Let's start with the big one: the claim that “direct democracy = mob rule.”

That’s refuted by the simple fact; that the Constitution was established by direct democracy.

The Founders covered this in the Declaration of Independence: with the words “all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. “

Here, the message is twofold:

• The phrase “to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men,” refers to the practice of Republican agency, while,
  the phrases “consent of the governed” and “all men are created equal,” translate to direct democracy over it.

• Accordingly, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish government directly— not by being forced to go through the government itself in order to do so, which would preclude consent.

• Thus, when the voters in each state opted to establish the Constitution in lieu of the Articles of Confederation, they did so via direct democracy, i.e. the voters did so by overruling their elected officials.

Simply put, a rational majority would, as with any corporation, establish middlemen to handle affairs of state and ensure consistency; however the state itself is owned by the actual voters, who thus hold final authority to overrule them at will.

And this is how the Constitution was established— and remained, as a voluntary international group of direct democracies.

The most popular and relevant misconception about political correctness is that there’s only one version of it, only one “politically correct” position on every issue. The truth is that both sides have their shibboleths, their litmus tests, their “correct” answer about something.

It is politically correct on the "right" to complain about political correctness, but they’re only talking about the flavor of political correctness they see on the left, with total blindness to their own PC issues. Try being a diehard Republican and talking about a woman’s right to choose what happens to her body. Try giving a less than full-throated endorsement to the police and military.

One thing I hear all the time from Trump supporters on NationStates is how much they "oppose" political correctness and love him because he’s so willing to be politically incorrect.

I just read an article about “What makes you so loyal to Donald Trump?” that began this way:

"Personally, I’m tired of all this politically correct nonsense where you can lose your job simply for saying or believing something that is against the doctrines taught by the left and the Democrat party. Nothing made me happier than to see Trump make politically incorrect statements and still win the presidency. It was a pleasure to watch."

He’s perfectly entitled to that opinion, but I wonder if he sees any inconsistency with his and Trump’s own political correctness? I mean, let’s take the long-time controversy with kneeling for the national anthem. Trump has been very vocal about it and claims to be quite aggrieved over it, even calling for people to lose their jobs over it (or be thrown out of the country!), but answer me this: What could be more politically incorrect than kneeling for the national anthem?

I highly doubt this person who loves DT for being Non-PC, who hates that “you can lose your job simply for saying or believing something that is against the doctrines taught by the left” has any problem with DT calling for someone to lose their job simply for believing non-PC things (that too many black people are unjustly killed by police) or doing non-PC things (kneeling during the anthem as a form of protest).

In short, both sides have their own definitions of politically correct, just as both sides have their own definition of what constitutes an “activist judge”. It’s just that only one side has weaponized these phrases and employed them with their preferred slant on the definition.

So…

The most popular misconception about political correctness in general is that only one side practices it.

The hypocrisy is so thick they don’t even see it. It’d be like asking a fish about the water… “What water?”

To preface this, I was born in Cuba. I came to the states at the age of 12, and have been here since. Although NationStates is, for the most part, dominated by Americans, here are some common misconceptions I had from outside.

• That everybody has a gun and there’s a realistic threat of being shot at any time - I have lived in many areas across the country and while I do own firearms myself, I have never felt a serious concern about being shot. In the United States, the refrigerator and the food that it contains in our homes are more dangerous than firearms. They certainly cause more deaths!

• That American television and films are representative of how life is in the country - In fact, Hollywood depictions are often so far from how regular Americans live, it’s a wonder that they even bother sometimes. If you are confused by a behavior that you see Americans exhibiting in films, you are likely not alone as we are often confused by what they portray as well.

• That American racism is a "White/Black" thing - There are racist interactions between ALL groupings within the United States. While the negative interactions between African Americans and Whites is the most prominent, it’s hardly the only one.

• That violent crime is a serious problem everywhere - In the majority of areas within the United States, there is no significant threat of being injured or killed during a criminal attack. In fact, most criminal assaults and worse are the results of long-running, poorly-managed domestic violence situations which only affect those closest to the assailant(s). So you can probably walk around most areas of even the largest of cities, day or night, without any fear of being harmed. While there are certainly dangerous areas and street crime isn’t an unknown entity, it doesn’t affect the majority of people who live here or who visit.

This is, largely, still a WIP. I may add to it again, or I may not, I'm not entirelyyyy sure. If you enjoyed it and learned something, great. If you're offended by this, please, go outside, go to the gym, go spend time with family. It will get better, I promise. Words on a screen cannot hurt you.