|
Home | Notes
Contributors
Archives | Search
Links | About
..........
Julia Gorin
 The America Show
Episode 4
Jesus and Mordy
Watch Video Now
..........

Conservatives Are From Mars, Liberals Are From San Francisco
by Burt Prelutsky
.........

America Alone
by Mark Steyn
..........

..........
The
CRO Store
..........

..........
|
|
FELLOW
TRAVELER |
Profiling,
Politics and Political Correctness
by J. F. Kelly, Jr. [writer]
8/31/06 |
The
civil rights and women’s liberation movements in America
gave birth to a wave of political correctness and revisionism,
demonstrating
that even
good causes can produce some unfortunate consequences. Political correctness
was nurtured on university campuses until it grew into a cause of its own,
its practitioners striving to outdo each other in applying it to any speech
and behavior. Eventually, it got out of control, spreading to Europe. It inspired
some truly ridiculous notions of proper speech and behavior, distorting the
way we used to interact and communicate with each other.
Contributor
J.F. Kelly, Jr.
J.F.
Kelly, Jr. is a retired Navy Captain and bank executive
who writes on current events and military subjects.
He is a resident of Coronado, California. [go to Kelly index] |
In the process, candor and honesty often gave way to cautious,
sanitized speech, carefully edited to avoid the possibility of
offending any member of a growing list of minority, disadvantaged
or under-appreciated groups. The requirement for diversity and
inclusion became paramount. Terms had to be modified to become
gender-neutral. Textbooks and prayers had to be re-written less
someone feel slighted, excluded or, worst of all, suffer a loss
of self esteem. Publishers made millions reprinting textbooks
to include lots of pictures demonstrating ideal racial, ethnic
and gender balance but often having little relevance to the instructional
purpose or even to the context. Sexual preference had to be dealt
with in such a way as to portray alternative sexual lifestyles
and families headed by same sex partners as wholesome and normal.
Quotas, official or informal, often determined who got hired,
fired or admitted to college. And as often as rules prohibiting
quotas were instituted, ways of circumventing them were improvised.
The freedom of expression that liberals on campus profess to
so diligently defend probably suffered more from political correctness
than from any previous assault on free speech.
But as extreme and hypocritical as this obsession with political
correctness has been, we could still laugh at its excesses and
make jokes about the PC police. After all, lives were not at
stake. All that should have changed with 9/11 and the war launched
by Islamic terrorists against America and the west. When lives
are in the balance, personal sensitivities must give way to national
security and the safety of all Americans and the practice of
political correctness must be replaced by the application of
probability and statistics.
Which brings us finally to the subject of profiling, a practice
particularly despised by the PC fanatics. Despised or not, it
is common practice in the business world. Lenders and insurers
use it all the time. When resources are limited, there is often
little choice and when it comes to screening airline passengers
and their luggage, resources are certainly limited. We need to
focus our efforts, therefore, on that portion of the population
that presents the greatest risk. Elderly women, disabled persons,
Japanese businessmen, Native Americans, nuns, and pre-pubescent
children, to provide only a few random examples, are not very
likely to be among that high risk population. The idea that they
should be the object of as much scrutiny as young Arab males
for the sake of political correctness is more than just ludicrous.
Considering what is at stake, it is a dangerous waste of scarce
resources that must be optimized in the interest of public safety.
Opponents of profiling argue that focusing on ethnic or religious
groups is not only unfair to the vast majority of their members
that pose no security risk, but makes us vulnerable to surprise.
The fairness argument, however, must never trump national security
and the safety of Americans. There is simply no argument here.
Arab and Muslim resentment of profiling should be directed at
those who wish to kill us in the name of God, not authorities
who should be trying by any means to prevent it. They have a
point, however, in warning about our vulnerability to surprise.
We should never assume that future terrorists will fit the same
profile and some random screening of all population groups should
continue.
All of the approximately
twenty recent major terrorist attacks against Americans and
Europeans thus far have been perpetrated
by Arab Muslim men, mostly between the ages of 18 and 35. That’s
reason enough to focus our efforts on this population group until
we have more effective screening methods at our disposal. Even
European authorities are practicing profiling. More importantly,
they are paying far more attention to monitoring behavior than
we are. Such methods offer far more promise than simple search
procedures.
It will probably always be possible to figure out some way to
get dangerous material aboard aircraft. There are, on the other
hand, highly effective and sophisticated methods for monitoring
suspicious behavior but they will require substantially more
training than our screeners currently are receiving. Meanwhile,
we need to emphasize probability and statistics and de-emphasize
political correctness before it gets more of us killed. CRO
copyright
2006 J. F. Kelly, Jr.
§
|
|
|