Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 36

Thread: The Cause Of Our Strife - Cultural Marxism

  1. #1
    Senior Member Cythraul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Last Online
    Friday, April 23rd, 2010 @ 09:44 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    England & Nederlands
    Subrace
    Paleo-Atlantid
    Country
    England England
    Location
    Buckinghamshire
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Family
    Engaged
    Occupation
    Graphic Design
    Politics
    Cynical
    Religion
    Old
    Posts
    848
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    The Cause Of Our Strife - Cultural Marxism

    In our struggle to understand the global corruption we see around us... the hidden assassins of our traditions and freedoms... the parasite that destabilizes our families and communities, we're quick to fixate our gaze upon the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, or Illuminati. While we may be right to do so, I believe we're missing an extremely vital component:

    Cultural Marxism

    Cultural Marxism is formulated as a way to subvert European folk and civilization-using methods other than direct political action. It was propagated by the Frankfurt School, formed in Germany in 1923 as a method by which a postmodernist, Marxist revolution could silently overthrow traditional Western society.

    Not only does Cultural Marxism explain almost everything that undermines and perplexes us socially, but there is absolute, undeniable documentation of its existence as a covert revolution which attacks our way of life.

    Antonio Gramsci, a young communist who died in one of Mussolini's prisons in 1937 at the age of 46, conjured up the notion of a 'quiet' revolution that could be diffused throughout a culture -- over a period of time -- to destroy it from within. He was the first to suggest that the application of psychology to break the traditions, beliefs, morals, and will of a people could be accomplished quietly and without the possibility of resistance. He deduced that "The civilized world had been thoroughly saturated with Christianity for 2,000 years..." and a culture based on this religion could only be captured from within.
    Source

    Cultural Marxist methods include:

    - Political Correctness
    When implementing a slow, subversive revolution, an outright ban on freedom of speech only triggers immediate dissent and protest against the establishment responsible. Cultural Marxism achieves this, instead, by political correctness. Introduced slowly, a public knows not who to blame, so they blame no-one and accept it.

    - Breakdown of the Traditional Family
    One of the basic tenets of Critical Theory was the necessity to break down the contemporary family. The (Frankfurt) Institute scholars preached that [21] "...Even a partial breakdown of parental authority in the family might tend to increase the readiness of a coming generation to accept social change."
    Source

    - Multiculturalism and Mass Immigration
    This is a sensitive subject. Very difficult for members of mass immigrant groups to accept that their presence in a new country is largely facilitated and used by an insidious world revolution.
    As they proclaim, this means their activities have been directed toward the disintegration of the traditional white male power structure. As anyone with eyes to view present-day television and motion pictures can confirm, this has been largely achieved.
    Source
    Destroying the traditional white male power structure is a concept very easily accepted by a compassionate society. Much like Feminism, what good man or woman is going to fight the movement towards racial and sexual equality? However, equality is not the Cultural Marxists true reasoning for promoting these concepts. They are methods of destroying old values and cultural ties so that the new postmodern world can replace our traditional one.

    - Feminism
    It's important to tie all these methods together because they're really the same thing - ways of destroying universal western traditions.

    That the CIA funded the Women's Liberation movement speaks volumes about how deeply entrenched within Western power structures Marxism may be.

    Gramsci insisted that alliances with non-Communist leftist groups would be essential to Communist victory. In our time, these would include radical feminist groups, extremist environmental organizations, so-called civil rights movements, anti-police associations, internationalist-minded groups, liberal church denominations, and others. Working together, these groups could create a united front working for the destructive transformation of the old Judeo-Christian culture of the West.
    Source


    Acknowledge and Fight the Covert War

    What's important to remember is that we are subject to a drawn-out, covert revolution. An open, overt, traditional-style revolution would have been rejected and defeated. But by the methods of Cultural Marxism, we're losing.

    "...there is one thing we can say with complete assurance. The traditional idea of revolution and the traditional strategy of revolution have ended. These ideas are old-fashioned"
    Herbert Marcuse - member of the Frankfurt School

    What is worth noting is that Marxists believe they are revolutionising the world in a positive way. They're surely aware that their methods are deplorable to an objective mind, but they take the perspective that it is a 'means to an end'. All of the evil they are perpetrating right now (and have done for decades) is negated by the postmodern utopia they envisage replacing our current society. They want to abolish religion, they want the kind of neutered future we see in movies like Equilibrium, or that which is depicted in George Orwell's novels. We might not be free, but we'll be free of war and poverty. Even if this is achieved, is it something any liberty-loving human being wants? Should we be forced into against our will?


