|
Edited on Sun Mar-19-06 12:16 PM by igil
"politicheski pravil'no".
Things had to be done "politicheski pravil'no", in accordance with the party line and policy. Anything not done in that way was censured, frequently by fellow (or not-so-fellow) CPSU members; if you were also a CPSU member, it could occur at a party meeting, or the local partorg or politruk (party organizer or political leader) would have a talk with you. If it escalated to needing attention at a meeting, the routine way out was samokritika 'self-criticism', in which you castigated yourself for not abiding by the CPSU 'politika', confessed your sin, and pledged to do better. You might be censured, kicked out of the party (very, very bad) or restored to good graces.
It became difficult, because what was "politicheski pravil'no" was frequently a mystery, and tended to change from time to time. It meant that what was proper and allowed to be said, spoken, or done was a matter of constant concern, and you were always aware that you were being monitored by either the partorg or party members. This led to a lot of self-censorship. Frequently it was specific words that had to be avoided or used, or the definitions given to those words. It led to the Soviet slogan "think one thing, say another, and do a third": in other words, institutionalized hypocrisy.
On edit: Lest people try to impute it to a later source, this was quite common in the '20s in Russia, and within a year or two in America. But you can see the term used, just not stereotypically, in compart writings from the decade before, if you have the wherewithall to tolerate actually reading any of them.
"Politically correct" is a not especially felicitious translation of the Russian. "Politika" is 'politics', t'is true, but also 'policy' or 'party line'. But the US Comm Party wasn't linguistically gifted and was too slavishly pro-Soviet, they accepted the term from Moscow English. CPSU policies were vaguely similar, it seems, to those in the 'motherland'; from there, it spread.
I started using it in the '70s, during the great negro/colored/black/afro-american/african-american linguistic tussle, and it continued with the indian/native american/indigenous american/first peoples business. If I said the wrong one in the wrong context, I was a racist; this, of course, was complete nonsense. But, then again, many of the trivial distinctions and shifts of meanings of Russian words compelled by party politics was, likewise, complete nonsense.
Compare the mess with "Eskimo" and 'squaw'. We are supposed to say Inuit, because most eskimos in Canada are Inuit and if you're in Canada and refer to eskimos you're likely refering to Inuits. But not all eskimos are Inuit, and apparently those that aren't Inuit take offense at being mischaracterized as a different ethnicity. 'Squaw' has been given a false etymology, and the meaning 'c**t" imposed on it--something a similar word might have had in a language that was unknown to Europeans when they borrowed the word from a different language. Yet, to pay homage to a policy that presumes to dictate the 'true', albeit wrong, meaning of the word, we have to revise maps. Point out the error, and the policy shifts to meet the same ends: 'squaw', in English, is (usually? frequently?) intended to be offensive; therefore, it's always construed to be offensive. We may lack a formal party to impose which policies are correct or incorrect, but we have informal arbiters of the same kind of persnickety rules and regs, leading to the same kind of meticulous self-monitoring and samokritika (or, conversely, rebellion against the rules, in true refusenik style).
On edit: Things not done "politicheski pravil'no" were "politicheski nepravil'no", "politically" incorrect (or wrong). Both the positive and negative terms were common in the '20s in Russia, and spread quickly via translation to the US; you could see them in use in the 1910s in Russian. It's only with the post-NEP crackdown in the mid-late 20's under Lenin, and esp. under Stalin, that the term became life-threatening.
|