Political Correctness in the Age of the Hipster

Growing up, I was kindly told that there are three things you never discuss inpolite company: religion, money and politics. I remember my parents telling methis at about age 12 in a matter-of-fact way and once again as a piece of advicebefore entering college. In the eight months since, I have mused over this piece ofadvice and, much to my parents’ potential disappointment, I find it difficult tofollow.

Admittedly, we live in the age of the modern hipster, many of whom considerthemselves to be independent contrarians (whether or not they wish to be labeled“hipster”). We defy older generations, at least on social media, in much thesame way the hippies of the late 1960s vocally defied their Silent Generationparents.

However, since my time here, I have witnessed countless examples of this “hipster”culture falling flat. Unlike our parents, who likely grew up in the politically charged60s and 70s, we avoid publicly discussing politics or religion at all costs. If YikYak’s response to the November campus protests are any indication, discussion of raceoutside Facebook posts and The Daily Princetonian articles is considered taboo. The fewconversations I’ve had with my peers concerning their economic statuses have oftenbeen stilted and awkward. Yet, in ignoring these issues, we ignore the very factorsthat are determinants of how included we feel on campus.

Perhaps these are simply strides to respect the privacy of others. And one shouldnever be forced to talk about issues that make them uncomfortable. But, whileconsiderate speech plays a major role in the way in which traditionallyunderrepresented groups feel included on campus, that should not become anexcuse to avoid discussion about our own religious and political affiliations, as wellas the way in which we think about race and economic background.

When we do not discuss these topics, we allow them to fester. As uncomfortable asthey are to discuss, these topics can inadvertently manifest themselves in harmfulways, usually in the form of false assumptions and stereotypes. In this “post-racial”and politically correct era, in lieu of offending, we often gain nothing frommultiple and informed perspectives.

In saying this, impertinence is not something for which I am advocating. “Hipsterracism”, often characterized by ironic uses of derogatory names and culturalappropriation (as seen by Urban Congo), is the misguided way in which somenavigate between political correctness and offense. Finding a line between politicalcorrectness and offensiveness is difficult but I think it is a challenge that we mustnot be afraid to face head on. Of course, this common call for action can becomerather banal, so where are the solutions?

We can first begin by being unafraid to ask questions. If someone has a genuinequestion about something, it is okay to ask it. Contrary to popular belief, it ispermissible not to know something. Offense is often created when the offender(intentioned or not) assumes his or her offensive act is, in fact, acceptable.At the same time, we are not encyclopedias. While we are here tolearn from each other just as we are here to learn from our books, we also have aresponsibility to look for knowledge via books, magazine articles and othermediums. Friends and classmates do not owe anyone answers, and if they dohappen to entertain questions, this is a luxury and not a right. In finding a solution,we must not place an educational burden on our peers.

Finally, we must be willing to simply argue and discuss. It is difficult to changeopinions, especially concerning such personal topics, but intellectual argument canbe an informative experience and later taken and applied to other areas ofdiscussion. Political correctness is only a burden if we hide behind the walls of ourfear and misconceptions.