
persons w ith m ale personalplum bing to use public bathroom s reserved for
m en w as a sign ofthe sam e pathology.W hy had not these becom e part ofthe
P.C.dem ands previously? W hy is there no canon ofP.C.that,once filled,
w ould require no further additions?

Because the point ofP.C.is not and has never been m erely about any ofthe
item s that it im poses,but about the im position itself.M uch less is it about
creating a definable com m on culture or achieving som e definable good.O n
the retaillevel,it is about the Am ericans ruling classs felt need to squeeze
the last drops ofvoter participation out ofthe D em ocratic Partys habitual
constituencies.O n the w holesale level,it is a w ar on civilization w aged to
indulge identity politics.

H ow D oes This M ovie End?

The im position ofP.C .has no logicalend because feeling better about ones
selfby confessing other peoples sins,hum iliating and hurting them ,is an
addictive pleasure the appetite for w hich grow s w ith each satisfaction.The
m ore fault Ifind in thee,the holier (or,at least,the trendier)Iam than thou.
The w orse you are,the better Iam and the m ore pow er Ishould have over
you.Am ericas ruling class seem s to have adopted the view that the rest of
Am erica should be treated as inm ates in reeducation cam ps.As H arvard Law
SchoolProfessor M ark Tushnet argued earlier this year in a blog post,this
m eans not trying to accom m odate the losers,w horem em berdefended,
and are defending,positions that liberals regard as having no norm ative pull
at all.Trying to be nice to the losers didnt w ork w ellafter the CivilW ar.

This vicarious yearning for the pow er ofvictors in civilw ar,how ever,has

16 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

nothing to do w ith G ram sci,never m ind w ith M achiavelli,w ho thought in

term s ofsubverting the enem ies one does not kill,rather than ofreveling in
breaking their spirit by inflicting indignities.People,he w rote,are to be
caressed or extinguished.Insulting people w ho are not perm anently
disem pow ered is funbut ofthe expensive and dangerous kind,because it
engenders at least as m uch sullenness and revolt as subm ission.

The question that G aelBrustier asked ofthe French Socialist Party can be
asked ofAm ericas ruling class:w hat do you think you are doing? By
dem anding ever m ore insulting conditions ofpotentialallies,you jeopardize a
cam paign ofsubversion that is going very w ellfor you.W hy issue calls to
arm s to your enem ies?

Consider the m ain enem y:religion.Am ericas m ainline Protestant

denom inations have long since delivered their (dim inishing)flocks to the
ruling classs progressive priorities.Pope Francis advertises his refusalto
judge attacks on W estern civilization,including the m urder ofpriests.H is
com m itm ent ofthe Catholic C hurch to the building ofa new hum anity,as
he put it at Julys W orld Youth D ay in Krakow ,opens the C atholic C hurch to
redefining Christianity to progressive m issions in progressive term s,a
m ission already accom plished at G eorgetow n U niversity,N otre D am e,and
other form er bastions ofAm erican Catholicism now turned into bastions of
Am erican progressivism .Evangelicalleaders seem eager not to be left behind.
G ram sciw ould have advised that enlisting Am ericas religious establishm ents
in the service ofthe ruling classs larger priorities need not have cost nearly
as m uch as M ussolinipaid in 1929.Refraining from frontalchallenges to
essentials w ould be enough.

Instead,Am ericas progressives add insult to injury by im posing sam e-sex

m arriage,hom osexuality,globalw arm ing,and other fashions because they
really have no priorities beyond them selves.Am ericas progressive rulers,like
Frances,act less as politicians gathering support than as conquerors w ho
enjoy punishing captives w ithout w orry that the tables m ay turn.

But as the turning point against progressive culturalhegem ony cam e to

other lands,it seem s to be com ing to Am erica as w ell.G ram scihad w ritten of

17 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

M achiavellis prince and ofhis ow n new princethat his realm w ould be one
in w hich allgood citizens could feelsecure from arbitrariness.But
arbitrariness is precisely w hat our m asters ofP.C.have fastened onto the
Am erican politicalsystem .

Consider our ruling classs very latest dem and:Am ericans m ust agree that
som eone w ith a penis can be a w om an,w hile som eone else w ith a vagina can
be a m an.Com plying w ith such arbitrariness is beyond hum an capacity.In
O rw ells 1984,as noted,Big Brothers agent dem anded that W inston
acknow ledge seeing five fingers w hile he w as holding up four.But that is
sm allstuffnext to w hat the U .S.ruling class is dem anding ofa free people.
Because courts and agencies just im pose their diktats,w ithout bothering to
try to persuade,m illions ofprecisely the kind ofcitizens w ho prize stability
have becom e w illing to take a w recking ballto w hat little rem ains ofthe
Am erican republic,not caring so m uch w hat happens next.

