As for the SWE thing, it's in the article I posted over the summer that you started (at least, i dunno if you finished it or not) reading.
Also, the reference to 'Stalinization' here was to this part:
"Although it's common to make jokes about PCE (referring to ugly people as "aesthetically challenged" and so on), be advised that Politically Correct English's various pre- and proscriptions are taken very seriously indeed by colleges and corporations and government agencies, whose institutional dialects now evolved under the beady scrutiny of a whole new kind of Language Police.
"From one perspective, the rise of PCE evinces a kind of Lenin-to_Stalinesque irony. That is, the same ideological principles that informed the original Descriptivist revolution--namely, the rejection of traditional authority (born of Vietnam) and of traditional inequality (born of the civil rights movement)--have now actually produced a far more inflexible Prescriptivism, one largely unencumbered by tradition or complexity and backed by the treat of real-world sanctions (termination, litigation) for those who fail to conform. This is funny in a dark way, maybe, and it's true that most criticisms of PCE seem to consist in making fun of its trendiness or vapidity. This reviewer's own opinion is that prescriptive PCE is not just silly but ideologically confused and harmful to its own cause."
no subject
Also, the reference to 'Stalinization' here was to this part:
"Although it's common to make jokes about PCE (referring to ugly people as "aesthetically challenged" and so on), be advised that Politically Correct English's various pre- and proscriptions are taken very seriously indeed by colleges and corporations and government agencies, whose institutional dialects now evolved under the beady scrutiny of a whole new kind of Language Police.
"From one perspective, the rise of PCE evinces a kind of Lenin-to_Stalinesque irony. That is, the same ideological principles that informed the original Descriptivist revolution--namely, the rejection of traditional authority (born of Vietnam) and of traditional inequality (born of the civil rights movement)--have now actually produced a far more inflexible Prescriptivism, one largely unencumbered by tradition or complexity and backed by the treat of real-world sanctions (termination, litigation) for those who fail to conform. This is funny in a dark way, maybe, and it's true that most criticisms of PCE seem to consist in making fun of its trendiness or vapidity. This reviewer's own opinion is that prescriptive PCE is not just silly but ideologically confused and harmful to its own cause."