The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Moderators: DrVolin, Wombaticus Rex, Jeff

The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby coffin_dodger » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:48 am

Worth a read - (emphasis mine)

Wednesday, 23 March 2016 - Brandon Smith
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/2836-the-reasons-why-people-hate-cultural-marxists

A common misconception in America today is that our nation is evenly divided between conservatives and liberals in an absolute sense. This is not necessarily true.

Though national elections always seem to progress along a 51 percent to 49 percent opposition, with red states barely beating our blue states or blue states barely beating out red states, this is not a practical representation of the legitimate ideological boundaries within the U.S. What you really have in America is a wide spectrum of beliefs of varying degrees in-between ultimate extremes. I am of course referring to the general public in this respect.

The top of the political pyramid is a different story entirely. For them there are no sides whatsoever. Top Republicans and top Democrats are essentially the same animal with the same goals. They may wear different masks and exploit diverging rhetoric, but at the end of the day for elitists, America is a one-party system.

For the rest of us there is a hazy drift, with many people holding some views that lean conservative and other views that lean liberal.

Unfortunately, “moderates” do very little to direct the future of nations. Nearly all great changes and great upheavals are initiated by the elites themselves (extremists in their own right) or by smaller groups on opposite ends of the spectrum (which are often manipulated by elitists). At the very far reaches of the void of the left and liberalism festers what I would call a sociopolitical theology; the cult of cultural Marxism.

If you are confused as to what cultural Marxism really is I highly suggest you research as much as possible into the Frankfurt School founded by Marxist professors and academics in Germany during the 1920s and the early 1930s. The basic foundation of the Frankfurt School was to take the collectivist philosophy of Karl Marx, which revolved primarily around economic class structure, and apply it in a more sociological manner utilizing Hegelian dynamics.

The Frankfurt School sought to explore “class oppression” not only between the rich and the poor, the workers and the aristocracy, but also in aspect to races, religions, families, genders, behavioral psychology, etc. That is to say, the Marxists of the Frankfurt School were looking for new methods to divide and conquer existing societies and nations beyond simple economic conflicts.

After the rise of fascism in Germany, numerous members of the Frankfurt School fled to the U.S., bringing their ideological framework with them and applying it in U.S. universities and academic circles.

One of the primary character traits or strategies of cultural Marxists today is that they rarely if ever actually self-identify as cultural Marxists. This strategy allows them to change their colors on a whim, like a chameleon, and it prevents opponents from pinning down their world view in order to present a solid argument against them. It also allows them to disassociate from past cultural Marxists with negative reputations while holding the same beliefs as those historical figures.

The cultural Marxist denies he is a cultural Marxist, then he goes on to argue an ideology which perfectly matches what cultural Marxists have historically believed.

This is only one of the many reasons why most people, conservatives and moderate liberals alike, distrust and even despise cultural Marxists. The pervasive weakness among cultural Marxists in America is that they tend to believe their own propaganda. They think that they are an actual social force in this country with the numbers and support to back their activities. They fell into this delusion because for a time they have been effective at infiltrating popular media and generating a false consensus, not to mention organizing public and online mobs to be used as a weapon against others. They seem to be everywhere, yet they are few.

Lately, though, the illusion of numbers is beginning to collapse for them. Masses of people, even those that identify with the “Left”, are beginning to disown what are often referred to as “social justice warriors” (cultural Marxists) and are speaking out. Here is a list of reasons why the public is shifting and the tide is turning against social justice and cultural Marxists.

Third Wave Feminism

Cultural Marxists are collectivists at their very core. This means that their ideological pursuit is the eradication of individualism, individual liberty, and groups based on voluntary participation in the name of the “greater good of the greater number.” Collectivists seek to centralize everything. This goal could not be more evident than in the efforts of third-wave feminists.

Third-wave feminists are best understood through the lens of what they refer to as “intersectionality,” a made up social justice term that whitewashes the new feminist strategy of co-opting ALL other social issues and forcing them under the umbrella of the feminist movement. Feminism is not simply about creating equal opportunity and equal rights for women, not anymore. Instead, third-wave feminism claims dominion over women’s rights, all gender related issues, race issues, gay rights issues, economic “inequality”, immigration issues, etc.

Of course, if you believe in working for equal rights of all people regardless of their individual and ethnic traits, you would be called an egalitarian by definition, not a feminist. But feminists attack this distinction and continue to demand that they are the sole proprietors of “equality” and claim all other methodologies are irrelevant.

