The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby tapitsbo » Thu Mar 24, 2016 5:09 pm

Wombaticus Rex » Thu Mar 24, 2016 4:50 pm wrote:
tapitsbo » Thu Mar 24, 2016 1:10 pm wrote:Without reading the article I just think it's funny that "cultural marxist" and "white supremacist" which people now don't call themselves (demanding explanations of what the terms they are being called mean) - were once self-identifying terms.


For the sake of my smug, didactic compulsions, that's not the case for "cultural marxist," which was conceived of and implemented as an epithet. There was never a school of earnest "cultural marxists," and if we're gonna talk about the Frankfurt School, I'm pretty sure the existing term of "Frankfurt School" suffices nicely.


Was there a school of glib, insincere ones?

I can believe that "cultural marxist" was coined by the right but I am convinced it was used at times to self-ID by the sincere...

It's ironic that rightists like Schmitt and Heidegger have plausibly influenced leftist cultural warriors more than the Frankfurt School has.
tapitsbo
 
Posts: 1824
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 5:11 pm

Luther Blissett » Thu Mar 24, 2016 8:47 pm wrote:I don't know, I live in a multicultural neighborhood and it's worked for approximately 4-5 decades.


Oh yes, it's 'working fine' where I live too. As long as the welfare state, the NHS, emergency and civil services hold up, the just-in-time supermarkets manage to keep their shelves filled, people will rub along just fine. Funny money from above keeps that illusion going.

At present we have Slovaks (probably the most dynamic group at present), Somalis, Pakistanis, and a few other disparate cultures, plus those with no culture, all sucking on the same teat whilst all mostly ignoring each other and sticking to their own languages, cultures and traditions.
So, we already have tribalism, which is what we get when multiculturalism is done badly, only a small push is needed to amplify all that, and I don't mean a push from the far right (the traditional boogeyman), I mean the inevitable falling away of bread and circuses.
" 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 5:29 pm

82_28 » Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:56 pm wrote:
No they haven't! This is deplorable. I hate the green function. So I won't use it. But I'm just kidding.



I'm losing track of how serious you might be here, so instead I'll just try and get back to the article (three pages and still no additional copypasta, can't be bad)


I am all things at all times but never mean to confuse nor explain. I pull pranks all the time and always have. I am serious but also not serious. I don't know how to explain that really other than to say I don't know how to explain it. I can if I have to and will, but I don't argue homie.
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: 11194
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 jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:02 pm

82_28 » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:29 pm wrote:
jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 8:42 pm wrote:
82_28 » Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:56 pm wrote:No they haven't! This is deplorable. I hate the green function. So I won't use it. But I'm just kidding.


I'm losing track of how serious you might be here, so instead I'll just try and get back to the article (three pages and still no additional copypasta, can't be bad)......



I am all things at all times but never mean to confuse nor explain. I pull pranks all the time and always have. I am serious but also not serious. I don't know how to explain that really other than to say I don't know how to explain it. I can if I have to and will, but I don't argue homie.


Nearly made it to four pages, but not quite. Maybe someone can give some attention to AD's paste as well
" 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 JackRiddler » Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:40 am

Yes, why don't you? The outside text provided here by AD (so what?) is to the point and an excellent response to the nasty delusions of the OP. There are many clips of articles on this board posted by various members, nothing necessarily wrong with it:

American Dream » Thu Mar 24, 2016 4:05 pm wrote:The shoddiness of the thesis has been established for decades now and yet reactionaries in search of a convenient straw man keep returning to it like flies to shit...

Dialectic of Counter-Enlightenment: The Frankfurt School as Scapegoat of the Lunatic Fringe

Martin Jay

Salmagundi
No.168/9, Fall 2010/Winter 2011


Although the process was foreshadowed in the 1960s when Herbert Marcuse became the media’s favorite “guru” of the New Left and was often portrayed in simple-minded terms, it wasn’t really until a decade or so ago that the School as a whole entered the netherworld of garbled memedom, and began circulating in a wide variety of narratives, such as that promoted by Estulin and Castro. Most of these, to be sure, came from a very different political direction. Patrick Buchanan’s 2001 best-selling screed against the nefarious impact of immigration, The Death of the West, was one major source, stigmatizing as it did the Frankfurt School for promoting “cultural Marxism” (a recycling of the old Weimar conservative charge of “cultural Bolshevism” aimed at aesthetic modernists). But the opening salvo had, in fact, been fired a decade earlier in a lengthy essay by one Michael Minnicino called “New Dark Age: Frankfurt School and ‘Political Correctness’,” published in 1992 in the obscure journal Fidelio.[4] Its provenance is particularly telling: it was an organ of the Lyndon Larouche movement cum cult, one of the less savory curiosities of nightmare fringe politics.

