Cultural Marxism, what are your thoughts?

[Ecthelion]

Topic says it all.
What do you think of the Frankfurt School's brainchild, and the Critical Theory that helps it along?

Is it the end of that's good and proper, or just the inevitable evolution of civilized society?

I didn't fully realize the bizarre nature of living in a society dominated by militant cultural marxism until I actually left it for one where people can say whatever they want. Now, years removed from the urban US, I find it difficult to wrap my head around how my former friends and schoolmates can still actually believe the things they post on facebook.

[Darth Red]

Moved from the mudpit (current events) to the Academy (political theory).

[Himster]

I didn't fully realize the bizarre nature of living in a society dominated by militant cultural marxism until I actually left it for one where people can say whatever they want.

What can be said outside "the Urban US" that cannot be said withing it?

[Derpy Hooves]

It's just a buzzword in order to get people to be afraid of multiculturalism, because in peoples' minds Marx=Communism=Bad

[sumskilz]

Talk of Cultural Marxism and tying it all to the Frankfurt School is a little bit too much of a conspiracy theory to me. That said, I'm really not a fan of the ends justify the means science denial in the name of equality trend in left-wing academia.

[Napoleonic Bonapartism]

The inevitable evolution of civilized society?

This.

The people I hear most vehemently denouncing Cultural Marxism display thinly concealed racism, and often see a direct link between black people and crime - ignoring things like socio-economic deprivation entirely. Probably because it's not simplistic enough for the kind of people who believe in this evil plot to swallow. Not to mention anti-semitism et al. displayed by the believers.

What I said in an different thread - details aside, just replace EU with USA or whatever - goes here:

One point of distinct importance that must be made clear on this thread is that Cultural Marxism is not a thing. Liberalism is, Liberal Values are, but there is no secret plot to turn the EU into One-Party Communist State. Its just a conspiracy theory.

As regards the OP Liberal values are not simply imposed on us from above, they are imposed socially. Yes, there is legislation against racism, intolerance etc. but there laws against stealing, look how well they work...

The reason some feel they are being oppressed by their lack of expressive choice is because society has (largely) adopted liberal values. You cannot discriminate, be racist etc. because it is socially unacceptable, a social no-go. And rightly so. The Government/Elite has not cruelly stripped us of our rights to express such views, society has, and I applaud it for that.

[Phier]

This.

The people I hear most vehemently denouncing Cultural Marxism display thinly concealed racism, and often see a direct link between black people and crime - ignoring things like socio-economic deprivation entirely. Probably because it's not simplistic enough for the kind of people who believe this to swallow. Not to mention anti-semitism et al. displayed by the believers.

What I said in an different thread - details aside, just replace EU with USA or whatever - goes here:

Only corrected for socioeconomic status there is a link between black people and crime.

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand...s/adp_ajph.pdf

This paper blames the neighborhood for some reason and recommends moving them to middle class areas to help. Of course they did that in my state and a 7 year old girl was just shot in the head in a local section 8 housing project a few blocks from me. I know a lot of police officers and those areas are pretty much how they spend most of their time.

[sumskilz]

The people I hear most vehemently denouncing Cultural Marxism display thinly concealed racism, and often see a direct link between black people and crime - ignoring things like socio-economic deprivation entirely. Probably because it's not simplistic enough for the kind of people who believe in this evil plot to swallow. Not to mention anti-semitism et al. displayed by the believers.

It is also simplistic ignorance and science denial to blame higher crime among people of sub-Saharan African ancestry entirely on socio-economic factors when objectively many alleles associated with criminal behavior (such as the 2 repeat MAOA gene) occur at a considerably higher rate among people of African ancestry. That one gene alone occurring in 5.5% of Black men compared to 0.1% of Caucasian men and 0.00067% of Asian men could account for wide disparities even if it's not present in the majority of people of African descent. Pretending these issues don't exist doesn't solve any problems.

EDIT:

Exploring the association between the 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene promoter polymorphism and psychopathic personality traits, arrests, incarceration, and lifetime antisocial behavior

The VNTR 2 repeat in MAOA and delinquent behavior in adolescence and young adulthood: associations and MAOA promoter activity

Natural born killers: The genetic origins of extreme violence

[Napoleonic Bonapartism]

Only corrected for socioeconomic status there is a link between black people and crime.

That's probably because it's better to be a middle class white than a middle class black because of the prevailing aura of bigotry that still exists in the Western World.
From the opening of the report I gather Latinos have less of a tendency to commit crime regardless of socio-economics. This is because they don't have nearly the same history with the US white population than the black population does - I suspect hate crimes on latinos are lower than against blacks proportionately.

[Astaroth]

It is also simplistic ignorance and science denial to blame higher crime among people of sub-Saharan African ancestry entirely on socio-economic factors when objectively many alleles associated with criminal behavior (such as the 2 repeat MAOA gene) occur at a considerably higher rate among people of African ancestry. That one gene alone occurring in 5.5% of Black men compared to 0.1% of Caucasian men and 0.00067% of Asian men could account for wide disparities even if it's not present in the majority of people of African descent. Pretending these issues don't exist doesn't solve any problems.