    Relations to Our Current Situation

    Look at the new American administration and the European Union. In America we have a new President who many associate with a Socialist (left wing) mindset who will do nothing short of strengthening Political Correctness and teaching a population how to spy on one another. The European Union is responsible for actually turning Cultural Marxism into law - particularly in Britain where we no longer have control over our borders, freedom of speech or freedom not to be surveilled at every moment of our lives. Both Europe and America have been infiltrated, right under our noses.


    Conclusion

    Revolutions like Cultural Marxism go beyond left and right. They are an infringement upon all our liberties.

    Most Americans do not yet realize that they are being led by social revolutionaries who think in terms of the destruction of the existing social order in order to create a new social order in the world. These revolutionaries are the New Age elite Boomers, the New Totalitarians [24]. They now control every public institution in the United States of America.
    Source
    "If by being a racialist, you mean a man who despises a human being because he belongs to another race, or a man that believes one race is inherently superior to another in civilisation or capability of civilisation, then the answer is emphatically no." - Enoch Powell

  2. #2
    Senior Member Verðandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 03:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgård
    Gender
    Age
    35
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    2,284
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    189
    Thanked in
    114 Posts

    What Is “Cultural Marxism” Anyway?

    The West would have to be conquered first. Gramsci posited that because Christianity had been dominant in the West for over 2000 years, not only was it fused with Western civilization, but it had corrupted the working class. The West would have to be de-Christianized, said Gramsci, by means of a “long march through the culture.” Additionally, a new proletariat must be created. In his “Prison Notebooks,” he suggested that the new proletariat be comprised of many criminals, women, and racial minorities.


    More...

  3. #3
    Progressive Collectivist
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 10:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    11 Posts

    Cultural Marxism and Cultural Studies

    Thanks to Monolith from Apricity I can share this interesting paper with you:

    Cultural Marxism and Cultural Studies

    Douglas Kellner

    Many different versions of cultural studies have emerged in the past decades. While during its dramatic period of global expansion in the 1980s and 1990s, cultural studies was often identified with the approach to culture and society developed by the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies in Birmingham, England, their sociological, materialist, and political approaches to culture had predecessors in a number of currents of cultural Marxism. Many 20th century Marxian theorists ranging from Georg Lukacs,
    Antonio Gramsci, Ernst Bloch, Walter Benjamin, and T.W. Adorno to Fredric Jameson and Terry Eagleton employed the Marxian theory to analyze cultural forms in relation to their production, their imbrications with society and history, and their impact and influences on audiences and social life. Traditions of cultural Marxism are thus important to the trajectory of cultural studies and to understanding its various types and forms in the present age.

    The Rise of Cultural Marxism

    Marx and Engels rarely wrote in much detail on the cultural phenomena that they tended to mention in passing. Marx’s notebooks have some references to the novels of Eugene Sue and popular media, the English and foreign press, and in his 1857-1858 “outline of political economy,” he refers to Homer’s work as expressing the infancy of the human species, as if cultural texts were importantly related to social and historical development. The economic base of society for Marx and Engels consisted of the forces
    and relations of production in which culture and ideology are constructed to help secure the dominance of ruling social groups. This influential "base/superstructure" model considers the economy the base, or foundation, of society, and cultural, legal, political, and additional forms of life are conceived as “superstructures" which grow out of and serve to reproduce the economic base.

    In general, for a Marxian approach, cultural forms always emerge in specific
    historical situations, serving particular socio-economic interests and carrying out important social functions. For Marx and Engels, the cultural ideas of an epoch serve the interests of the ruling class, providing ideologies that legitimate class domination.

    “Ideology” is a critical term for Marxian analysis that describes how dominant ideas of a given class promote the interests of that class and help cover over oppression, injustices, and negative aspects of a given society. On their analysis, during the feudal period, ideas of piety, honor, valor, and military chivalry were the ruling ideas of the hegemonic aristocratic classes. During the capitalist era, values of individualism, profit, competition, and the market became dominant, articulating the ideology of the new bourgeois class that was consolidating its class power. Ideologies appear natural, they seem to be common sense, and are thus often invisible and elude criticism.
    Here the full text as a PDF-file:
    http://forums.skadi.net/attachment.p...1&d=1278412630


    Cultural Marxism is in certain regards fundamentally different from original Marxism, yet other Socialist ideas before the rise of this "school of thought".