Larouche and his followers have, to be sure, always remained on the fringe of the fringe, too confused in their ideology to be taken seriously by either radical left or right, with little, if any significant impact on the real world. But the germ sown by Minnicino was ultimately to bear remarkable poisonous fruit. The harvester was the Free Congress Foundation, a paleo-conservative Washington think tank founded by Paul Weyrich, who was also in on the creation of the Heritage Foundation and the Moral Majority movement. Much of the financial support came from his collaborator Joseph Coors, who knew how to turn all that pure Rocky Mountain water into a cash flow for the radical right. The FCF sponsored a satellite television network called National Empowerment Television, which churned out slickly produced shows promulgating its various opinions.

In 1999, it broadcast an hour-long, skillfully crafted exposé of “Political Correctness: The Frankfurt School,” which was put together largely by William Lind, one of Weyrich’s colleagues at the Foundation and head of its Center for Cultural Conservatism. Weyrich himself appeared only at the end during a question-and-answer session with viewers who called in. In addition to Lind, a number of the usual suspects—the right-wing pundits Roger Kimball and David Horowitz, and the former football star and homophobic religious preacher Reggie White—comment on the School’s history. There is as well one anomalous figure, the author of the first history of the Frankfurt School, The Dialectical Imagination. The book was itself displayed at the end of the show, and recommended to anyone interested in the full story, albeit with the cautionary reminder that its author was himself a dangerous apologist for the School’s philosophy. Later Lind would crow in a column in The American Conservative, “The video is especially valuable because we interviewed the principal American expert on the Frankfurt School, Martin Jay, who was then the chairman of the History Department at Berkeley (and obviously no conservative). He spills the beans.”[5]

Ever since that lamentable broadcast I have often been asked how I fell among such dubious characters, and so let me beg the reader’s indulgence for a moment to explain before moving on to the larger issues at hand. When I was approached for the interview, I was not informed of the political agenda of the broadcasters, who seemed very professional and courteous. Having done a number of similar shows in the past on one or another aspect of the history of the Frankfurt School, I naively assumed the end results would reflect my opinions with some fidelity, at least within the constraints of the edited final product. But what happened instead was that all my critical remarks about the hypocrisy of the right-wing campaign against political correctness were lost and what remained were simple factual statements confirming the Marxist origins of the School, which had never been a secret to anyone. Interweaving my edited testimony into the larger narrative may have given it an unearned legitimacy, which I now, of course, regret, but it’s likely the effect would have been pretty much the same without my participation as “useful idiot.” Those beans I allegedly spilled had already been on the plate for a very long time, and it would have taken no effort at all to confirm that, yes, they were Marxists, and yes, they thought cultural questions were important, and yes, they—or at least Marcuse—worried about the effects of “repressive tolerance.”

In any event, the “documentary,” soon available on the net, spawned a number of condensed textual versions, which were reproduced on a number of radical right-wing sites. These in turn led to a welter of new videos now available on You Tube, which feature an odd cast of pseudo-experts regurgitating exactly the same line. The message is numbingly simplistic: all the ills of modern American culture, from feminism, affirmative action, sexual liberation and gay rights to the decay of traditional education and even environmentalism are ultimately attributable to the insidious influence of the members of the Institute for Social Research who came to America in the 1930s. The origins of “cultural Marxism” are traced back to Lukács and Gramsci, but because they were not actual émigrés, their role in the narrative is not as prominent. Nor do most of the commentators attribute responsibility to the Communist International, although occasionally, as in the case of Cry Havoc!, a 2007 book by a founder of the National Review, Ralph de Toledano, the crackpot claim is actually advanced that the Frankfurt School was a Commie front set up by Willi Muenzenberger.[6]

There is a transparent subtext in the original CFC program, which is not hard to discern and has become more explicit with each telling of the narrative. Although there is scarcely any direct reference to the ethnic origins of the School’s members, subtle hints allow the listener to draw his own conclusions about the provenance of foreigners who tried to combine Marx and Freud, those giants of critical Jewish intelligence. At one point, William Lind asserts that “once in America they shifted the focus of their work from destroying German society to attacking the society and culture of its new place of refuge,”[7] as if the very people who had to flee the Nazis had been responsible for what they were fleeing![8] Airtime is also given to another of Weyrich’s colleagues at the FCF, Lazlo Pasztor, who is innocently identified as a “leader of the Hungarian resistance against Communism,” but had already been discredited a decade earlier as a former member of the pro-Nazi “Arrow Cross,” who had to leave the Bush campaign in 1988 when he was outed.

