After reading several of the comments for this piece, I feel like many of the counter arguments are completely valid to address and hopefully the author can address in a follow up or in the following piece in his series. Unfortunately the argument here is flawed in the first place, at times hilariously characterizing the “New Left” (I’m still not sure what that defines) as a stealth group of language watchers that are observing every online communication that passes through the channels; at other times the argument falls on the author making the same assumptions on the party he speaks off in the same way he claims they are behaving. Some of these fallacies such as the claim that the New Leftists are not capable of holding multiple positions when in fact, those same individuals may consider themselves feminists as well as environmentalists or perhaps even some may hold one of these positions and have some conservative values.
Another one is the “bigger fish to fry” argument that you’ll occasionally see in debates. Not to render the issues presented invalid or not worthy of its own conversation, but the usage of the argument only shifts the argument away from the main concern, which is what I gather to be an explanation or an analysis on the moral grounding of the New Left on the internet (because the author stems many of the examples of their behavior from social media interactions and the like). So why would a subset of a population that’s based in a first world environment would take the time to reflect on how their ideology matches up with the “big picture”? That’s an unusual and highly unsettling standard for an ideology to be judged upon.
“I’m a feminist who wishes to bring equal treatment and respect in terms of salary, job opportunities, and public opinion but you know what? There are some countries where women are not even allowed leave to their homes so maybe my idea isn’t that noble.” Lolwut?
As many others who commented on the article have said, Political Correctness itself is not a first year spawn, it existed before and most of the time it is due to a demographic feeling that the type of rhetoric is it countering against are not needed in a public space.
Now clearly, I am not claiming that all of the author’s complaints are unwarranted. No, it is not a marketing strategy taken upon by the elites to bestow upon themselves so they can feel the same morality as one would feel finding out that they have made it on Santa’s Nice list, but it is not inconceivable to think that some are using the platform to feel better about themselves. Yes, they are instances where the quick judging of a tweet or status and the inability to discuss has stunted debates or conversations, but the very same concerns can be raised on the notion that the political incorrect comments already stunts the conversation in the first place.