Yes, You Can Say Merry Christmas: Understanding How Political Correctness is Weaponized

November 27, 2024 JC Pass

In recent years, a curious phenomenon has emerged in cultural discourse: the weaponization of political correctness. At its heart lies a narrative of victimhood propagated by those who fear societal change, framed as a struggle against a supposed overreach of progressive ideals. One of its most contentious battlegrounds is the supposed "war on Christmas," a debate that reveals far more about our collective anxieties than it does about holiday greetings.

See this content in the original post

The Roots of the "War"

The so-called "war on Christmas" suggests that traditional Christian celebrations are under siege, a claim often made by conservative commentators. In this narrative, saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" is cast as evidence of a broader cultural erosion, an attack on tradition itself. Yet, this narrative ignores the historical reality: Christmas in the west has always been a tapestry woven from diverse traditions, with secular and pagan influences that predate Christianity.

From a sociological perspective, the uproar over phrases like "Happy Holidays" reflects fears of pluralism. As psychologist Jonathan Haidt has argued, humans are hardwired for group loyalty, often perceiving diversity as a threat to in-group norms. For some, the rise of inclusive language feels like a loss of cultural dominance, leading to a defensive posture that resists change. However, this defensiveness is rarely about language itself—it is a reaction to broader shifts in power and representation.

Political Correctness as a Strawman

Political correctness, at its core, is about fostering respect in an increasingly diverse society. Yet, it has been weaponized as a strawman, portrayed as an oppressive force that stifles free speech and demonizes tradition. This framing is strategic: by exaggerating the threat of political correctness, critics shift attention away from systemic inequalities and toward imagined grievances.

For example, inclusive practices, such as recognizing non-Christian holidays or adopting gender-neutral language, are often framed as erasures rather than additions. The panic over Starbucks’ minimalist holiday cups or schools teaching about Hanukkah and Kwanzaa illustrates how easily inclusion is misconstrued as exclusion.

This weaponization is not limited to Christmas; it extends to LGBTQIA+ issues as well. The backlash against Pride Month celebrations, gender-inclusive bathrooms, or the use of pronouns is rooted in similar anxieties. Critics often frame these efforts as an assault on "traditional values," creating a zero-sum game in which respect for one group is perceived as disrespect for another.

The Psychological Underpinnings

At a psychological level, the resistance to political correctness can be linked to a phenomenon known as moral panic. Sociologist Stanley Cohen defines moral panic as an exaggerated reaction to perceived threats to societal norms, often fuelled by media sensationalism. In the case of Christmas, the panic is not about the holiday itself but what it symbolizes—a changing landscape where cultural homogeneity no longer holds sway.

Neuroscience offers additional insights. Studies show that exposure to diversity can trigger a threat response in the brain, particularly in individuals who value stability and tradition. This response is amplified when diversity is framed as a loss rather than a gain, as is often the case in media coverage of "cancel culture" or debates over inclusive language.

Weaponizing the Narrative

Politicians and pundits have exploited these anxieties, weaponizing political correctness as a rallying cry for their base. By framing themselves as defenders of "traditional values," they tap into a powerful narrative of victimhood. Ironically, this narrative often ignores the actual marginalized groups whose rights and representation are at stake.

Take the backlash against LGBTQIA+ representation in media. When brands include same-sex couples in advertisements or feature transgender characters in television shows, critics often accuse them of pandering or erasing heteronormative norms. This ignores the fact that LGBTQIA+ individuals have historically been excluded from mainstream culture—a reality political correctness seeks to address.

The narrative of erasure is also evident in legislation targeting LGBTQIA+ communities, such as bans on drag performances or restrictions on discussing gender identity in schools. These laws are often justified as protecting traditional values, yet they reflect a deep discomfort with diversity and a refusal to share cultural space.

Moving Beyond the Myths

The weaponization of political correctness is ultimately a distraction. The debate over saying "Merry Christmas" or using inclusive language is not about language at all—it is about power. By framing inclusion as an attack, critics obscure the real issues at hand: systemic inequalities, cultural representation, and the fear of a world that no longer centers their experiences.

To move forward, we must challenge the narrative of victimhood that underpins these debates. Saying "Happy Holidays" does not diminish Christmas, just as recognizing LGBTQIA+ rights does not threaten traditional families. Inclusivity is not a zero-sum game; it is an acknowledgment that multiple truths can coexist.

Simply Put

As we navigate the holiday season and the broader cultural landscape, the question is not whether we can say "Merry Christmas." The real question is whether we can confront our fears of change and embrace a society that is richer, more diverse, and more equitable than ever before.

So, as an agnostic, neurodivergent, politically left ally — Merry Christmas!