It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Discussing Cultural Marxism and the Reactionary Movements That Oppose It.

page: 1
29
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+12 more 
posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 03:30 AM
link   
If you are like me you probably look at ATS and the greater world around us and wonder why there is so much strife and division. There is a palpable polarization that some would chalk up to the election cycle but this is not a satisfactory answer. These divisions extend throughout all elements of our society. We hear the terms “culture war” or “clash of cultures”. This is a simple explanation for what we are experiencing but it is greater than that. I am going to introduce you to a sort of unifying explanation for the lack of social cohesion and the decline of western civilization. That is the concept or theory of Cultural Marxism.

To understand cultural Marxism you have to back up a minute and look at Marxism. Webster’s defines Marxism as the following.


“: the political, economic, and social principles and policies advocated by Marx; especially : a theory and practice of socialism including the labor theory of value, dialectical materialism, the class struggle, and dictatorship of the proletariat until the establishment of a classless society”


The Marxist theorist at the time of the Russian Revolution felt they had a handle on the economic theory, and things were going well for them in Russia but after the First World War and subsequent depressions they were at a loss to explain why the world had not descended into a global workers revolution. The countries which had not joined them had to be contained by force. Those which could not be contained by force had to be attacked another way. A think tank was formed called The Institute for Marxist Studies in Frankfurt. Around the time the Nazis came to power the institute moved to the United States to escape Nazi oppression being both mostly Jews and communist. They were welcomed at Columbia University where they continued there until the early 1950s.

This think tank discovered that converting peasant economies like Russia to communism was far easier because of the amount of inequality and poverty the people were experiencing. There was less private property or institutions to protect it. The reason western cultures resisted communism was because they had something which the Russians nearly had none of and that was a middle class.

The western middle class was mostly comprised of capitalist, Nationalist constitutional democracies/republics, and white Christians. Therefore these cultural ideas had to be targeted, compromised, and destroyed. The weapon of choice was a concept that was developed called “Critical Theory”. Already entrenched in academia this concept spread and flourished.

Critical Theory is defined as


“ Critical theory is a school of thought that stresses the reflective assessments and critique of society and culture by applying knowledge from the social sciences and the humanities.”


Most of this critique is aimed almost exclusively at western culture, and those elements that identify it. These assessments are designed to encourage Marxist thoughts and ideas such as the concept that gender is a western societal concept used to oppress women. This leads to the avocation of a gender less society which is exactly what Marxism advocates. Patriotism is derided and the founders of the principals of these cultures are criticized. The founding fathers of America were white slave owners therefore their ideas which we base our republic on are wrong and further enforce this . I am using examples from the videos that I am posting so I encourage people to watch the vids to get a better understanding.

Critical theory is used to create a sort of existential vacuum. This vacuum becomes filled with Marxist ideology. It fragments the culture by distorting scientific findings, imposing modern interpretations and concepts on the past, and creating a victims mentality. It creates movements based on perceived injustices to promote its ideas. It stifles any opposition or discussion as merely reinforcing its critiques of sexism, classism, racism, homophobia, etc. It uses shaming and guilt to enlist the aid of “useful idiots” and preys on altruism.

The problem with combating Cultural Marxism as a concept is that the majority of people who have been sounding the alarm are tied into racist or nationalist movements. I theorize that these groups as a whole take a greater interest in changes to their culture and are more sensitive to this encroachment. This does not justify the usage of this information to spread unwarranted hate and supremacist ideologies and can quickly become a vector for recruitment.

There is an overlap at times in race and culture they can become inseparable. I mentioned earlier that western culture was predominantly white. Therefore it becomes easy for people to simplify things in those terms and focus on race over culture. At the same time the victims of cultural Marxism are primarily white and so their perceived anger at oppression, their need to protect their culture, and disillusionment is real but misdirected.

There is an alternative right movement growing in Europe and America which is channeling this racial tension created by cultural Marxism. They bring up legitimate concerns but direct the conversation towards race. Not all of these alt right movements are that way but some are. They bring up issues like white displacement or genocide. Multiculturalism is an idea that is only practiced or enforced in the west. When whites immigrate in large numbers to another culture its called imperialism. Its OK for other races to practice separatism or even racism but not whites. Whites being the main proponents of western culture. They criticize aspects of cultural Marxism such as diversity quotas, the forced migration of peoples. This even consists of Obama's proposals to diversify neighborhoods. You can’t blame whites for feeling they are being held to a double standard. If whites move into a black a neighborhood and open businesses and buy property and raise community property values where they are unafordable for the minorities, then they are accused of gentrification. The reverse is called diversifying. Diversity to cultural Marxism becomes a sort of code for “less white or western”.