    Cultural Marxism is even more dangerous for a people than "orthodox Marxism", because it's main goals is to deconstruct all naturally grown structures and healthy elements. Also its emphasis on the individual can be directly related to other, Christian and Liberal/Libertarian ideas about the individual and does not focus on a class or group, a great whole, but the strict individual perspective - in the and a dictatorship which suppresses the individual because it claims to do so for emancipating the individual - from culture, but if necessary even from nature and genetic inheritance. Everything which makes people different and gives them a different value being neglected, yet funnily, later Cultural Marxism was, with "Political Correctness", perfectly usable for the Neoliberal backlash and Liberalcapitalism.

    Because every individual needs to be re-educated and re-adjusted, traditional and group oriented cultural elements neglected, natural differences neglected, criticism of the current Establishment, which formally adopted Cultural Marxism as "Political Correctness" being suppressed and therefore, in the background, the Plutocratic Oligarchy can rule disoriented, fractionised, irritated and individualised subjects which can't think out of the box and the box tells them they live in the greatest society which ever existed, because all what's being done, even Liberalcapitalist reforms, being for the good of the individual - which units corrupted Liberterians and Cultural Marxists in way, with this materialistic Pseudo-Individualism.

    Just that now economic Liberalism can use Cultural Marxism as an instrument against alternative visions of society - because every alternative vision which emphasis the group would have, in one form or another, "to discriminate", and be it about certain people among the Capitalists themselves - but this again is bigot and only the Cultural Marxist transformation of society which concentrates more on re-education and suppression of free speech and dissident voices than economic problems, is essentially an "anti-white male" ideology, is just...

    Some quotations out of the text which are, in my opinion, important:

    This utopian impulse contributes to cultural studies a challenge to articulate how culture provides alternatives to the existing world and images, ideas, and narratives that can promote individual emancipation and social transformation, perspectives that would deeply inform the Frankfurt School and contemporary theorists like Fredric Jameson.
    In addition, societies establish the hegemony of males and dominant races through the institutionalizing of male supremacy or the rule of a governing race or ethnicity over subordinate groups.
    Gramsci’s key example in his Prison Notebooks (1971) is Italian fascism that supplanted the previous liberal bourgeois regime in Italy through its control of the state and exerted, often repressive, influence over schooling, the media, and other cultural, social, and political institutions.
    Current Liberalcapitalism does the same, just in the name of a much more corrupted Plutocratic Oligarchy and the "values" of and "modes" of Cultural Marxism! Obviously only "to protect individual rights..."

    Explaining the Thatcher-Reagan hegemony of the 1980s would require
    analysis of how rightist ideas became dominant in the media, schools, and culture at large. It would discuss how on a global level the market rather than the state was seen as the source of all wealth and solution to social problems, while the state was pictured as a source of excessive taxation, overregulation, and bureaucratic inertia.
    Well, Neoliberals just managed to go on with their social destructive and exploitative policy against the social and regulative state, yet they began to say: "But we do something for the individuals, we try to give everybody the same chances by launching (Cultural Marxist) programs and defending (Cultural Marxist) Liberal values..."

    Like with affirmative action. So they could weaken the communities and groups, states and people, while at the same time going on with their asocial policy and stating they are more moral than lets say nations with a more just social and economic system, better standard of life etc., but "oppression of homosexuals or foreign racial elements" or the like...

    More flies witht he same fly swat and various Cultural Marxists began to support this development massively, while at the same time betraying any real Marxist/Socialist idealism, so combining the worst of all ideological worlds in the modern West.

    Now you can't even criticise a Jewish Capitalist because that would be discrimination, even though his speculations and actions ruined millions of lifes probably, if you say that Jew did it with the support of other groups, you are just an Antisemite and better refrain from any substantial systemic criticism.

    Therefore, with this individualist approach Cultural Marxism being the most perverted ideology every created and transformed into Neoliberal-friendly, indivdualist and NGO, soft-minded, soft-topic oriented nonsense.