It is surprising that,in 2015-16,our ruling class w as surprised by D onald

Trum p.Though he rem ained obedient to m ost ofP.C.s specific dem ands and
rem ained largely a liberalD em ocrat,it sufficed for him to disdain P.C.in
general,and to insult its purveyors,for Trum p to becom e liberalism s Public
Enem y N um ber O ne.W illiam G alstons colum n in the W allStreet Journal
barely begins to get a sense ofhow his classs Leninist seizure ofAm ericas
culture has m iscarried.

[Trum ps] cam paign has ruthlessly exposed the illusions ofw ell-educated
m iddle-class professionalspeople like m e.W e believed that changes in law
and public norm s had gradually brought about changes in private attitudes
across partisan and ideologicallines.

M r.Trum p has proved us w rong.H is critique ofpoliticalcorrectness has

destroyed m any taboos and has given his follow ers license to say w hat they
really think.Beliefs w e m ocked now com m and a m ajority in one ofthe
w orlds oldest politicalparties,and som etim es in the electorate as a w hole.

The point is not Trum p,but the fact that though the ruling class pushed

18 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

W estern civilization aside,it did not replace it w ith any culturalhegem ony in
the G ram scian-M achiavellian sense.Rather,by pushing P.C.defined as
inflicting indignities,the progressives destroyed the legitim acy ofany and all
authority,forem ost their ow n.

M y 2010 article for the Am erican Spectator,The Ruling Class and the Perils
ofRevolution,argued that som e tw o-thirds ofAm ericans a few D em ocratic
voters,m ost Republican voters,and allindependentslack a vehicle in
electoralpolitics.Resentm ent ofthe patent disregard for the Constitution
and statutes w ith w hich the ruling class has perm eated Am erican life,along
w ith its culturalw ar enforced by P.C.,m eant that Sooner or later,w ellor
badly,that m ajoritys dem and for representation w illbe filled.Inoted:
U nfortunately,it is easier for anyone w ho dislikes a courts or an officials
unlaw fulact to counter it w ith another unlaw fulone than to draw allparties
back to the foundation oftruth.

That is because a m ajority ofAm ericans realizing that the Constitution and
the law s have ceased to protect them from unending injuries to their w ay of
life;aggravated by being insulted as irredem ableand deplorableracists,
sexists,etc.;eager for reliefand,yes,for payback w ith interest;know ing that
the ruling class is closed to argum ent from those it considers its
inferiors have no option but to turn the tables in the hope that,suffering the
sam e kind ofinsulting oppression,the ruling class m ight learn the value of
treating others as they them selves like to be treated.M ore likely,doing this
w ould be one m ore turn in the spiralofreprisals typicalofrevolutions.And
yet,there seem s no w ay ofavoiding this.

W hat is to be done w ith a politicalsystem in w hich no one any longer believes?

This is a revolutionary question because Am ericas ruling class largely
destroyed,along w ith its ow n credibility,the respect for truth,and the
culture ofrestraint that had m ade the Am erican people unique stew ards of
freedom and prosperity.W illfulm asses alienated from civilization turn alltoo
naturally to revolutionsnaturalleaders.D onald Trum p only foreshadow s the
im placable m en w ho,Abraham Lincoln w arned,belong to the fam ily ofthe
lion and the tribe ofthe eagle.

19 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

In short,the P.C.changes in law and public norm s(to quote G alston again)
that the ruling class im posed on the rest ofAm erica,rather than having
gradually brought about changes in private attitudes across partisan and
ideologicallinesas the ruling class im agined (and as G ram sciw ould have
approved)have set offa revolutionofw hich w e can be sure only that it
w ont be pretty.

Back (http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/article/w hats-left/)|Section (http://w w w .clarem ont.org

/crb/w hat-is-inside/essays-269/)|Table of Contents (http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/ issue/fall-
2016/)|N ext(http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/article/voice-of-civilization/ )

(http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/article/ties-that-bind/ )

TIES TH AT BIN D (H TTP:// W W W .CLAREM O N T.O RG / CRB/ARTICLE/ TIES-
TH AT-BIN D/ )
By:D avid Azerrad

O ur problem is that our perceptions are distorted by nostalgia.

(http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/article/horror-show /)

H O RRO R SH O W (H TTP:// W W W .CLAREM O N T.O RG / CRB/ARTICLE/ H O RRO R-
SH O W / )
By:M artha Bayles

W hat does The W alking D ead say about Am erican anxieties?

 

Advertising (http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/advertising/ )

C ontact the Editor (http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/contactEditor/ )
(http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/contactEditor/ )
(http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/contactEditor/ )M asthead
(http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/m asthead/ )
Publication C om m ittee (http://w w w .clarem ont.org/crb/pubC om / )

20 of 21 1/18 14:54
The Rise of Political Correctness http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

---

O pinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the view s

of the editors,the C larem ont Institute,or its board of directors.N othing in
this journal,w hether in print or pixels,is an attem pt to aid or hinder the
passage of any bill or influence the election of any candidate.

C larem ont Institute

21 of 21 1/18 14:54