As understood today, political correctness aims at preventing social discrimination by curtailing offensive speech and behaviour towards underprivileged groups of individuals. The core proponents of political correctness often draw on post-modernism and critical theory and are notorious for their scepticism about objective truth and scientific rationality. Conversely, the critics of post-modern political correctness uphold Enlightenment liberal principles of scientific reasoning, rational truth-seeking and open discourse against claims of relativism and oppression. Yet, both the post-modern proponents and their Enlightenment liberal critics make up two sides of the same phenomenon of political correctness. Both sides intend to protect a liberal value system from illiberal truth-claims, which is the function of politically correct regulation. While post-modern advocates attempt to promote liberating tolerance, Enlightenment liberals place liberal values above the open-ended search for truth. Despite appearances to the contrary, this socio-academic debate is not about two sides favouring and opposing political correctness. In fact, it is a debate about the type of politically correct regulation that can better guard liberal values.

No abstract

Karl Polanyi's double movement is a dialectical process characterized by a continuous tension between a movement towards social marketization and a movement towards social protectionism. Notably, Polanyi condemns the former movement while defending the latter. Without using the term "double movement", F.A Hayek's theory of social evolution acknowledges the same phenomenon but reaches different normative conclusions. While for Polanyi the marketization of society is a utopia with dystopian consequences, Hayek's evolutionary explanation of this dialectical process asserts that there is no alternative to a market oriented society. Both authors defend that their favoured movement is the one that truly supports the continuity of life. This article compares the authors' normative readings of the double movement and concludes that, from an evolutionary perspective, Polanyi's conclusion possesses a robustness that Hayek's postulate lacks. Sumário. O duplo movimento de Karl Polanyi é um processo dialéctico caracterizado por uma tensão continua entre o movimento a favor da comercialização social e o movimento a favor do protecionismo social. Notavelmente, Polanyi condena o primeiro movimento enquanto faz a defesa do segundo. Sem usar o termo "duplo movimento", a teoria da evolução social de F.A.Hayek reconhece o mesmo fenómeno mas chega a conclusões normativas distintas. Enquanto que para Polanyi a comercialização da sociedade é uma utopia com consequências distópicas, a explicação evolucionista de Hayek conclui que não há alternativa a uma sociedade de mercado. Ambos os autores defendem que o seu movimento preferido é aquele que de facto suporta a continuidade da vida. Este artigo compara as leituras normativas que os dois autores fazem do duplo movimento e conclui que, de uma perspectiva evolutiva, a conclusão de Polanyi possui uma robustez que falta ao postulado de Hayek.

No abstract