There used to be an expression used in this country. It was: "Call a spade a spade". Which, of course, means say what something actually is. The expression fell into disuse due to the fact that the word "spade" was adopted by some as a racial slur against blacks.
The expression goes all the way back to at least 1542. It first showed up in English in Nicolas Udall's collection of Erasmus's works, but ultimately was derived from Plutarch's Moralia in the first century AD. Therefore, originally it had nothing to do with racism in any form.
It may be contrasted with Shakespeare's line from 'Romeo and Juliet': "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." This line identifies the hypocrisy of political correctness.
In today's mores it is felt by many that if we only call something / someone by a more polite name, title, or use of words, it will actually change the minds of people and actually make that something/someone different. Doing so does NOT, of course.
With the application of political correctness we have lost our ability to laugh at our own foibles and our own incorrect, preconceived notions. We have lost an important ability to investigate the folly of stereotypes and refute them.
There once was a TV show, 'All In The Family'. Its main premise seemed to be to highlight the ignorance of racism and intolerance via humor. It was definitely not politically correct. In THIS clip "Archie" finds out that Sammy Davis, Jr. is to pay a visit and "Archie" is making his family guess who the visitor will be. The show was wildly popular and effective in its message.
To edit (somewhat) Shakespeare's line, "Calling an Islamic migrant who comes to a land expecting to be treated as royalty, who feels that the local women are only present for their pleasure and abuse, and who wants to be governed by archaic, medieval laws by a name other than what they are, does NOT make them something else."
As an aside: The modern equivalent of Shakeseare's line is "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig." The line is from a book by Victoria Clarke published in 2006.
So, we come to the cultural enrichers. This is the politically correct term being used throughout Europe to describe the Islamic migrants invading (via invitations from the European governments) the European continent. It is the term being foisted upon the citizens by their governments. The actual citizens of Europe have a somewhat different set of terms which they use. And, these different terms are definitely not politically correct; but, they are accurate nonetheless.
Logic dictates that a true cultural enricher would be a person, coming from another land, who has needed skills, a willingness to assimilate into the culture of their new land, adopt the local laws, and be a positive force.
Such is a far cry from the migrants entering Europe. Check out these reports coming from Europe: Click Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, and Here. Probably the most important link to visit is This One detailing the vast number of persons with terrorist ties embedded in the migrants coming into Europe.
So, why don't the European citizens rise up and demand an end to this migration? The answer could be a reason similar to why the Jews didn't rise up when Hitler first came into power in Germany - apathy and disbelief. "How bad could it really be?", "Nothing is actually going to affect me, right?!", they asked. The answers to these two questions were "VERY" and "WRONG"!
Well, are we here at home, both our government and "we the people", acting in any way different than our counterparts in Europe? Apparently not!
Currently, our government knows there are terrorist cells/organizations/networks existing and working in our country.
Yet, our government does nothing to thwart their existence. Even worse, our government has no means of assuring us that any of the so-called refugees coming to our shores are NOT terrorists.
But, even with this our current administration insists on bringing thousands of additional unvettable persons to our land - at our peril.
But, have there actually been problems with these refugees so far? Apparently, the answer is YES
But, what do we, the American people, do? Nothing!
Along with unfettered illegal immigration, bringing these refugees here, most of whom need public assistance to survive, is naught but a political ideology to enhance an ever increasing dependent class who, because of their dependency upon the government, will vote for the party that gives them the most. Consider: Already over 20% of our population exists on some form of government assistance. That figure is from www.census.gov. Most estimates put the figure at a full 1/3 of our population on some form of government assistance. Do we need to encourage moves to increase those who are dependent? I think not!
As people's incomes rise they tend to switch political parties/alliances. NOTE: In this linked article scroll down to the paragraph heading "Income".
Therefore, it is not surprising that one political party wishes the poorer and less skilled among us to increase - votes for them depend on it.
The whole migrant/immigration issue is wholly about political power and control by governments - both here and abroad. It has not one thing to do with compassion or "the right thing to do". Do not be deluded by statements to the contrary.
We have fast approaching presidential and congressional elections. One of the presidential candidates has expressed a desire and intent to increase the number of refugees from the Middle East (i.e., Islamic countries) by 550% over that of the current administration - again, we are unable to discern the wishes or motives of these refugees.
This should be a Red Flag to us all. But, again, what do we, the American people, do? Nothing but ask "How bad could it really be?", "Nothing is actually going to affect me, right?!" Sound familiar?