It is not a conspiracy. Traditional economic Marxist theory is about capitalism that creates a society where the power relationship between the upper class and working class are out of balance, which in turn creates social problems. Cultural Marxism deals instead with other types of power relationships, for instance the power relationship between Europeans and non-Europeans. In cultural Marxism, non-Europeans are always “the good guys” just like the working class are always “the good guys” in traditional Marxism.
In the 50s, the ideas of the Frankfurt School were repacked in ways college students could read and comprehend. In the 60s, the time was ripe for revolution. Herbert Marcuse became the chief guru of the New Left, and he injected cultural Marxism into the baby boom generation, to the point where it is now USA’s state ideology.
The thing I just can’t understand is how those crappy ideas could end up in American college and school books. Same thing with the proven fallacies by Lewontin and Gould that were used to undermine European identities. They must have had pretty good connections of some sort.
In a cultural Marxist “democracy”, there are seemingly free elections and free speech, but politics and mass media are dominated by an establishment that believes that only certain expressions of opinion should be allowed. As a consequence, citizens are living with the illusion that they receive an objective and comprehensive view of reality. The opinion oppression is well hidden, the free debate strangled. All new parties that reject cultural Marxism are easily outmaneuvered by accusations of xenophobia/racism/fascism.
Your Sweden Democrats have 20 seats out of 349 in the Riksdag, and you’re fooling yourself if you think they would get more if Sweden had no hate-speech laws or media inattention-to-them or whatever it is you’re on about. If that’s a “cultural Marxist ‘democracy,’” then “cultural Marxist ‘democracy’” is simply another name for “democracy.”
Actually, the way you’ve defined “cultural Marxism,” any party that rejects it is defined by xenophobia/racism/fascism.
Yeah, but in your Internationalist Utopia you seem to think the Dalai Lama, and Israeli’s are just a bunch of xenophobes for wanting to preserve their culture.
There is a reasonable document outlining cultural marxism here by Douglas Kellner.
[QUOTE=RaleighRally]
Herbert Marcuse became the chief guru of the New Left, and he injected cultural Marxism into the baby boom generation, to the point where it is now USA’s state ideology.
[/QUOTE]
So the rightwing conception of Cultural Marxism is that some dude named Herbert Marcuse “injected” Marxism into the baby boom generation, and therefore Marxism is now US state ideology?
Then I offer that as proof that Cultural Marxism is a conspiracy theory. Pretty much cased closed?
As you can easily see for yourself by reading the essay, it uses Cultural Marxism to refer to about what you’d expect - different conceptions of how Marxism could be and have been applied to “culture”. By various people, through history, belonging to different schools of Marxism, living in different countries with different modes of government.
But the conception of Cultural Marxism that RaleighRally, Breivik and Tino Sanandaji all subscribe to specifically denotes the Frankfurt School and only them (check the Free Congress Foundation vid that RR posted). But they are in reality only one of many manifestations of Marxism as applied to the area of culture - and here they are rebranded and made part of a confused conspiracy theory that has something to do with muslim immigration to western countries.
Which, of course, is why the U.S. has elected four Republican presidents (for a total of 28 years) in that same period, supporting such “New Left” activities as the invasion of Iraq, repeated laws and judicial rulings to push back affirmative action, and repeated actions to limit immigration or impede support for immigrants.
You are so far out of touch with reality that your claims are not just unsupportable, but ludicrous.
He is correct only to the extent that “racism” is now a dirty word in America, which is all RR is really complaining about when he says “Cultural Marxism”; and that is a change of which Marcuse indeed would have approved, and of which any decent person would approve, but I don’t see how Marcuse can claim much credit. The cultural revolution against American racism happened at a grassroots level and involved millions of people black and white with little acquaintance with Marxist theory.