    He described his own "philosophy of praxis" as a mode of thought opposed to ideology, which includes, among other things, a critical analysis of ruling ideas. In "Cultural Themes: Ideological Material" (1985), Gramsci notes that in his day the press was the dominant instrument of producing ideological legitimation of the existing institutions and social order, but that many other
    institutions such as the church, schools, and different associations and groups also played a role. He called for sustained critique of these institutions and the ideologies that legitimate them, accompanied by creation of counter institutions and ideas that would produce alternatives to the existing system.
    This somehow reminds me on early Christians which begged for tolerance and the freedom of religion. Until they themselves got their grip on the political power...

    Or certain ideas being just instrumentalised by the Establishment and making things much worse.

    This can be sensed in this quote:
    Max Horkheimer and T.W. Adorno answered Benjamin's optimism in a highly
    influential analysis of the culture industry published in their book Dialectic of
    Enlightenment, which first appeared in 1948 and was translated into English in 1972. They argued that the system of cultural production dominated by film, radio broadcasting, newspapers, and magazines, was controlled by advertising and commercial imperatives, and served to create subservience to the system of consumer capitalism.
    Though many writings look nice at first, yet when analysing it in detail and looking for concreate advices, they show their totally destructive and anti-European character.

    Obviously the full merge of economic Liberalism with Cultural Marxism happened were Capitalism and ownership, Pseudo-Individualism, Liberalism, the Anglo-Jewish plutocracy grew up first, namely in the English speaking countries, Great Britain and the US of A:
    Through a set of internal debates, and responding to social struggles and movements of the 1960s and the 1970s, the Birmingham group engaged the interplay of representationsand ideologies of class, gender, race, ethnicity, and nationality in cultural texts, including media culture.
    Like the Frankfurt school, British cultural studies concluded that mass culture
    was playing an important role in integrating the working class into existing capitalist societies and that a new consumer and media culture was forming a new mode of capitalist hegemony.
    Correct.

    From the beginning, British cultural studies was highly political in nature and investigated the potentials for resistance in oppositional subcultures. After first valorizing the potential of working class cultures, they next indicated how youth subcultures could resist the hegemonic forms of capitalist domination. Unlike the classical Frankfurt school (but similar to Herbert Marcuse), British cultural studies turned to youth cultures as
    providing potentially new forms of opposition and social change.
    Destruction of the European structures by sexuality and youth culture, integrated finally in the consumer Capitalism!

    Cultural studies came to focus on how subcultural groups resist dominant forms of culture and identity, creating their own style and identities.
    It appears that in its anxiety to legitimate study of the popular and to engage the artifacts of media culture, British cultural studies turned away from so-called “high” culture in favor of the popular. But such a turn sacrifices the possible insights into all forms of culture and replicates the bifurcation of the field of culture into a “popular” and “elite” (which merely inverts the positive/negative valorizations of the older high/low distinction). More important, it disconnects cultural studies from attempts to develop oppositional forms of culture of the sort associated with the “historical avant-garde” (Burger 1984). Avant-garde movements like Expressionism, Surrealism, and Dada wanted to develop art that would revolutionize society, which would provide alternatives to hegemonic forms of culture.
    The final step away from a vision of a more just society to a just destructive and more tamed, yet more useful for the Plutocrats, "Marxian approach" = fractionised society.

    I suspect more reasons for this "anxiety", namely corruption...

    British cultural studies -- like the Frankfurt school -- insists that culture must be studied within the social relations and system through which culture is produced and consumed, and that thus analysis of culture is intimately bound up with the study of society, politics, and economics.
    Employing Gramsci’s model of hegemony and counterhegemony, it sought to analyze “hegemonic,” or ruling, social and cultural forces of domination and to seek “counterhegemonic” forces of resistance and struggle. The project was aimed at social transformation and attempted to specify forces of domination and resistance in order to aid the process of political struggle and emancipation from oppression and domination.
    One of the results of this was that they teared every higher culture and organisation of the people into the dirt, because they associated what was before, in their theory, with oppression per se, seeing everything in a mode of dependency and ignoring completely the USEFULNESS of social and cultural traditions or (memetic) codes.

    And they concentrate on common European people, especially white males, rather than on the real suppressor of ALL PEOPLE, namely the Plutocratic Oligarchy, therefore betraying the (especially white) working class in the end!