These are legitimate concerns that are explained through cultural Marxism. People need to understand that these divisions are being created intentionally to destroy the culture and replace it. Those are just some of the concerns. The issue overlaps into men’s rights and the MGTOW movement popping up. These people who are getting drawn into this alternative right are reactionaries. They are reacting to the smothering of their culture and identities through cultural Marxism and critical theory. It ties into stuff like Gamergate, people protesting Star Wars, people upset about Bruce Jenner.


Continued....
edit on 9-2-2016 by NihilistSanta because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 03:30 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

I say the victims are primarily white but black culture has been as much a victim if not greater. Social programs that are designed for blacks to fail, drugs, abortion, incarceration, divorce and single parenting, and poor education, have all helped to accelerate these things. Black/African studies promote racism and blame which perpetuates victimhood. Black culture has been turned into a cartoon stereotype that is used to perpetuate further division. During my research I found several black activists fighting the aspects of cultural Marxism affecting them. The majority again focused on race specifically intermarriage. Other times they focused on religion. This shows that all western groups regardless of makeup are susceptible to making this about race or feeling tribalistic and protective of their “own”.

I bring this thread and these videos to ATS so that we can recognize the problem and discuss it. There is an opposition movement out there that is becoming ethnocentric. We need to help people understand this without revisionism or appealing to instincts of xenophobia. The challenge is that I want to preserve western culture. Western culture while it has had its misteps has created some of the greatest contributions to all members of humanity. From the sciences, to economic freedom, to philosophical thought that protects the individual and private property, to Christian charity, western culture has helped to raise up some of the most backwards parts of the world. Many of you are indoctrinated already. You will focus on issues of race, or religion, or sex etc instead of asking why this is being done. You will reinforce your own guilt and biases, project your own racism and hatred, some of you will focus on “which group” is doing this. This is another vector for racist movements and also a distraction. Some of you will be offended because you belong to one of the offending groups. Everyone needs to realize that you are not as original as you think. We are all subject to becoming useful idiots unless we educate ourselves.

Does this make sense to anyone else? I would hope people would become aware of this without using it as an opportunity to point more fingers or espouse our prejudices. American culture is losing or has lost its identity. Instead we are a culture of subcultures all vying for dominance. We have so much in common from language, customs, myths, religion/values, which marks us as uniquely American and western. Those things are worth preserving. The old adage “United we stand, divided we fall” comes to mind. I hate to be cliché but the older I get the more truth I find in the old traditions and ways.

Below were some videos to help understand Cultural Marxism, its origins, and how it is being used to attack western culture. The shortest first at 12ish minutes, the next is 30 minutes, and the last is an hour and a half but is more in depth with people like G. Edward Griffin, Ron Paul, and Pat Buchannan. I don’t know anything about the people presenting the vids so use your own discernment.



Warning some usage of profanity in the following video












edit on 9-2-2016 by NihilistSanta because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-2-2016 by NihilistSanta because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-2-2016 by NihilistSanta because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 03:58 AM
link   
There is a lot of different issues that fall under this idea. It becomes hard to separate the issues. We have to acknowledge our past this is a given and yet we shouldn't try to force feelings of guilt on people from the present. We DO have to recognize that racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination DO exist without blaming groups or weaponizing it. We DO need to accept true diversity in ideas and expression and peoples while at the same time maintaining our national identities and customs. We should be critical of history and ideas but not to the point that we don't have anything constructive to replace them with.

