Being Politically Correct is Not Moral

Disclaimer

This article dives deeper into personal thinking rather than covering factual news. Use this as a disclaimer: everything from here on is opinion-based. You don’t have to agree with it, but I ask that you take a moment to understand where I’m coming from.

Leadership Incompetency

In recent times—over roughly the last century—politics has become more of a job than a form of leadership. We see countless politicians run on promises, yet little to none ever complete what they swore to do. My issue does not necessarily lie in their reliability, but rather in their authenticity and credibility. Leadership was once about seeking what was best for your people, so that your people could become their best. The basic requirements were a desire for greatness, righteousness, and justice.

Now, leadership brings power, and everyone is a power-hungry bastard. That isn’t new; it has always been a common trait. But as the great Uncle Ben once said, “With great power comes great responsibility.” So where did that responsibility go, and why does no one seem willing to take accountability for it?

Political Correctness vs Morality

As times change, correctness changes as well. What was considered correct a hundred years ago is no longer correct today, and that is simply a factual statement. But something that doesn’t change? Morality. That connects to my point: being politically correct is not the same thing as being morally right. An example of this would be the terror ICE has released over the United States of America. Without diving too deep into it, we can conclude that what they are doing may be politically correct (using "may" loosely). In the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) defense, they are illegal immigrants, and they must be sent back Using Whatever Force Necessary. Is that morally correct?

Do you truly think a child that was detained returning from preschool and then being used as “bait” is morally correct?

Hell no.

An event like this is and always will be morally incorrect; it does not stand close to being morally correct, exploiting the innocence of a child to carry out your heinous agenda. No matter if you bleed red or blue—this is just not right.

Political Morality

Political correctness is subjective, utterly subjective. Mao Zedong, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Benito Mussolini were all seen as great leaders for some, but horrible beings for others; they were politically correct, but clearly, morally wrong. So where am I trying to go with this? What is the goal here? Because leadership is subjective, you lead your people. If you are praised in one place, you will be hated in another. However, one must lead with humanity in mind. That’s where political morality makes its debut.

Political morality is somewhat of a middle ground between political correctness and morality. If it were to be placed on a line, it falls somewhere in the middle, but not always directly in the middle. Political morality is rooted in authority, but justification of authority. Making decisions but making sure those actions do not trample another. Sounds almost… Machiavellian. A lot easier said than done, and I agree, but the issue is it’s not being attempted.

Coming back to the notion of ICE. If there was even a hint of political morality being pushed, it would be clear as day. (I have excluded names on purpose due to legal reasons.) In the case of another ICE shooting, during a protest, a woman was being harassed by federal agents, and a man came over to assist her. In return, the man gets pepper-sprayed, forced to the ground, and shot more than 8 times. Is murdering someone while they help another moral? I sure hope it isn’t. The evidence of the lack of political morality points towards the DHS’s statements where they called the victim a “domestic terrorist” because he had a concealed firearm, in an open-carry state with the correct credentials to carry said firearm (The Guardian, 2026). But that’s all moral and not political. The politicality comes with the bias of leaning left or right as I mentioned earlier.

We need to bite the bullet and accept that politics cannot make everyone happy, but it aims to make most content. The citizens are the ones whose interests should be prioritized, which creates bias. And that’s acceptable, if it places your people first. If there is a decision that requires firm authority to take place and it may create some controversy, the bias can lean towards political correctness, ensuring the pull of the moral force still exists and has an influence, preventing any sort of radical efforts to take place.

Conclusion

Ultimately, we have to stop viewing politics as a game of winning and losing and start viewing it as a matter of human consequence. If we continue to allow "political correctness" to serve as a mask for moral bankruptcy, we will continue to see children used as bait and citizens treated as terrorists for exercising their rights. My call for Political Morality isn’t a call for a perfect world—it’s a call for a justified one. It is a demand that those in power remember that their authority is a loan from the people, not a birthright to be used for heinous agendas.

We must demand leaders who have the courage to stand in that middle ground, leaders who can wield authority without losing their humanity. We have to bite the bullet and accept that while no policy will ever please everyone, no policy should ever strip us of our basic moral compass. It is time to stop settling for "politically correct" and start demanding what is fundamentally right. Because at the end of the day, if leadership isn't rooted in morality, it isn't leadership at all, it's just power. And as we’ve seen, power without responsibility is a fire that eventually burns everyone.

- Saaim Japanwala

Community

Leave your thoughts down below, please make sure to follow Rules and Regulations. Looking forward too see the discussions!