What is Cultural Marxism?
It is a really bigoted quack conspiracy theory wherein conservatives assert that there is a conspiracy where black people, lgbt people, leftists, immigrants, and anti-colonial advocates are seen as working together to instill Marxism under the pretense of multiculturalism.
On itself, as a idea-set, not really.When you want to put it in practice, it runs into the same problem as any Marxist idea as per the critique of Max Weber.Max Weber saw the weakness of Marxism and the social justice that stems from it as inherently an act in futility and disappointment. The weakness in Marxist thinking is that it envisions a reality that should be without having any type of plan based on or without any regard to actual reality.This is still a huge strategic deficit within Marxist thinkingHe saw that Marxist thinking was to much grounded in idealized archetypes stemming from it’s already faulty dichotomy of Labor vs. Capital. Laborers were not the homogeneous bloc of people as Marxists envisioned. The rise of the administrative and bureaucratic class already invalidated it, also the distinction between high-skill and low-skill labor further increased the heterogeneous nature of labor.So what do you do when you believe your utopia is the only solution, but all kind of other forces in reality are playing against? You go full authoritarian off course. And that’s where Cultural Marxism becomes bad.Even Lenin admitted that a authoritarian state is needed to enforce the Marxist ideal.
What is cultural Marxism?
Definition of Cultural Marxism: Cultural Marxism: An offshoot of Marxism that gave birth to political correctness, multiculturalism and "anti-racism." Unlike traditional Marxism that focuses on economics, Cultural Marxism focuses on culture and maintains that all human behavior is a result of culture (not heredity / race) and thus malleable. Cultural Marxists absurdly deny the biological reality of gender and race and argue that gender and race are “social constructs”. Nonetheless, Cultural Marxists support the race-based identity politics of non-whites. Cultural Marxists typically support race-based affirmative action, the proposition state (as opposed to a nation rooted in common ancestry), elevating non-Western religions above Western religions, speech codes and censorship, multiculturalism, diversity training, anti-Western education curricula, maladaptive sexual norms and anti-male feminism, the dispossession of white people, and mass Third World immigration into Western countries. Cultural Marxists have promoted idea that white people, instead of birthing white babies, should interracially marry or adopt non-white children. Samuel P. Huntington maintained that Cultural Marxism is an anti-white ideology. Critics of Cultural Marxism have maintained that Cultural Marxists intend to commit genocide against white people through mass non-white immigration, assimilation, trans-racial adoption and miscegenation.
Methodologically, it’s projection of marxist class division of bourgeoise/proletariat, oppressing class/opressed class, onto any social or human category you can think of - male/female, white/black, old/young, etc.In this “view” (I put it in quotes because it is not really a worldview, TB explained further) there are basically no causes of motion in the world but oppression and discrimination. For instance, a homeless man may belong to one privileged class (men) charged with sexism, but he is also “oppressed” along economic class division (that’s actually what cultural marxist claimed in debate with me). Whatever happens, is result of oppression or discrimination of this or other kind.At its core, however, cultural marxism is an emotional stance of passive aggression: the cultural marxist keeps charging a skeptic for supposed taking side of oppressing class of any kind that is at hand, expecting the skeptic to submit in an emotional way. It is a way of seeking dominance via spouting supposedly good intentions while keeping the other side on defensive that has to keep explaining that “no, no, I’m not racist / sexist …”.Since you can claim oppression or discrimination anywhere (pretty hazy and hard to prove or disprove), you can try to dominate anybody, anywhere, for any stance other than submission to a cultural marxist. It’s using presumption of guilt to keep anybody who does not follow the cheap-Stalinist party line ostracized and hounded.A good example is George Lawlor, a student in UK, who dared to question effectiveness of anti-rape “consent” training course at his university, by pointing out that actual rapists are unlikely to attend the course and even if they do, it’s unlikely to have an effect on them.He missed the point altogether, because while the “courses” are obviously completely ineffective this way, the point here is political: achieve dominance over other people, make them submit to supposed leaders of the pack, not to prevent rape.Cheap stalinists of course always say that they have an all-important “cause” - but that’s exactly what every tyrant, wannabe or successful, always claims anyway.Clearly, cultural marxism is a peculiar struggle of certain cliques for power.