This kind of totalitarianism has provoked a growing backlash against feminists, even from more left leaning subsections of the American population. People are beginning to realize that there really is no need for feminism anymore. Women already have equal protection under the law, and they already have equal opportunity.

In fact, in many sectors women are given considerable advantages over men. Women are given greater favor in college applications and grant applications which is why women today outnumber men in universities. Women are often given favor in job applications, even in professions which men are more inclined to succeed in (like firefighting, for example); this bias in favor of women by employers is often inspired by government incentives and by a fear of civil suits. Women have far more institutionalized advantages in divorce court, and, women are more likely to receive reduced sentences for the same crime as a man.

The most common lie used by feminists to argue for the existence of inequality is the “gender pay gap,” which has long been debunked. A woman who works the same exact job as a man with the same effort and diligence, for the same exact hours, and does not take maternity leave or extra vacations is paid the SAME as that man. And if for some reason there is something amiss in the accounting, there are laws in place to punish employers that do actually pay women less for the same work. There is no gender pay gap except what women create for themselves through their own life choices.

Since women have the same rights and protections as men today, feminists are forced to create oppression out of thin air to then fight against. The new battlefield for feminists and social justice warriors is about "feelings" rather than law. That is to say, feminists believe that personal feelings should be protected by law and that contrary or discriminatory thought must be criminalized. Of course, the definition of criminal discrimination is left rather broad. Ultimately, it is the feminists and their allies in government that arbitrarily decide what thoughts are "bad" and what thoughts are acceptable.

The feminist movement must co-opt and absorb other groups and other issues and it must create exponentially more divisions and imaginary oppression in order to justify its existence. They will never stop. There will never come a day when feminists are satisfied because their goal is not equality. Their goal is social power, and to maintain social power indefinitely.

Mob Shaming And Self Censorship

Cultural Marxists will use any tool at their disposal to shut down or silence dissent, but they prefer to use mob tactics and public shaming as their bread and butter. Get enough of your cohorts together in an organized attack and the illusion of consensus becomes powerful leverage.

There are numerous instances of accomplished people being railroaded out of their jobs in the past few years by cultural Marxist mobs, and numerous people harassed into self censorship for fear of being labeled a sexist, misogynist, racist, bigot, xenophobe, homophobe, etc. This tactic, though, has been so overused that it is now losing its effectiveness. There is a growing movement of people who no longer care what they are labeled by cultural Marxists and when the mob no longer has shaming as a tool, they can only move on to more “direct” actions.

Physical Interference With Freedom Of Speech

Now that the shaming techniques are becoming passé, cultural Marxists are attempting to physically disrupt discussion or silence opposing views. From the notorious social justice mob at the University of Missouri, which called for “some muscle over here,” to forcefully remove student journalists covering the protest, to feminist mobs shutting down conferences on men’s issues, to the professional agitators bused in to disrupt Trump rallies, cultural Marxists are beginning to physically impede the rights of other people to speak, or listen and participate.

How do they rationalize this anti-1st Amendment activity? Easy! They simply argue that it is THEIR 1st Amendment right to disrupt YOUR 1st Amendment rights, even if you are in a public space. This is the kind of circular insanity that leads directly to Stalinist or Maoist totalitarianism.

I’m sure that many people are also familiar with the heightened number of incidences in recent weeks of these same cultural Marxists being beaten up in response to their strategy. Expect this to continue and expect reactions to social justice mobs to become even more violent as we get closer to election time.

Reverse Racism

My favorite hypocritical claim from cultural Marxists is that there is no such thing as reverse racism. Meaning, a black or Hispanic or Asian person, etc., cannot be racist towards a white person. How is this possible? They assert that racism requires institutionalized “advantage” or “privilege.” Only white people can be racist because we have all the “privilege” and institutional protection.

Of course, bringing up the fact that the president of the United States is a black man does not seem to matter. The so called “patriarchy” reigns supreme, and the patriarchy is white.

If you think that reverse racism is not a real issue, then you might want to take a gander at this little debate at Harvard, in which the main argument by a Black Lives Matter activist was “white people do not have a right to life” (be sure to check out the links included with the video which affirm that this was not simply a debater “playing devil’s advocate”).



So, here is where cultural Marxism always goes wrong, or right, depending on who is benefiting. Communist movements like cultural Marxism, have a fantastic knack for eliciting fascist responses and driving otherwise even-handed people into the arms of fascist governments. It happened in Germany, Spain and Italy before World War II, and it could very well happen again in America today.