    Final stage of this destructive nonsense:
    there is a widespread tendency to decenter, or even ignore
    completely, economics, history, and politics in favor of emphasis on local pleasures, consumption, and the construction of hybrid identities from the material of the popular. This cultural populism replicates the turn in postmodern theory away from Marxism and its alleged reductionism, master narratives of liberation and domination, and historical teleology.
    In fact, British cultural studies has had an unstable relationship with political economy from the beginning. Although Stuart Hall and Richard Johnson grounded cultural studies in a Marxian model of the circuits of capital (production-distributionconsumption-production), Hall and other key figures in British cultural studies have not consistently pursued economic analysis and most practitioners of British and North American cultural studies from the 1980s to the present have pulled away from political economy altogether.
    For Hall, therefore, the global postmodern involves a pluralizing of culture, openings to the margins, to difference, to voices excluded from the narratives of Western culture.
    Thats now the Liberal crap the Plutocrats can use all the time and extend their power and profit with it even! A total turn from original social revolutionary, Socialist AND EVEN MARXIST approaches, now consumed by Liberalcapitalism and the Plutocratic Oligarchy, which can use it as a mean of extending the control over the people and making naturally grown structures, with the potential of stronger resistance, weaker and softer, or deconstructing them as a whole!

    For Hall (1991), the interesting question is what happens when a progressive politics of representation imposes itself on the global postmodern field, as if the global field was really open to marginality and otherness. But in fact the global field itself is structured and controlled by dominant corporate and state powers and it remains a struggle to get oppositional voices in play and is probably impossible in broadcasting
    IN FACT, because of Cultural Marxist inspired "political correctness", only what's useful for the Plutocrats being supported, but REAL OPPOSITION SUPPRESSED!

    Neoliberalism simply incorporated the useful elements (for the Plutocracy) of Cultural Marxism!

    The oppositional view now is not a Latino talking in a slang, for sure not, but real political movements which try to defend European genetic (biological) and memetic (cultural) traditions, the position of the male - especially the white male - the non-Jewish, non-Islamic people, those REALLY opposing Capitalism and NAMING THOSE structures and people, especially in the mass media and financial system, political structures, all following the rule of the Plutocratic Oligarchy, which cause real destruction and exploitation nowadays!

    The simple white man is not the oppressor, but that victim of a vicious Liberalcapitalist system like the black farmer in Africa, yet the real mechanisms of exploitation and corruption being widely ignored, or at best touched softly, while collective interests and longer term interests of the white nations being wholly ignored and even considered "a crime".

    there is more pluralism, multiplicity, openness to new voices,
    on the margins, but such alternative cultures are hardly part of the global postmodern that Hall elicits. Hall’s global postmodern is thus too positive and his optimism should be tempered by the sort of critical perspectives on global capitalism developed by the Frankfurt school and the earlier stages of cultural studies.
    IF, only IF those people like Hall are honest, they just stupid dogs because they were satisfied and distracted with small, dry bones by those in charge and completely ignore THE FACTS and HUMAN REALITY!

    They are just the menials of the Anglo-Jewish Plutocracy to achieve the new society Coudenhove-Kalergi already predicted!

    Critical cultural studies insisted that the politics of representation
    must engage class, gender, race, and sexuality, thus correcting lacunae in earlier forms of cultural Marxism. British cultural studies successively moved from focuses on class and culture to include gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, nation, and other constituents of identity in their analyses (see the articles collected in Durham and Kellner 2001).
    Brainwashed idiots or corrupted subjects?

    ranging from neo-Marxist models developed by Lukàcs, Gramsci, Bloch, and the Frankfurt school in the 1930s to feminist and psychoanalytic cultural studies to semiotic and post-structuralist perspectives (see Durham and Kellner 2001). In Britain and the United States, there is a long tradition of cultural studies that preceded the Birmingham school (see Davies 1995
    and Aronowitz 1993).
    The influence of the Freudian psychoanalysis can't be overstated if talking about Cultural Marxism, because his "school" was already anti-European and fallacious in many respects, yet was almost completely hijacked by Marxists too. And the "polymorph sexual perversion" of humans should be used to destroy the West, the base of its organisation - especially the family and healthy relations between related people and man and woman, in particular.

    It can empower people to gain sovereignty over
    their culture and to be able to struggle for alternative cultures and political change. Cultural studies is thus not just another academic fad, but can be part of a struggle for a better society and a better life.
    Agreed on everything, but I have to add something: Cultural Marxists went and still go in the wrong direction!