We also need to recognize that anyone who is trying to get a handle on this, people who oppose this are not inherently racist or bigots while we acknowledge that racist and bigots are co-opting opposition.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 04:12 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

A thought provoking essay. I doubt it will get much response, but you can always link to it when you accuse a member of engaging in cultural Marxism in another thread. Most people who invoke generalized class struggle are not consciously attempting to follow a Marxist paradigm, they are genuinely objecting to what they perceive as disparity in power.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 04:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
I bring this thread and these videos to ATS so that we can recognize the problem and discuss it. There is an opposition movement out there that is becoming ethnocentric. We need to help people understand this without revisionism or appealing to instincts of xenophobia. The challenge is that I want to preserve western culture. Western culture while it has had its misteps has created some of the greatest contributions to all members of humanity. From the sciences, to economic freedom, to philosophical thought that protects the individual and private property, to Christian charity, western culture has helped to raise up some of the most backwards parts of the world. Many of you are indoctrinated already. You will focus on issues of race, or religion, or sex etc instead of asking why this is being done. You will reinforce your own guilt and biases, project your own racism and hatred, some of you will focus on “which group” is doing this. This is another vector for racist movements and also a distraction. Some of you will be offended because you belong to one of the offending groups. Everyone needs to realize that you are not as original as you think. We are all subject to becoming useful idiots unless we educate ourselves.



I've read this with an open mind, Haven't watched the videos yet, don't have the time atm but will later. just wanted to chime in to say that the above paragraph seems to be loaded with many assumptions. It appears to me that this sort of assumptive reasoning actually demonstrates many attributes that supposedly run contrary to the information being put forth.

In other words, If you don't believe in X, you're part of the problem. Isn't that the exact type of reasoning being railed against?



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 04:19 AM
link   
a reply to: SLAYER69

No not at all. I am not saying that if you agree with feminism you are part of the problem. I am not saying to minimize the concerns women face or to revert to some pre-englightened form of engagement. I am saying that feminist have to be aware of how their concerns are being used to create division. Not just feminist but they are being used as an example here. The same way that people who research this subject can be co-opted into racist movements that do nothing but cause further division. These divisions are a tactic that represent a greater threat than the individual issues themselves.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 04:28 AM
link   
I recently read an interview with the proclaimed gay porn king pin. He was discussing how liberals were becoming antisemites because a group of liberals were protesting a speech he was at involving some coalition of gay advocacy groups that operate in the US and in Israel. They were not protesting homosexuality they were protesting Israeli treatment of Palestinians. This is a small example of how even sides that once had common interest are being turned against each other through methods like political correctness, the media, and politicizing of all social issues.

Its funny see because the kingpin is used to being able to shut down any opposition based on claims of homophobia or antisemitism. Usually liberals are the ones jumping to his aid. He was not prepared to be on the receiving end of their ire or being equated with "hate".



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 04:31 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

You are stating what the videos and myself have already stated. This was what the reference to "useful idiots" was referring to. I also made it a point to show that no one is immune from being used in such a way.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 06:38 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

I do not look around at the world, and wonder why there is so much turmoil and rage and chaos.

I see these things, and I examine each, and find that these things have a unified cause, that all things are connected together, that the poverty of one group of people can be directly followed back to the greed and foolishness of a few, or sometimes one other.

I do not wonder. I perceive. Wondering would require that I not be in a position to answer the question, using what I know. To wonder at the possible answers to a conundrum which already has a known solution, is to waste ones time.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 07:47 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta




hey are reacting to the smothering of their culture and identities through cultural Marxism and critical theory. It ties into stuff like Gamergate, people protesting Star Wars, people upset about Bruce Jenner.


I have to laugh when you brought up the Twitter boycott of star wars as an example of reactionary movements to Cultural Marxism.
There was nothing valid in their protest, A black actor being cast as a main character in a universe filled with aliens of different hues and colors.
The causality is there is still a fringe in the western community that are still getting used to the fact that cultural exports are no longer being whitewashed, this goes hand in hand with economics as companies try to target as much of the general population as they can to increase their revenue.

To say this is all being intentionally done to undermine western culture is ridiculous, multiculturalism is a byproduct of globalization and economic integration. The only way to combat said ideology would be to resort back to extreme isolationist policies similar to that of feudal Japan.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 07:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: DJW001

You are stating what the videos and myself have already stated. This was what the reference to "useful idiots" was referring to. I also made it a point to show that no one is immune from being used in such a way.


Your disclaimers are surrounded by dense rhetoric. The phrase "cultural Marxism" is unfortunate, as it implies that the proposed solution to the perceived imbalance of societal power is economic. When homosexuals want to have the same rights as heterosexuals, the solution is not to give control of the means of production to the workers.

