Difference between revisions of "Talk:Politically correct"
(Nazi and Communist ideas) |
(Sorces) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
I also remember reading a European immigrant's writings about Nazi and Communist ideas of [[socially correct]] or [[ideologically correct]] ideas and language. It had more to do with content than wording, IIRC. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 12:32, 9 April 2007 (EDT) | I also remember reading a European immigrant's writings about Nazi and Communist ideas of [[socially correct]] or [[ideologically correct]] ideas and language. It had more to do with content than wording, IIRC. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 12:32, 9 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Sorces == | ||
| + | |||
| + | ''There are many outrageous examples of what is now considered objectionable in modern text books'' | ||
| + | The source is to a description of a book written by [[Diane Ravitch]] and all I could find is ''A typical publisher’s guideline advises that...'' There is no mention of which publisher(s) or which textbooks. That is perhaps quoting opinion as fact and is likely in breach of [[Conservapedia:Commandments]] 2, footnote 1. The book itself perhaps does mention which publisher(s) or textbooks. The book and page number should be given as the source. As it stands at the moment accuracy is questionable. | ||
| + | [[User:WhatIsG0ing0n|WhatIsG0ing0n]] 13:03, 9 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 17:03, April 9, 2007
Hmmm. One hears so much about the "mainstream" these days. It would seem to me that, if conservatism is really based on unchanging, immutable principles, then a true conservative should not give a d*** about whether he is in the mainstream or not, and should not invoke the mainstream (besides, since some liberal views, such as the call for universal health care, are now supported by a vast majority, couldn't they then just as readily lay claim to the "mainstream" as well?? Boethius
- And, not for nothing, but a source wouldn't be uncalled for somewhere in there. Myk 11:11, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
- Well there are a handful of sources now, but I can't write this thing by myself. Everwill 15:02, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
Origins of the term
I remember seeing an old campus comic strip with "Political Correctnessman" as a caped superhero.
I also remember reading a European immigrant's writings about Nazi and Communist ideas of socially correct or ideologically correct ideas and language. It had more to do with content than wording, IIRC. --Ed Poor 12:32, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
Sorces
There are many outrageous examples of what is now considered objectionable in modern text books The source is to a description of a book written by Diane Ravitch and all I could find is A typical publisher’s guideline advises that... There is no mention of which publisher(s) or which textbooks. That is perhaps quoting opinion as fact and is likely in breach of Conservapedia:Commandments 2, footnote 1. The book itself perhaps does mention which publisher(s) or textbooks. The book and page number should be given as the source. As it stands at the moment accuracy is questionable. WhatIsG0ing0n 13:03, 9 April 2007 (EDT)