    Obviously this is a rather "Cultural Marxist-friendly" to say it nice, text, but still a lot of interesting insights!
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

  4. #4
    Senior Member Zogbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Online
    Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 @ 06:00 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Swedish/Prussian
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Gender
    Politics
    Nationalsozialismus
    Religion
    Germania
    Posts
    235
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Here is part one of a three-part series on the Frankfurt school & cultural Marxism. The uploader also has a fairly interesting interview of professor Kevin MacDonald up, where he discusses various Jewish intellectual movements in brief, including the Frankfurt school.

  5. #5
    Progressive Collectivist
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 10:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    11 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Zogbot View Post
    Here is part one of a three-part series on the Frankfurt school & cultural Marxism. The uploader also has a fairly interesting interview of professor Kevin MacDonald up, where he discusses various Jewish intellectual movements in brief, including the Frankfurt school.
    Why I can agree with many points they make in this video, the problem is that they don't see how Liberalcapitalism really works and how the Plutocratic Oligarchy is actually using Cultural Marxism as a tool. They just confuse the tool with the masters using it!

    So in a way, they are still caught in the fraud of Cultural Marxism, by taking them really serious and ignoring the fact that Capitalists actually work perfectly together with them - at least in the majority of cases - in Neoliberalism.

    The only entrepreneurs suffering from it are the smaller and medium ones, the big, real Capitalist corporations, owned by the bankers, the financial Oligarchy and their allies, as well as menials, can deal pretty well with Cultural Marxism, implemented it in their programs in the companies and use it to get international acceptance and influence, over all boundaries of race, religion etc.

    So in the end, Cultural Marxism is, like being told in part 1 more or less, no real "traditional Marxism" any more, but primarily directed - almost without other aspects - against "the culture of the white man" and actually working for the exploitation of the people in the Marxist sense - they work together with "Capitalist exploiters" on many levels, so it's just all a fraud for the simple people with no insights into the structure of power, since they don't really touch the real problem of Capitalism sufficiently and neither to the Capitalists harm their schools and universities, even on the contrary, they support them - at least those acting like they want, spreading Cultural Marxism but actually making real social revolutionary ideas, which would be a real threat for the bankers, weaker the same time.
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

  6. #6
    Senior Member Roderic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Online
    Monday, May 27th, 2019 @ 06:09 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Posts
    642
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    4 Posts

    Political Correctness Aka Cultural Marxism

    Cultural Marxism, also known as Political Correctness, is an ideology and a strategy used to socially engineer the society through the subversion of culture.

    Political Correctness and Multiculturalism are tools used today to undermine and destroy western culture in order then to replace it with a radically different one based on collectivist lines.

    These techniques are broadly based on the teachings of the Frankfurt School, first based in Frankfurt, Germany, and then spread to New York and in the rest of the world. The Soviets, communists and socialists worldwide used these techniques in order to undermine the culture and the institutions of western nations and so bring them under their control.

    Political Corectness is not a phenomenon that should be underestimated. It is the root of all evil and is destroying slowly our societies and civilization.
    Valdas Anelauskas is a professor at the University of Oregon. He as a Lithuanian and grew up in the former Soviet Union.

    Column by William S. Lind

    What Is The Frankfurt School (And Its Effect On America)?

    YouTube - Political Correctness aka Cultural Marxism. Part 1 of 7

    YouTube - Political Correctness aka Cultural Marxism. Part 2 of 7

    YouTube - Political Correctness aka Cultural Marxism. Part 3 of 7

    YouTube - Political Correctness aka Cultural Marxism. Part 4 of 7

    YouTube - Political Correctness aka Cultural Marxism. Part 5 of 7

    YouTube - Political Correctness aka Cultural Marxism. Part 6 of 7

    YouTube - Political Correctness aka Cultural Marxism. Part 7 of 7


    This video was made by The Free Congress Foundation Free Congress Foundation.

    It may be watched in one complete video, instead of divided in three parts, at:

    The History of Political Correctness

    YouTube - Part 1: The History of Political Correctness

    YouTube - Part 2: The History of Political Correctness

    YouTube - Part 3: The History of Political Correctness


    A clip that makes a good point about Political Correctness and avoiding the issue.