Your analysis is biased in other ways. First, you assume that social criticism is exclusively leveled at "western" institutions. In fact, it is leveled at whatever society the critics inhabit. Social activists oppose monarchy, Islam, Stalinism, and so forth in countries where these "isms" apply. Obviously, social criticism is more dangerous in these "non-western" societies.

Secondly, you overemphasize the contribution of central European socialist academics. There was not much interest in their brand of Marxist analysis outside of academia in the United States. There was a long tradition of grassroots labor organizing in America that sought to make capitalism more just, not overthrow it.

The greatest impetus to what you (lamentably) call "scientific Marxism" came with the influx of "structuralist" thought from France in the 1960s. Levi-Strauss, Fanon, and especially Foucault, developed their deconstructionist theories as an alternative to Marxist analysis, which had been losing its dominant place in French academic thought. It is they who expanded social criticism from the economic to the personal, with an emphasis of how institutions use coercion to maintain power over groups, and individuals use power to control others. Foucault was positively Sadean in his view of power. Throw in Jacques Derrida's ability to prove that black is white and up is down, and you had the perfect formula for transforming society into a free for all of conflicting "victims."

Your greatest error is in assuming this is addressing some sort of coherent goal. Perhaps its earliest theoreticians thought that getting different groups within an industrialized society to feel oppressed might make them more inclined to revolt against capitalism, but by the time it trickled down to "community organizers" by way of the French, it tended to re-conform itself to the traditional American labor desire of getting a bigger slice of the pie, not tossing the pie out altogether.
edit on 9-2-2016 by DJW001 because: Edit to polish style.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: DJW001

You are stating what the videos and myself have already stated. This was what the reference to "useful idiots" was referring to. I also made it a point to show that no one is immune from being used in such a way.


Your disclaimers are surrounded by dense rhetoric. The phrase "cultural Marxism" is unfortunate, as it implies that the proposed solution to the perceived imbalance of societal power is economic. When homosexuals want to have the same rights as heterosexuals, the solution is not to give control of the means of production to the workers.

Your analysis is biased in other ways. First, you assume that social criticism is exclusively leveled at "western" institutions. In fact, it is leveled at whatever society the critics inhabit. Social activists oppose monarchy, Islam, Stalinism, and so forth in countries where these "isms" apply. Obviously, social criticism is more dangerous in these "non-western" societies.

Secondly, you overemphasize the contribution of central European socialist academics. There was not much interest in their brand of Marxist analysis outside of academia in the United States. There was a long tradition of grassroots labor organizing in America that sought to make capitalism more just, not overthrow it.

The greatest impetus to what you (lamentably) call "scientific Marxism" came with the influx of "structuralist" thought from France in the 1960s. Levi-Strauss, Fanon, and especially Foucault, developed their deconstructionist theories as an alternative to Marxist analysis, which had been losing its dominant place in French academic thought. It is they who expanded social criticism from the economic to the personal, with an emphasis of how institutions use coercion to maintain power over groups, and individuals use power to control others. Foucault was positively Sadean in his view of power. Throw in Jacques Derrida's ability to prove that black is white and up is down, and you had the perfect formula for transforming society into a free for all of conflicting "victims."

Your greatest error is in assuming this is addressing some sort of coherent goal. Perhaps its earliest theoreticians thought that getting different groups within an industrialized society to feel oppressed might make them more inclined to revolt against capitalism, but by the time it trickled down to "community organizers" by way of the French, it tended to re-conform itself to the traditional American labor desire of getting a bigger slice of the pie, not tossing the pie out altogether.


Marx is "scientific" socialism as opposed to "utopian" socialism.

Race war is thought to be a good way to introduce internal strife and promote class warfare, a prerequisite for the realization of socialism.

The "labor movements" are a little more opaque. They range from interventionist "pro labor" policies to syndicalism. It should be noted that corporativism is a manifestation of syndicalism, a trade union centric variation on socialism.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Has it been successful in promoting Marxism or is the world still mainly dominated by global capitalism with much of the "culture" being dominated by American hagemonic values? It's always been a term used by Jon Birchers as a blanket term for anything they don't like or agree with.
edit on 9-2-2016 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

Fascinating and thought provoking OP! Kudos!