EDIT:

Exploring the association between the 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene promoter polymorphism and psychopathic personality traits, arrests, incarceration, and lifetime antisocial behavior

The VNTR 2 repeat in MAOA and delinquent behavior in adolescence and young adulthood: associations and MAOA promoter activity

Natural born killers: The genetic origins of extreme violence

Even if we were to assume that to be correct, what difference does it make in terms of morality or policy?

Even if we did determine that Asians were genetically the clear #1 "masterrace" in terms of intelligence, what difference would or should that make?

Does that mean we should allow racism and discrimination as long as it is based on "science"? Does that mean we should allow someone to choose an Asian over a "white" person solely based on the fact that the Asian is supposedly smarter (on average, statistically speaking)?

What relevance does any of that have for society?

Racism and discrimination are terrible and should never be allowed, regardless of whether on average there might be a quantum of truth to some common prejudices on average. What would the alternative be?

It's the same when it comes to gender. Of course it's possible that women (on average!) might be more inclined to stay at home and take care of their kids than men. But does that mean that we should allow discrimination based on that? Obviously not.

The problem with statistical averages is that they are just that -- you have no way of knowing whether it applies to the individual. If a woman wants to have a career and nothing but that, it should be just as possible for her as for anyone else, despite the fact that on average, women *might* prefer having kids as well. The same applies to other genetic differences.

But even aside from that, these supposed differences cannot be taken into account in terms of morality and policy. If they did, society would fall apart. Maximum freedom, rights protection and equality can only be achieved if racism and discrimination are fought from the get go.

[sumskilz]

Even if we were to assume that to be correct, what difference does it make in terms of morality or policy?

Moral positions aren't based on science.

Even if we did determine that Asians were genetically the clear #1 "masterrace" in terms of intelligence, what difference would or should that make?

Don't make policies that discriminate against them because they are over-represented at universities.

What relevance does any of that have for society?

Only that we shouldn't assume that all statistical inequalities are due to prejudice.

Racism and discrimination are terrible and should never be allowed, regardless of whether on average there might be a quantum of truth to some common prejudices on average. What would the alternative be?

It's the same when it comes to gender. Of course it's possible that women (on average!) might be more inclined to stay at home and take care of their kids than men. But does that mean that we should allow discrimination based on that? Obviously not.

There isn't a need to jump to justification of prejudice, my issue is with academic self-censorship and science denial. There have been cases where certain academics have been labelled racist, and then suddenly they can't get their work published, and no one is willing to peer-review it. I think that certainly does more harm than good.

Maximum freedom, rights protection and equality can only be achieved if racism and discrimination are fought from the get go.

I'm for maximum freedom, but it's a moral position. I'm opposed to deliberately misrepresenting data in order to justify a moral position.

[Himster]

Back when there were no black people in Ireland, in my school we were so eager to embrace cultural Marxism: we just called the guy with the least pale tan "black" and treated him accordingly. Naturally he ended up as a career criminal.

When people are treated in a certain way, it's awfully likely they will react: the universal law of cause and effect cannot be magically dismissed just because causal links are complex/varied/unknowable. There are (obviously) genetic correlations connecting black/asian/white/Jewish/red/brown people, but of course this is so. Certain social pressures will ensure particular genes will be favoured over others, in a violent social structure the more violent individuals will be sexually favoured and obviously lead to higher percentages of that gene: Do we blame the gene? Do we blame the collective "race"? Do we blame external social pressures? Do we blame the parents? Do the blame the children? Or do we blame the individual for their individual acts? Maybe we should recognise all of these, rather than simply picking one because it fits our preferred social narrative and reject all others. However it's not that simple because of the quantity of "data" on such a topic is so vast and inherently unreliable due to it's correlative nature and because we literally live in society: it is practically impossible to have a truly unbiased view.

[DaVinci]

In addition, here is what i wrote in another thread about the topic 'Cultural Marxism'

Cultural Marxism ... a buzz word by the far right wing. Where does it come from?

It was in the starting years of the 90s in the US, as the Red Scare didn't work anymore as enemy-picture, in the west, but just mainly in the USA (you know Gorbatschow etc. breakdown of the real-communism/real-socialism ... Warshaw-pact).

The far right, or better said, the new right in the american political spectrum, in the US the right wing of the Republicans needed something new to blame. A book was also written at the time called 'The Death of the West' iirc., which put some fire into it.
The new thing for the new right, first in the US (far right, if you want) was then the religious-cultural war against everything that is moderate-liberal-social-democrat politics aka liberal values, all that idiocy led then to the Tea Party wing within the Republican party.

It has its roots in the McCarthy-time, where american apparent-leftists were persecuted, and that also goes back to the time, as european rather german philosophers emigrated into the US (refugees of the Nazis), and became professors at american universities, ie. the men of the so-called Frankfurter School, who also where a source of the 60s students revolt and overall the change of politics rather culture in the end 60s, first in the US, then in europe.