As many people point out here “cultural Marxism” is pure nonsense made up by Alt-Right conspiritarians. Marxism applied to culture IS a thing however- and that’s what you find with modern Marxist cultural studies.Marxism applied to cultural studies is very open and frank about being Marxist and, as with all forms of Marxism, remains strongly rooted in economic analysis centred on class. Marxism does move into areas such as gender and race but the core is always class and economic relations.Marxists are not coy or covert about being Marxist, the post-modern identity theorists the Alt-Right accuse of being “cultural Marxists” aren’t hiding anything- they really aren’t Marxists.Marxists can’t stand post-modernists as one of the first principles of the post-modernist approach is the rejection of “grand theories of society” which pretty much strikes at the heart of Marxism- a “grand theory” if ever there was one!Calling post-modernists “cultural Marxists” is like calling Republicans “cultural Democrats”. Well, from a Marxist perspective, they might as well be! They are just two wings of the capitalist part after all, why get bogged down in details?Yes, the term “culture Marxism” is as useless as the term “Republicrats” in describing real political differences and approaches, as opposed to simply hurling propagandistic epithets.
Why do atheists mimic the principles of "Critical Theory" in Cultural Marxism?
I could not care less about the USA federal reserve since, thank my lucky stars, I'm not a Yank. "The Federal Reserve act was in 1913. No coincidence that WWI was exactly a year later." Nonsense. The 1914 - 18 war was a surprise to the big money markets, a point clearly made by historian Niall Ferguson. "the Bavarian Illuminati continued under the guise of Freemasonry." Pull my other leg, it whistles "Home Sweet Home". "See, a Christianized west will give to charity through the church, thus no need for socialism." Then explain the growth of privately operated self help friendly societies like the "Oddfellows" in Britain and Europe in the 1700s long before before Marx published if the churches covered all bases in charity. Humbug and nonsense all the way through. You are either extremely deluded, very ignorant and deluded or you are trolling, I can't quite make up my mind which.
You mean a “dog-whistle”? I don’t see how “cultural marxism” could possibly be “code” (i.e., a near synonym) for “antisemitism”. Indeed they’re more likely to be antonyms than anything.As a “dog whistle” it makes sense. Many people who are agitated about “cultural marxism” do tend to be antisemitic. But if a bunch of radical Jews got kicked out of Germany and came to your country to (quite successfully) spread their socially destabilizing and destructive ideas, you might be just a tiny bit antisemitic too.Of course, it won’t do to complain too much about “the Jews” until we have an answer for those (very very) WASP-y university deans and administrators that welcomed members of the Frankfurt School to their august halls.Now we can argue til the cows come home about whether “cultural marxism” is the best possible name for the phenomenon of the Frankfurst School or not. There is no reasonable doubt as to it’s influence.It is certainly possible to be antisemitic and not care very much about “cultural marxism”. Similiarly it is possible to be deeply opposed to cultural marxism and not be antisemitic at all. In fact, I am friends with many conservative (anti-neocon) Jews who oppose “cultural marxism” in no uncertain terms. And they are not at all antisemitic.So “cultural marxism” is really not a very good “dog-whistle” for antisemitism either.
You would call people who disagree with Cultural Marxism being an actual thing correct. The proper term for people who oppose Cultural Marxism would range from misinformed to deluded, depending on the amount of time and thought they've given to opposing it.As a progressive and later Marxist activist, I've not meet a single person who would identify as a Cultural Marxist, and there is no theoretical body of work that would purport to be Cultural Marxism or would describe it. It is a far-right fabrication used as an umbrella term for anything from taxes to gay and reproductive rights to Jews controlling the world, and the term reaches back to Nazi Germany persecuting Leftist authors and artists.I suppose the polar opposite would be how Anarchists describe anything they dislike as fascist, except that fascism is an actual thing and at least they consistently refer to oppression, whereas most of what is termed Cultural Marxism has little to do with either Marxism or culture.