Cultural Marxism':

a reply to: burdman30ott6

As far as "is it happening" look around. The entire crux of the progressive movement is a full frontal assault of traditional values and ideals.

What are traditional values and ideals, that the rights of the many outweighs the few or the one?? Sorry about the Star Trek thing.
Rights and values evolves , if not we would still be practising Jim Crow and slavery.
The preamble To The Constitution.

We the People of the United States,
in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
constitutioncenter.org...

See those old dead white guys had a genius plan , the constitution was not meant to be a dormant piece of paper, just laying about and worshipped without further thought, it's a live document or was meant to be such, it meant that we the people should improve upon the Union not as was but what it could be,
This in my view extending freedoms and rights previously not given to others under the guise of traditions and conservatism.

a reply to: Spider879

Except for the Democrat's / "liberals" / Progressive's / SJW's / etc are bent on rights being determined by what group you're in. Which is exclusive. And contrary to the Constitution. And contrary to MLK's Dream. But in line with Hitler's Struggle.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Spider879

Except for the Democrat's / "liberals" / Progressive's / SJW's / etc are bent on rights being determined by what group you're in. Which is exclusive. And contrary to the Constitution. And contrary to MLK's Dream. But in line with Hitler's Struggle.

Not with the labels again, an activist belonging to a " Group" once said

“If There Is No Struggle, There Is No Progress”
Frederick Douglas 1857.

He and the radical "SJWs" of their time ,mainly abolitionists, fought that good fight to make that more Perfect Union. this is the most American of traditions IMO.

a reply to: Spider879

Most people in this thread have no idea what Marx had in mind for a cultural revolution in the late 19th and early 20th century... here is a hint it's called the industrial revolution and pursuit of passion for labor equality.

a reply to: Spider879

Yet you can't use your living document theory to rescind free speech protections or ban firearms. Both things are unconstitutional (as enumerated in the bill of rights). And since the Constitution (or its BOR) do not grant citizens any rights (it actually places additional controls on government, protecting our rights further) it is ludicrous to think you function outside that initial set of bounds (the initial condition).

Sure, you can always amend the Constitution and enumerate other existing rights that you feel need additional protection, but you're looking at this all quite backwards. But you can't repeal amendments to remove rights granted by our creator (read: other than government)

As an example, repeal of 2A would not take the existing right to self-defense RKBA from Americans. You would simply be eliminating a secondary bulwark against government tyranny.

But let us be equally direct, the far-left is upset that it lost the SCOTUS battle because it fully intended to challenge our existing, natural rights. Thankfully mainstream Democrats and independents would never remain silent while you infringed on the core values of America. Those core values are what we're talking about. Including the ability to amend the Constitution to adapt to new threats to liberty

Cultural Marxists (or the equivalent descriptor for that very behavior) attempt to subvert/provoke a culture into a pattern that allows it to gain a foothold on power. Hegel is well known for the Hegelian Dialectic. Basically a problem-reaction-solution spew of BS that these subversive groups use to entrench themselves into existing systems and subvert their cultural/political/legal/economic/societal norms against the will of the population (the nation's Citizens). This is extremely undesirable behavior.

a reply to: Spider879

But the SJW "struggle" isnt the same one as the Founders, or even MLK. Instead of equal rights and freedom from tyranny they scream for superiority and wield tyranny to try to get it (and not just against The Machine but they fellow common man [like Brownshirts]).

a reply to: JBurns


If people are going to interpret the Constitution to provide more freedoms, I would be behind that.

The Constitution was never meant to remove freedoms.

ft

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Spider879

Ah of course, anyone who disagrees with the leftists is racist and antisemitic. Got it.

So what is cultural Marxism - enlighten us wise one.

Go read the book, marxism is marxism. Pfffft, people have a very hard time keeping s*hit simple.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Spider879

Most people in this thread have no idea what Marx had in mind for a cultural revolution in the late 19th and early 20th century... here is a hint it's called the industrial revolution and pursuit of passion for labor equality.

There is a big difference though, in a free nation the people control everything in a micro managed nation the government controls everything. The difference between the old republic and socialism. The government did create laws to protect the workers of America or we wouldn't have 40 hour work weeks and s*hit pay. It's why a minimum wage was established as well. But it does not mean we destroy America and give our government control of everything, then we would all be screwed.

a reply to: xBWOMPx

Marx didn't outright deny capitalism. You have to remember, his employment was communist propaganda, he was conflicted because of it which gave way to his over all ideology.

Capitalism can run rampant, hence why Marx made his manifesto, just in case. The exact same reason why the American revolution happened.

People misunderstand Marx, sure on face value its communism, but deep down it's more of a single person mindset to pursue what you love to do and not be exploited for it or put your passion on the back burner to make ends meet.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: xBWOMPx

Marx didn't outright deny capitalism. You have to remember, his employment was communist propaganda, he was conflicted because of it which gave way to his over all ideology.

Capitalism can run rampant, hence why Marx made his manifesto, just in case. The exact same reason why the American revolution happened.

People misunderstand Marx, sure on face value its communism, but deep down it's more of a single person mindset to pursue what you love to do and not be exploited for it or put your passion on the back burner to make ends meet.

I honestly never thought I'd live to see the day an American would defend Marx and socialism. I never thought i'd see the day America was fighting for her freedom from within. It's quite sad tbh.
I know your from canada, im just talking about all the others from America

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Spider879

Not very concerned about those canards you inserted into your OP.

What I am concerned about is preserving our heritage/culture/identity/nation and especially Constitution. Call it whatever you like, but I oppose anything but those things. If that is "Marxism" or "cultural Marxism" then so be it. IF there is a better term, that is OK too.

The idea is all the same: a group of outsiders (with no legitimate stake in a country) attempt to subvert that country and change its ideals/culture/nationality. That is not a good thing. It is entirely unwanted and patently unlawful under Article 4 Section 4 US Constitution.

We're Americans. That transcends any arbitrary groups you mentioned earlier.

Outsiders huh - in all cases of Marxist revolution the impedes is internal.

An American, under the Constitution, is free to be a Socialist or a Communist or a Nazi (authoritarian nationalist by definition)

I'm still not hearing anyone define Cultural Marxism. But this is the closest yet.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Spider879

Most people in this thread have no idea what Marx had in mind for a cultural revolution in the late 19th and early 20th century... here is a hint it's called the industrial revolution and pursuit of passion for labor equality.

Yes.

Marx envisioned that workers would get tired of being exploited and rise up.

That didn't happen, so the "struggle" has been converted into a social one which is what the term is about. Dominant culture groups are labeled as oppressors and minorities are painted as the oppressed victims. It has the aim creating the same type of struggle only in a social context with the same aim as Marx's workers revolution.

See ... the actual laborers are too happy to actually want to seriously revolt.

But if you can convince every minority group of every kind that the dominant cultural groups are systematically oppressing them by convincing them that everything wrong with their lives is because of that oppression in some nebulous way ... then you can create that revolt in other ways.

And that's why we tell little Suzie that she's an African-American, gender non-conforming, learning disabled, Buddhist with two mommies rather than telling her that she's a bright child who loves gymnastics and dolls, likes wearing pants instead of dresses, loves the color green, and wants to grow up to be a baker.

By indentifying her various minority victim groups, you can tell little Suzie all the different ways that the larger society is holding her down and will make her fail at life no matter what she does which will make little Suzie angry and ready to overthrow that society.

Viola! Marx's revolt if in a different form than the workers' one.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Spider879

Not very concerned about those canards you inserted into your OP.

What I am concerned about is preserving our heritage/culture/identity/nation and especially Constitution. Call it whatever you like, but I oppose anything but those things. If that is "Marxism" or "cultural Marxism" then so be it. IF there is a better term, that is OK too.

The idea is all the same: a group of outsiders (with no legitimate stake in a country) attempt to subvert that country and change its ideals/culture/nationality. That is not a good thing. It is entirely unwanted and patently unlawful under Article 4 Section 4 US Constitution.

We're Americans. That transcends any arbitrary groups you mentioned earlier.

Outsiders huh - in all cases of Marxist revolution the impedes is internal.

An American, under the Constitution, is free to be a Socialist or a Communist or a Nazi (authoritarian nationalist by definition)

I'm still not hearing anyone define Cultural Marxism. But this is the closest yet.

Marxism is marxism, keep it simple. Go read the book it's out there!

originally posted by: toysforadults

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: toysforadults
RACISS RACISS

everyone is raciss omg all white people and right wingers or pro Trumpers are racist

I've heard this ten thousands times, I've become immune. you cannot implement communism and abolish private property rights while using social justice as your platform sorry NO

Or you don't know or define Cultural Marxism.

cul·tur·al
ˈkəlCH(ə)rəl/Submit
adjective
relating to the ideas, customs, and social behavior of a society.

from google

so from this I can easily extrapolate that cultural Marxism is relating to the ideas, customs and social behavior's of Karl Marx AKA Communist

preeettttyyyyyy sssiiimmpppllleeeeeeeeee

Close but wrong. It's not about Marx the Man as you say a communist. Silly really.

What ideas, customs and social behaviors of Karl Marx. LOL

Maybe you should have looked up the definition of Marxism too and stuck the two together. Too lazy to do any more than that.

a reply to: JBurns

Yet you can't use your living document theory to rescind free speech protections or ban firearms. Both things are unconstitutional (as enumerated in the bill of rights). And since the Constitution (or its BOR) do not grant citizens any rights (it actually places additional controls on government, protecting our rights further) it is ludicrous to think you function outside that initial set of bounds (the initial condition). 

Yes, there are folks in my camp who want to have safe spaces from words, and uncomfortable conversations , I'm in the Bill Maher Dave Chapple camp., and reject and denounce that those that do, and yes it's a problem, however if through the spoken word, a private entity such as a company viewed you as a threat to their bottom line because of your action, I'm not exactly gonna run to your defense, but if laws put in place that said this or that word or thought is illegal then I'm with you.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Spider879

I've seen what you consider "Nazi" and, frankly, I'm not going to lose any sleep over your assessment of this. Chicken Little confusing gravity for the sky falling down around him comes immediately to mind.

Another hyperdefensive ire spouter with no definition of Cultural Marxism.

It's the ideology that anything traditional or trying to conserve the traditional is the source of all of the modern world's woes and, therefore, must be attacked and replaced with some manner of "enlightened" (their word, certainly not mine) position. Whereas Marxism, at it's heart, is focused on destruction of traditional economies, risk-reward economics, and profit taking by all but the elite inner party and their allies, Cultural Marxism focuses on destruction of standing culture, total inversion of pure and unclean concepts, and rewriting the entire experience of history's victors to portray them as the enemies while the ones who our ancestors defeated (ideologically and otherwise) are portrayed as victims who should receive financial and cultural reconcilliation from us today. It is the belief that none of us are smart enough to self direct our path, save those who are blessed by the "enlightnement" masters in leftist politics. Cultural Marxism is to politics what sientology is to religion: bullsnip packaged in an ice cream wrapper which requires you either kiss the ass of the leadership or buy your way into heaven and if you do neither, you're an enemy and require further brain washing.

Cultural Marxism is the scourge of this country, bringing with it political correctness in which mere thoughts are equivalent to crimes, Words are taken to be more destructive than bombs, and refusal to play the game makes you more useful to the Marxists dead than alive.

Sounds more like Maoism to me. Marx was, in fact more economic, but that is a separate issue then Cultural Marxism (as opposed to Economic Marxism - remember Marx was an economist.)

a reply to: xBWOMPx

I do not want to get into an argument with you. But you really need to think rhetorically when it comes to Marxist mindset.
At least look into YouTube videos explaining what he had in mind. But don't forget, when he lived it was a different age.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
To speak specific to "Cultural Marxism", now, I did do one piece I noted is what all the Antifa type iconoclast / historical revisionist screaming surrounding the Confederate statues, as that style iconoclasm has been done before in Lenin's Russia, Mao's China and ISIS's Middle East:

(When History Repeats) DESTROY THE OLD FOURS!

So to describe it in pure form I would assume its speaking to wiping out the existing culture, its history from the books, and installing a new one (like formatting a hard disk and putting in different brand OS over the old one and acting like the first one never existed).

Not Cultural Marxism.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: FyreByrd

I didnt actually try to define "it", nor have I ever.

Here I put the assertions of the position of the article into perspective where "Cultural Marxism" is often pointed at.

I have other terms for "it" (such as Hyper-Tribalism), and "its methods" (such as Social Group Warfare), or at least for what I tend to surmise is being described when I see the term used.

Then why are you 'talking' in this thread?