My only observation is that after multiple decades on this planet, I've learned one lesson very well. Those who seek to preserve anything are doomed to fail. Cultural Marxism will ultimately triumph in the US as the middle class is slowly, (or not so slowly) destroyed and replaced with the new class of "winners", i.e., the technocrats that run the burgeoning government of dictatorship over the proletariat.

I'd suggest that rather than focus your efforts on trying to stop the future from happening, you should instead focus your energies on advising people on how to get out from under the house of cards before it falls on them and destroys them. Many are already doing that; the number of people renouncing US citizenship soars year over year. Corporations are leaving the US to escape high taxes. Learn from History! When it was obvious the Bolsheviks would take over Russia, the middle class and wealthy merchant classes left in droves, taking their wealth with them. When it was obvious that the Roman Empire was going to collapse, Galla Placidia and the Theodosians transferred their vast wealth to Constantinople! If you have kids looking to go to college or know of others who do, suggest they look at Canada or France or even Brazil for higher education. They need to get "international" rather than try to stay the course in this lost cause.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:08 AM
link   
here's a neat video....



Published on Jul 25, 2015

This video is NOT fiction but based on Fact: The agenda of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the CPUSA Progressives attempt to sabotage the constituted restrictions withholding absolute power from our central government. A communist form of government is an autocratic, authoritarian construct so a cartel of elites have total control to "dictate" economic, ethic, and sociological elements of society. The Pros is to subvert funds and power to a privileged few who hold the political power. Not a new ideology, an ideology over 80 years forced imprisonment, tortured, genocide and mass executions: millions have perished under the guise of "share the wealth" or the modern indoctrination "Climate Changed" as defined by the communist (Karl Marx) Van Jones who Barack Obama hired specifically to head "green jobs" vetted by Valerie Jarrett who has a history of communist ties.

THE U.S. WILL BECOME A COMMUNIST GOVERNMENT WITHIN 10 YEARS






posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
Has it been successful in promoting Marxism or is the world still mainly dominated by global capitalism with much of the "culture" being dominated by American hagemonic values? It's always been a term used by Jon Birchers as a blanket term for anything they don't like or agree with.


You have placed your finger on the crux of the issue: Just as Fanon's writings inspired colonials in their wars of independence, but did nothing to help these newly independent states form stable governments, so "Cultural Marxism" does nothing to advance socialism, beyond, perhaps, creating support for politicians who promise a free ride to the " oppressed," whoever they believe themselves to be.

The practical outcome of of creating groups that identify themselves as being an oppressed minority is that there is less unity in addressing genuine issues of economics and governance. Feminists reject the "transgendered" for portraying stereotypes. By focusing on the high incidence of violence against the black community by police, African-American activists do not see the need to own up to the larger problem of black on black violence. By campaigning for gay marriage, the question of whether or not the State should be involved in sanctioning marriage gets overlooked.

"Cultural Marxism" has led to a balkanization of progressivism and, thus, actually serves the interests of reaction.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:58 AM
link   
I do get what you are trying to say OP. The catch here is that even trying to articulate a defense of Western culture gets one marginalized by some very anti-social and anti-modern labels. I think we have to find some clear common denominators for defining *modern* Western civilization in order to better explain Western culture and so better counter the stereotypes used to dismantle it.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: NateTheAnimator

The validity to you of their protest is of little concern. The point is that the people protesting are reacting to a perceived greater cultural threat and they feel targeted.

To say multiculturalism is a byproduct of globalism is a gross simplification. Forced multiculturalism is directed ONLY at predominantly white WESTERN cultures. You mention feudal Japan but no need for time travel. If multiculturalism was simply the result of globalization shouldn't Japan appear similar to the US?



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

You missed the point. This isnt about economics. The theorist realized that western culture is the obstacle to their vision of a classless society. You mention balkanization of progressivism. The goal isnt progressivism that is far too mild. So it is not important to achieve yours or progressives vision of society according to these theorist. Progressives are the current useful idiots. They seemingly don't recognize that in their strides for unity and social equality that they are creating further division. The next batch of useful idiots are the people being co-opted when researching this and the reactionaries.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: TonyS

I cant stop the future and that isn't really my goal. My goal is to make people aware of the issue and to prevent them from being swayed by racist rhetoric and movements. There is a real problem brewing and there is controlled opposition forming. The real ends of this is to destroy both sides and offer the preferred solution. That being a global Marxist society.




top topics



 
29
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join