The debaters argue against the right to life of an entire ethnic group (white people), because they claim that white people have abused their privileges to exploit or oppress other groups.

First, like all collectivists, they have completely disregarded individual liberty and inherent conscience. All white people are presented as a singular group (which they are not), and all white people are presented as guilty for crimes which can be attributed to any other ethnic group at any other point in history as well. All white people are accused of having “privileges” beyond that of other ethnic groups, but no proof of this privilege is ever presented; it is just treated as a given fact.

Second, these cultural Marxists foolishly do not take into account that if they want to promote the extreme side of communism to support their views others could just as easily take the opposing extreme in response. What would a fascist say to the Harvard debater’s arguments?

A fascist might argue the other side of the coin — that all other ethnic groups suffer oppression because they are “inferior,” “weak” or “intellectually inadequate.” A fascist would probably assert that the weak survive only by the good graces of the strong, and that only the strong have a “right to life.” A fascist would argue that all groups that are so easily oppressed should be exterminated to make room for the strong.

This argument is just as absurd as the argument presented at Harvard because it completely overlooks the fact that individuals have a right to life, period. Being part of an ethnic group is not a crime in itself, but cultural Marxists would like white people in particular to ignore their individualism and believe they are defined only by their color and that they should feel guilty by association. This is the epitome of racism.

Black Lives Matter

Yes, black lives do matter, just as all lives matter. But as the Harvard debater above argues, certain ethnic groups matter “more” because they are supposedly more oppressed.

The classic tactic of cultural Marxists is to create new divisions or to exacerbate existing divisions in order to destabilize a society. Once a society is broken, it can then be rebuilt according the vision of a select few. One of the best methods of causing division is to exploit cultural differences based on obvious separations.

People do tend to separate more according to skin color and ethnicity. This is a tale as old as time. Is it wrong? Not necessarily. Ethnic groups develop their own belief systems, their own values and principles, and though many human beings share archetypal similarities and inherent conscience regardless of the time and place they were born, they still have anthropological discourse.

It is very easy to pit one ethnic group against another if the right pressure is applied. Black lives matter is nothing more than an effort by cultural Marxists to capitalize on race tensions and make them far worse through agitation.

Forced Multiculturalism

As stated above, different ethnic groups can have different priorities. The concept of freedom is inherent in the human psyche from birth, but numerous cultures are structured around suppressing that human desire and need. These cultures cannot be reconciled with cultures that do respect individual liberty. There are many other important differences that cause clashes between cultures, but freedom vs. collectivism is the most explosive.

Cultural Marxists certainly have no respect for freedom. Their only concern is artificial “equality,” because forced equality makes collectivism possible. This often means grinding down the best the world has to offer to match it with the worst the world has to offer.

Multiculturalism is really just a mechanism by which failed and unstable cultures are aggressively injected into more stable societies in order to disrupt and then homogenize them. Europe is now experiencing this in unprecedented fashion, and the U.S. has been dealing with it incrementally for decades.

Multiculturalism is of course a nice way of describing the Cloward-Piven Strategy, a strategy designed by cultural Marxists to deliberately undermine economic and social systems. The use of Islamic refugees as a battering ram against Western society is a perfect summation of this strategy.

Islamic culture abiding by Sharia Law and unfamiliar with Western traditions and beliefs is completely incompatible with European and American civilization. It is one thing for Islamic culture to exist with respect to Western values, it is another thing for Islamic culture to supplant Western values.

The process of forced multiculturalism is driving large portions of the EU and America to become violently opposed to cultural Marxists. I fear that this is leading to irreconcilable division to the point of war, just as what took place during the last Great Depression. And, as I pointed out at the beginning of this article, cultural Marxists are a tiny minority, a paper tiger posing as the real thing. If they do not stop with their incessant subversion and cultism they will end up being the first to pay the price. The rest of us will pay later.
coffin_dodger
 
Posts: 2062
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:05 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (14)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:01 am

On here I've seen some fairly strong denouncements of the idea of Cultural Marxism. At the time I mused that it seems ok for the Left to have all shades of conspiracy theories from strong to flimsy, and they are all mostly received with a degree of interest..... however, when the Right does a similar thing it is treated automatically with derision, a fairly unsymmetrical attitude.

When it is addressed at all, the idea of CM is usually critiqued by questioning its historical roots, but to me that doesn't matter, it does seem to describe something in modern times and for that reason alone it is a reasonable label to use.