    YouTube - Political Correctness

  7. #7
    Senior Member OnePercent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Online
    Monday, August 13th, 2012 @ 07:01 AM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic-American
    Ancestry
    Swiss/Irish
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Arizona Arizona
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Gender
    Age
    43
    Occupation
    Tech Support
    Politics
    Independent
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    471
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    What is Cultural Marxism?

    Earlier today I made a comment on a news article wherein I called the author of the article a cultural marxist. I was promptly accosted by other commenters who said that "cultural marxism" is basically a made up term that has no meaning. To this I provided the following definition:

    Cultural Marxism is commonly known as “multiculturalism” or, less formally, Political Correctness.

    Through the use of "Critical Theory" developed by the marxist philosophers of the Frankfurt School (especially Marcuse), adherents utilize marxist inspired social class criticism to undermine "capitalist" bourgeoisie culture. The overarching goal is to reduce the cultural dominance of the "middle-class" in favor of the proletariat, a group that is seen as being more amenable to economic marxism.

    In practice cultural marxists criticize the major cultural institutions of a society as being "racist" or "sexist" in order to undermine them and cause infighting. Their ultimate goal is to turn a unified and functioning society into a dysfunctional and fractured one. They do this in the belief that such a disordered society will finally bring about Marx's "proletarian revolution".
    I also found a very nice explanation online:

    What is Cultural Marxism?
    William S. Lind

    In his columns on the next conservatism, Paul Weyrich has several times referred to “cultural Marxism.” He asked me, as Free Congress Foundation’s resident historian, to write this column explaining what cultural Marxism is and where it came from. In order to understand what something is, you have to know its history.

    Cultural Marxism is a branch of western Marxism, different from the Marxism-Leninism of the old Soviet Union. It is commonly known as “multiculturalism” or, less formally, Political Correctness. From its beginning, the promoters of cultural Marxism have known they could be more effective if they concealed the Marxist nature of their work, hence the use of terms such as “multiculturalism.”

    Cultural Marxism began not in the 1960s but in 1919, immediately after World War I. Marxist theory had predicted that in the event of a big European war, the working class all over Europe would rise up to overthrow capitalism and create communism. But when war came in 1914, that did not happen. When it finally did happen in Russia in 1917, workers in other European countries did not support it. What had gone wrong?

    Independently, two Marxist theorists, Antonio Gramsci in Italy and Georg Lukacs in Hungary, came to the same answer: Western culture and the Christian religion had so blinded the working class to its true, Marxist class interest that Communism was impossible in the West until both could be destroyed. In 1919, Lukacs asked, “Who will save us from Western civilization?” That same year, when he became Deputy Commissar for Culture in the short-lived Bolshevik Bela Kun government in Hungary, one of Lukacs’s first acts was to introduce sex education into Hungary’s public schools. He knew that if he could destroy the West’s traditional sexual morals, he would have taken a giant step toward destroying Western culture itself.

    In 1923, inspired in part by Lukacs, a group of German Marxists established a think tank at Frankfurt University in Germany called the Institute for Social Research. This institute, soon known simply as the Frankfurt School, would become the creator of cultural Marxism.

    To translate Marxism from economic into cultural terms, the members of the Frankfurt School - - Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Wilhelm Reich, Eric Fromm and Herbert Marcuse, to name the most important - - had to contradict Marx on several points. They argued that culture was not just part of what Marx had called society’s “superstructure,” but an independent and very important variable. They also said that the working class would not lead a Marxist revolution, because it was becoming part of the middle class, the hated bourgeoisie.

    Who would? In the 1950s, Marcuse answered the question: a coalition of blacks, students, feminist women and homosexuals.

    Fatefully for America, when Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933, the Frankfurt School fled - - and reestablished itself in New York City. There, it shifted its focus from destroying traditional Western culture in Germany to destroying it in the United States. To do so, it invented “Critical Theory.” What is the theory? To criticize every traditional institution, starting with the family, brutally and unremittingly, in order to bring them down. It wrote a series of “studies in prejudice,” which said that anyone who believes in traditional Western culture is prejudiced, a “racist” or “sexist” of “fascist” - - and is also mentally ill.

    Most importantly, the Frankfurt School crossed Marx with Freud, taking from psychology the technique of psychological conditioning. Today, when the cultural Marxists want to do something like “normalize” homosexuality, they do not argue the point philosophically. They just beam television show after television show into every American home where the only normal-seeming white male is a homosexual (the Frankfurt School’s key people spent the war years in Hollywood).