Back then to the 90s, the time of the new right. It was the time of somebody called G.W. Bush, and the time of the evangelical movement there.
Europe's right wing, in most of those reactionary things a step behind the US, practically kept over that new enemy-picture, with the growing EU et al as main enemy.

Just nowadays, the reactionary right wing in europe uses the term Cultural Marxism (which has its origins in the US) to blame populistically the process that happens in euope's political stage, within the single nations and especially for the EU government and its politics.

As Napoleonic Bonapartism (poster above) rightly called it, a pan-western tendency of a new right wing, which gained (esp. since the 90s) and gains currently political power, underlined by an overall valid tendency to more conservatism aka new national-conservatism, in comparison to the end 60s, 70s and 80s ... in the latter decade, that tendency started.

[Napoleonic Bonapartism]

On an issue seperate to the validity of claims made by people who believe Cultural Marxism, I must say that the term as used by the Political Right, is little short of a conspiracy theory: The Media are telling us to tolerate people so that Western Society Declines and then they can... [insert insane end-game outcome here - choose from set up a Communist State, USSR style, Islamic Caliphate, General Apocalypse or even Alien Invasion (Yeah, why not?)]

[DaVinci]

I also wanna put out something to the Frankfurter School (read it up), which indeed had a quite significant influence in our western culture(s).

It must be noted here in this relation, that europe in post-WWI time, despite the known struggles and thus rather a miracle, had a cultural blossoming in the 1920s years, especially also within the Weimar Republic time in Germany, the GoldenTwenties (in this time, the Frankfurter School was founded).

That blossoming was also valid in other european countries (esp. in its metropols) plus also in the US.

This process but was then pretty much stopped with the upcoming fascism in europe (as side-note, thus ie. the men of the Frankfurter School emigrated, otherwise they certainly would have ended ie. in concentration camps) and then finally of course with the WWII.

One can say, that the fascism aka the barbarism trampled down all its possible options of this creative decade. The cultural blossoming of the 20s but regained some meaning in the post WWII time, and then further on, which then resulted into the end 60s culture changing movements (as partial source! ... for diverse departments in our societies).

One can also boil it down to, in a way as rough general interpretation: The fight for progressive development in diverse departments and for the human rights et al in our societies in the 20th century.

[Treize]

For those who refuse to be brainwashed by marxists, jacobins and other left-wing criminals I have a few recommended read.

https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bit...df?sequence=10
This, originally english, thesis was rewritten into a Dutch book and has become a bestseller. The original English version is now available for free for English speakers.

Also recommended:
http://www.rogerscruton.com/articles...ancophile.html
http://www.rogerscruton.com/articles...ancophile.html

[Napoleonic Bonapartism]

For those who refuse to be brainwashed by marxists, jacobins and other left-wing criminals I have a few recommended read.

https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bit...df?sequence=10
This, originally english, thesis was rewritten into a Dutch book and has become a bestseller. The original English version is now available for free for English speakers.

Also recommended:
http://www.rogerscruton.com/articles...ancophile.html
http://www.rogerscruton.com/articles...ancophile.html

Pray tell, for I have not had a satisfactory response from any of the Cultural Marxist faithful, what the intended purpose of this systematic liberalisation of western society is?

[mongrel]

It is also simplistic ignorance and science denial to blame higher crime among people of sub-Saharan African ancestry entirely on socio-economic factors when objectively many alleles associated with criminal behavior (such as the 2 repeat MAOA gene) occur at a considerably higher rate among people of African ancestry. That one gene alone occurring in 5.5% of Black men compared to 0.1% of Caucasian men and 0.00067% of Asian men could account for wide disparities even if it's not present in the majority of people of African descent. Pretending these issues don't exist doesn't solve any problems.

EDIT:

Exploring the association between the 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene promoter polymorphism and psychopathic personality traits, arrests, incarceration, and lifetime antisocial behavior

The VNTR 2 repeat in MAOA and delinquent behavior in adolescence and young adulthood: associations and MAOA promoter activity

Natural born killers: The genetic origins of extreme violence

Funny how those traditional all white southern juries used to detect this gene.

[Himster]

Pray tell, for I have not had a satisfactory response from any of the Cultural Marxist faithful, what the intended purpose of this systematic liberalisation of western society is?

It's obviously to pave way for the international gay mafia and Global Jewish Banking clans to divide the spoils from their inevitable absolute dominion. Liberalisation (ie. the idea that you shouldn't bully based on race, sexual-orientation, gender or religion): is obviously just a cleverly concocted lie to force everyone into thinking gays/Jews/blacks/latinos aren't all evil.

[Napoleonic Bonapartism]

It's obviously to pave way for the international gay mafia and Global Jewish Banking clans to divide the spoils from their inevitable absolute dominion. Liberalisation (ie. the idea that you shouldn't bully based on race, sexual-orientation, gender or religion): is obviously just a cleverly concocted lie to force everyone into thinking gays/Jews/blacks/latinos aren't all evil.

Of course! And there was me thinking the Illuminati had a hand in it. How naive I was.

Seriously though these people never mention the end-game, perhaps because the theory - if I generously call it that - would fall apart if it had to be envisaged, the absurdity would become clear.