(just heading off the usual posse)
" Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism"
User avatar
jakell
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 4:58 pm
Location: North England
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby Jerky » Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:04 am

Yeah, this is basically a bunch of ignorant bullshit, and I would say it's an example of "a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing", but I suspect the author knows better, and is lying on purpose.

J
User avatar
Jerky
 
Posts: 1251
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: Toronto, ON
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby 82_28 » Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:23 am

^^^^Yeah, what a load of shit. Thanks for sharing though, Sr. Dodger.
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 10461
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The slippery Cultural Marxists

Postby Sounder » Thu Mar 24, 2016 8:32 am

^^^^Yeah, what a load of shit.


OK then 82-28 and jerky, use your scintillating intellect to break down this rhetoric and show us specifically in what ways this is a 'load of shit'.

-or Jack or AD, no c+p, your own words, thanks.

RI is after all, not a faith based organization. :thumbsup
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 3293
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 8:54 am

I don't think we've got past the allergic reaction to the phrase 'Cultural Marxism' yet (referenced in my above post), never mind the contents of the piece. Hopefully a proper look will come at some point once the swelling has abated a bit.

..... what I would call a sociopolitical theology.....


Hey! you added the 'faith based organisation' bit after I used this quote, so we are seeing similar things it seems. Religious metaphors appear to be as useful as my medical one.
Last edited by jakell on Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
" Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism"
User avatar
jakell
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 4:58 pm
Location: North England
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby 82_28 » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:06 am

To be honest I got bored halfway through and just skimmed from there. I know how I feel about Culture and Marxism already. I know, we know, what the terms mean. I take no position as far as the OP. Share it if you find it. The more the merrier. But boring. Sorry. Not a dig on you, just boring.
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 10461
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby coffin_dodger » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:38 am

Jerky » Thu Mar 24, 2016 12:04 pm wrote:Yeah, this is basically a bunch of ignorant bullshit, and I would say it's an example of "a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing", but I suspect the author knows better, and is lying on purpose.

J


So, which is it - ignorance, or crafted purposefully? It can't be both - even though you contradict yourself in the same sentence! :wink
coffin_dodger
 
Posts: 2062
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:05 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (14)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby Luther Blissett » Thu Mar 24, 2016 10:18 am

I can't personally tell if it's ignorance or purposeful lying, I go back and forth from sentence to sentence. I think about half the statements made are just inventions (like: "That is to say, the Marxists of the Frankfurt School were looking for new methods to divide and conquer existing societies and nations beyond simple economic conflicts" based on 1980s Pat Buchanon fantasies; "This means that their ideological pursuit is the eradication of individualism, individual liberty, and groups based on voluntary participation in the name of the “greater good of the greater number.” Collectivists seek to centralize everything"; and "Communist movements like cultural Marxism, have a fantastic knack for eliciting fascist responses and driving otherwise even-handed people into the arms of fascist governments") and the other half of the statements are purposeful lies (like: "And if for some reason there is something amiss in the accounting, there are laws in place to punish employers that do actually pay women less for the same work" [lol]; "All white people are presented as a singular group (which they are not), and all white people are presented as guilty for crimes which can be attributed to any other ethnic group at any other point in history as well. All white people are accused of having “privileges” beyond that of other ethnic groups, but no proof of this privilege is ever presented; it is just treated as a given fact" [I think the author probably knows better and probably knows how it works if they've ever had a conversation about race with a non-white person]; and "Cultural Marxists certainly have no respect for freedom. Their only concern is artificial “equality,” because forced equality makes collectivism possible. This often means grinding down the best the world has to offer to match it with the worst the world has to offer.…Multiculturalism is really just a mechanism by which failed and unstable cultures are aggressively injected into more stable societies in order to disrupt and then homogenize them" [the author knows they are using the language of a neonazi here]).
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4806
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 10:29 am

'Neonazi'? Are you sure?

It sounds like fairly standard alt-right fare to me, so this is being very liberal with the Nazi brush. It's not much different to what is being discussed on the 'Soros' and 'Coercive'' threads.

Still, it sometimes helps to get the Nazis in early on, so that they can be ejected early on (although they do tend to hang around)
" Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism"
User avatar
jakell
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 4:58 pm
Location: North England
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby Luther Blissett » Thu Mar 24, 2016 10:46 am

jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:29 am wrote:'Neonazi'? Are you sure?