    After World War II ended, most members of the Frankfurt School went back to Germany. But Herbert Marcuse stayed in America. He took the highly abstract works of other Frankfurt School members and repackaged them in ways college students could read and understand. In his book “Eros and Civilization,” he argued that by freeing sex from any restraints, we could elevate the pleasure principle over the reality principle and create a society with no work, only play (Marcuse coined the phrase, “Make love, not war”). Marcuse also argued for what he called “liberating tolerance,” which he defined as tolerance for all ideas coming from the Left and intolerance for any ideas coming from the Right. In the 1960s, Marcuse became the chief “guru” of the New Left, and he injected the cultural Marxism of the Frankfurt School into the baby boom generation, to the point where it is now America’s state ideology.

    The next conservatism should unmask multiculturalism and Political Correctness and tell the American people what they really are: cultural Marxism. Its goal remains what Lukacs and Gramsci set in 1919: destroying Western culture and the Christian religion. It has already made vast strides toward that goal. But if the average American found out that Political Correctness is a form of Marxism, different from the Marxism of the Soviet Union but Marxism nonetheless, it would be in trouble. The next conservatism needs to reveal the man behind the curtain - - old Karl Marx himself.
    So I guess my question is what do you think? Is Cultural Marxism a real ideology that is influencing our society, or is it, as one detractor put it, a conspiracy theory where Cultural Marxists (understood as a secret cabal) have imposed values like tolerance, equality and multiculturalism on modern society.?

  8. #8
    Aka Haight Jörmungandr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Online
    Saturday, August 25th, 2012 @ 03:10 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Güstrow, Mecklenburg.
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Location
    AU
    Gender
    Politics
    National-Socialist
    Religion
    Odinist.
    Posts
    67
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Of course it's real. Jews created it, they implemented it and now it rules us.

    All one needs to do to see it in action is observe society.

    I hardly think people would call themselves "Cultural-Marxists" as they tend to go by other names such as "progressives" or "Liberals" or "Trotskyists" etc and they claim they are "in a fight for equality" for all people.*


    *So long as you are not White.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Plantagenet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    Monday, September 2nd, 2019 @ 10:27 PM
    Ethnicity
    Celto-Germanic
    Ancestry
    British-German
    Subrace
    Nordid-Cromagnid
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    Gender
    Politics
    Throne and Altar
    Religion
    Aryajnana
    Posts
    719
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

  10. #10
    Senior Member KingOvGermania's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Online
    2 Weeks Ago @ 01:52 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Germany, Austria
    Subrace
    Nordic-Alpine mix I believe
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    Location
    Ered Nimrais
    Gender
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    Radical Traditionalist
    Religion
    Transcendental Naturalism
    Posts
    506
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    39
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    It is 100% truth that the idea of 'political correctness' was invented by Marxists, and laid way to 'anti-racism', 'feminism', and any other destructive movement today. It all started with the Frankfurt School mixing Freud's theories with Marx to create a system of cultural Marxism, as opposed to Economic one. It started as a total assault on Western culture and was purveyed in Western culture through Academia, the 'counterculture' of the 60s, etc, and influenced all sorts of degeneracy today. Psychology especially uses it to deam anything against an egalitarian, race-denying, anti-cultural norm as pathologically harmful.
    For more info, watch this video, it is genuinely eye opening;
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjaBpVzOohs
    Let truth and falsehood grapple...truth is strong-
    John Milton

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. National Geographic's Staunch Cultural Marxism
    By Autosomal Viking in forum Cultural & Linguistic Anthropology
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: Monday, June 11th, 2018, 03:31 AM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: Saturday, February 12th, 2011, 12:07 AM
  3. The Frankfurt School & Cultural Marxism
    By Old Winter in forum Political Theory
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Sunday, October 31st, 2010, 11:26 PM
  4. Cultural Marxism Example: Team Ashamed of Being Winners
    By rainman in forum Psychology, Behavior, & Neuroscience
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: Friday, November 6th, 2009, 12:36 AM
  5. Sweden: The Triumph of Cultural Marxism
    By BeornWulfWer in forum Sweden
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Saturday, November 15th, 2008, 11:34 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •