‘Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.’
George Orwell

Public pressure for overuse of political correctness in our world seems to fulfill the same role as Newspeak did in the world of ’1984′ on a lesser scale. The Orwellian instrument aimed to eliminate insubordinate thoughts altogether whereas abuse of political correctness is designed to prevent people from expressing their opinion freely. Unfortunately, the mechanism remains the same. Everyone who dares to use words deemed ‘politically incorrect’ submits himself to allegations of racism, homophobia or sexism. It does not matter anymore whether his point was valid or not, he is eliminated from the dabate. It a dangerous practice as it prevents any form of criticism. Criticism itself is not an evidence of rudeness but rather of sound mind. ‘Question, question everything’. Only weak minds accept everything that comes without consideration. Therefore, as long as the criticism is not offensive it is an honourable deed. It is a shame that our society becomes less and less suspicious of what is told, especially by the Government.

However, lack of political correctness should be distinguished from disrespectful and aggressive behaviour that inevitably and gravely offends person towards whom is launched, not only their actions.The higher the intellectual standard one represents, the more eloquent the criticism should express. If the same opinion might be expressed in two different ways of which one is of offensive nature and the other is not, it would be wise to choose the politically correct one. It is not a devious invention as long as is used reasonably. It is the misuse and abuse of it that makes it dangerous. Moreover, by eliminating insults, it could actually improve the standard of the public debate.