It sounds like fairly standard alt-right fare to me, so this is being very liberal with the Nazi brush. It's not much different to what is being discussed on the 'Soros' and 'Coercive'' threads.

Still, it sometimes helps to get the Nazis in early on, so that they can be ejected early on (although they do tend to hang around)


I'm interpreting the word "best" as "white" there, which in the author's own context pretty much has to be true. "Multiculturalism" is "aggressively injected" and then they somehow flip multiculturalism into disruptive "homogeneity." All this language ("grinding down") used to try to cast their peace activist egalitarian enemies as villains is used as a dog whistle so that the right readers will instinctively know what they have to do - you know, like shoot behoodied black teenage interlopers in their gated communities, or hey, maybe join that new Lion Guard thing, because multiculturalism is grinding down the best that the world has to offer.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4806
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Lahore & Marseille

Postby IanEye » Thu Mar 24, 2016 10:56 am



Multiculturalism is of course a nice way of describing the Cloward-Piven Strategy, a strategy designed by cultural Marxists to deliberately undermine economic and social systems. The use of Islamic refugees as a battering ram against Western society is a perfect summation of this strategy.

Islamic culture abiding by Sharia Law and unfamiliar with Western traditions and beliefs is completely incompatible with European and American civilization. It is one thing for Islamic culture to exist with respect to Western values, it is another thing for Islamic culture to supplant Western values.

The process of forced multiculturalism is driving large portions of the EU and America to become violently opposed to cultural Marxists. I fear that this is leading to irreconcilable division to the point of war, just as what took place during the last Great Depression. And, as I pointed out at the beginning of this article, cultural Marxists are a tiny minority, a paper tiger posing as the real thing. If they do not stop with their incessant subversion and cultism they will end up being the first to pay the price.

The rest of us will pay later.




The claim that intervention might be justified through appeals to universal human rights would lead us into a tit-for-tat slanging match. What about Israel’s abuse of human rights? The US-led West only intervenes when its own interests are at stake. etc. etc. And we could go spiralling round in circles of abuse ad infinitum, as one does in the current memepsychosis.

The tragedy of the Arab-Israeli conflict is a tragedy - in the sense that there is only a choice between two dire alternatives. There is no 'right' side to be on because both sides can line up a set of convincing and emotive arguments that merit sympathy. The passions deployed by the memes which plague the region are so blinding and overwhelming that truly open discussion and sincere compromise are out of the question. From a secular rationalist perspective the conflict is a prime example of humanity's susceptibility to meme manipulation, and of a deep-rooted inclination towards zero-sum situations.

From the handful of interviews that Bryn Jones gave, it sometimes seems that he conceived of Islam as a passive victim of occidental depredations and colonial exploitation. This now-fashionable point of view is both very indulgent towards Islam, in that all of Islam’s failings can be blamed on the West and all crimes can be justified as retaliation against the West; and deluded and patronizing, in that it denies Islam has its own agency, agenda or expansionist program.




At other times he seems more aware of more pro-active and dynamic potential latent in Islam. From an interview in 1995:

You have an earlier CD entitled the United States of Islam. To me that seems to hint at a common prophetic theme of a unified Arab-Asian military alliance against the west. Do you foresee a union of former Soviet states, China, North Africa, and other Islamic countries?

Yeah, it could be a Pan-Arabic force like Tajikistan, Iran, Kazakhstan, a whole force... Whether it will come off or not, I don't know. It should, but they've all got their own interests so I don't know whether Syria would join up with Iran or Iraq.


Bryn Jones professed to be utterly indifferent to European culture, or even fundamentally opposed to it when it was allied to US interference. Seeing that the Arab-Israeli conflict would lead to an increasingly polarized, inescapable and global conflict, he made it quite clear what side he would be on, when it came to the crunch.

These days Bryn Jones would not have been so isolated, now that there are pro-Islamic political groups and movements in the UK which wear their love of totalitarianism and hatred of Zionism on their sleeves. But the parasitism of Islamo-Marxism would have no doubt disgusted Bryn Jones: Marxism being for him just another form of Western imperialism; an imposition of values alien to Islamic culture.

Fortunately, as has been noted, the music of Muslimgauze is vastly more complex, varied and emotionally subtle than the viewpoint expressed so tersely by Bryn Jones in interview.





.
User avatar
IanEye
 
Posts: 4705
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:33 pm
Blog: View Blog (29)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 10:57 am

Luther Blissett » Thu Mar 24, 2016 2:46 pm wrote:
jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:29 am wrote:'Neonazi'? Are you sure?

It sounds like fairly standard alt-right fare to me, so this is being very liberal with the Nazi brush. It's not much different to what is being discussed on the 'Soros' and 'Coercive'' threads.

Still, it sometimes helps to get the Nazis in early on, so that they can be ejected early on (although they do tend to hang around)


I'm interpreting the word "best" as "white" there, which in the author's own context pretty much has to be true. "Multiculturalism" is "aggressively injected" and then they somehow flip multiculturalism into disruptive "homogeneity." All this language ("grinding down") used to try to cast their peace activist egalitarian enemies as villains is used as a dog whistle so that the right readers will instinctively know what they have to do - you know, like shoot behoodied black teenage interlopers in their gated communities, or hey, maybe join that new Lion Guard thing, because multiculturalism is grinding down the best that the world has to offer.


Well at least you are aware of this assumption (to some, such assumptions are almost invisible).

Now we have an assertion that can be examined though ie 'the author is a white supremacist' ( where white=best)
TBH, I can't really see it in the article, he certainly doesn't focus on race as much as your average WN does.
" Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism"
User avatar
jakell
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 4:58 pm
Location: North England
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby Luther Blissett » Thu Mar 24, 2016 11:10 am

jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:57 am wrote:
Luther Blissett » Thu Mar 24, 2016 2:46 pm wrote:
jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:29 am wrote:'Neonazi'? Are you sure?

It sounds like fairly standard alt-right fare to me, so this is being very liberal with the Nazi brush. It's not much different to what is being discussed on the 'Soros' and 'Coercive'' threads.

Still, it sometimes helps to get the Nazis in early on, so that they can be ejected early on (although they do tend to hang around)


I'm interpreting the word "best" as "white" there, which in the author's own context pretty much has to be true. "Multiculturalism" is "aggressively injected" and then they somehow flip multiculturalism into disruptive "homogeneity." All this language ("grinding down") used to try to cast their peace activist egalitarian enemies as villains is used as a dog whistle so that the right readers will instinctively know what they have to do - you know, like shoot behoodied black teenage interlopers in their gated communities, or hey, maybe join that new Lion Guard thing, because multiculturalism is grinding down the best that the world has to offer.


Well at least you are aware of this assumption (to some, such assumptions are almost invisible).

Now we have an assertion that can be examined though ie 'the author is a white supremacist' ( where white=best)
TBH, I can't really see it in the article, he certainly doesn't focus on race as much as your average WN does.


Fair enough, but just as accurate: he certainly doesn't mean anything else.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4806
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 11:28 am

Luther Blissett » Thu Mar 24, 2016 3:10 pm wrote:
jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:57 am wrote:
Luther Blissett » Thu Mar 24, 2016 2:46 pm wrote:
jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:29 am wrote:'Neonazi'? Are you sure?

It sounds like fairly standard alt-right fare to me, so this is being very liberal with the Nazi brush. It's not much different to what is being discussed on the 'Soros' and 'Coercive'' threads.

Still, it sometimes helps to get the Nazis in early on, so that they can be ejected early on (although they do tend to hang around)


I'm interpreting the word "best" as "white" there, which in the author's own context pretty much has to be true. "Multiculturalism" is "aggressively injected" and then they somehow flip multiculturalism into disruptive "homogeneity." All this language ("grinding down") used to try to cast their peace activist egalitarian enemies as villains is used as a dog whistle so that the right readers will instinctively know what they have to do - you know, like shoot behoodied black teenage interlopers in their gated communities, or hey, maybe join that new Lion Guard thing, because multiculturalism is grinding down the best that the world has to offer.


Well at least you are aware of this assumption (to some, such assumptions are almost invisible).

Now we have an assertion that can be examined though ie 'the author is a white supremacist' ( where white=best)
TBH, I can't really see it in the article, he certainly doesn't focus on race as much as your average WN does.


Fair enough, but just as accurate: he certainly doesn't mean anything else.


He seems to leave it open for interpretation, ie, not so easy to pin down. I can't see how he is referring specifically to race here:

...Cultural Marxists certainly have no respect for freedom. Their only concern is artificial “equality,” because forced equality makes collectivism possible. This often means grinding down the best the world has to offer to match it with the worst the world has to offer...
" Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism"
User avatar
jakell
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 4:58 pm
Location: North England
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 19 guests