A number of years later a fringe neo-Nazi group called “Stormfront” could boldly express what had hitherto only been insinuated, and in so doing really spill some foul-tasting beans:

Talking about the Frankfurt School is ideal for not naming the Jews as a group (which often leads to a panicky rejection, a stubborn refusal to listening anymore and even a “shut up”) but naming the Jew by proper names. People will make their generalizations by themselves – in the privacy of their own minds. At least it worked like that with me. It was my lightbulb moment, when confusing pieces of an alarming puzzle suddenly grouped to a visible picture. Learn by heart the most important proper names of the Frankfurt Schoolers – they are (except for a handful of minor members and female “groupies”) ALL Jews. One can even quite innocently mention that the Frankfurt Schoolers had to leave Germany in 1933 because “they were to a man, Jewish,” as William S. Lind does.[9]


Now that the real origins of political correctness in the cultural Marxism devised by a clever bunch of foreign-born Jews had been revealed, the full extent of the damage they had caused could be spelled out. Here is a list cited verbatim from many of the websites devoted to the question:

1. The creation of racism offences

2. Continual change to create confusion

3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children

4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority

5. Huge immigration to destroy identity

6. The promotion of excessive drinking

7. Emptying of churches

8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime

9. Dependency on the state or state benefits

10. Control and dumbing down of media

11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family
[10]

Well, I suppose at least the second plank has been realized, with perhaps the self-inflicted help of the sixth. In this confused world, it is only a short step to blaming everything from Roman Polanski’s lust for underage girls to the allegedly liberal curriculum at the Naval Academy to Obama’s health care initiative—these are among many of the wild assertions one can find online—on the sinister influence of Horkheimer and his friends. One site even asserts that the Fabian Society, the reformist intellectuals of late 19th-century British socialism, was “a division of the Frankfurt School,” which suggests that linear chronology can be swept aside when it comes to exposing the work of the devil. The ultimate goal of “cultural Marxism” in their telling is thus far more than the leftist thought-control that denies alternative positions under the guise of restricting hate speech. It is the subversion of Western civilization itself.

It is, frankly, very difficult to know what to make of all of this and even harder to imagine a way to counter it. The radical Left, it has to be conceded, has at times also scapegoated émigré intellectuals for their sinister, covert influence. After Bush’s invasion of Iraq, the neo-conservatives supposedly inspired by Leo Strauss and his followers were blamed for inspiring a foreign policy that was ultimately in Israel’s interest. Here too a certain anti-Semitic subtext could easily creep into the discourse.[11] And as we see in the unholy alliance of Castro and Estulin, the Frankfurt School could be assigned the same role by leftists also fighting against the shadowy string-pullers allegedly running the universe. Indeed, if we go back to Estulin’s original Spanish text and look for the source that he cites to make his absurd claim that was swallowed whole by the gullible Castro, we find the very same 1992 essay by the Lyndon Larouche minion Michael Minnicino that was the source of the Free Congress Foundation video![12] But the vast majority of accusations of this sort come out of a swamp of shockingly ill-informed, logically challenged demagogues on the radical right, whose easy access to the internet allows them blithely to spread the most egregious nonsense.

Does the sheer quantity of sites devoted to disseminating it, almost always drawing on the same obsessively repeated pseudo-facts and unfounded speculations, suggest a genuinely widespread phenomenon? Although it may be hard to gauge its real extent, the momentum of the dissemination has certainly accelerated in the past few years. What began as a bizarre Lyndon Larouche coinage has become the common currency of a larger and larger public of addled enragés. As the case of Pat Buchanan shows, it has entered at least the fringes of the mainstream. Indeed, if you include right-wing radio demagogues with sizeable audiences like the thuggish Michael Savage, it has now become their stock in trade as well.[13] Can it be doubted that if you polled the crowds at Tea Party rallies about the influence of “cultural Marxism” on the decline of American culture, which they want to “take back” from immigrants, recent and otherwise, you would find significant familiarity with this discourse?

Until very recently and then only in passing has the radical right’s obsession with “cultural Marxism” and the Frankfurt School even been noticed, let alone systematically analyzed.[14] There has, in contrast, been a sustained scholarly interest in the ways in which Critical Theory has been received in America, including scrupulously researched and judiciously argued new books by David Jenneman and Thomas Wheatland about the ways in which they interacted with American culture during their actual time as émigrés.[15] But only their influence on and interaction with other intellectuals has attracted real attention. There is little, if any, connection between this reception and the one detailed above. The latter functions instead on the far lower level of the demagogic propaganda spewed by the very “prophets of deceit,” to cite the title of Lowenthal’s contribution to the Institute’s Studies in Authority, who were analyzed sixty years ago by the Frankfurt School itself.[16]

It is very disheartening to see how robust this phenomenon remains today, and a source of bitter irony to observe how the School itself has become its explicit target. But if there is one positive implication of these developments, it is the perverse tribute today’s radical right pays to the School’s acuity in revealing the workings of their deplorable ideology and its origins in their political and psychological pathologies. In looking for a scapegoat for all the transformations of culture which they can’t abide, they have recognized the most acute analysts of their own condition. In the fog of their blighted understanding, they have discerned a real threat. But it is not to some phantasm called “Western civilization,” whose most valuable achievements they themselves routinely betray, but rather to their own pathetic and misguided worldview and the dangerous politics it has spawned in our climate of heightened fear and despair.

The answer should not be to replace one scapegoat with another and trace all critiques of political correctness and the anxieties of those who level them back to the machinations of an extremist cult. Only a solution in which the deeper sources of those anxieties can be reduced will lessen the attraction of such theories to the people who find them persuasive. But perhaps at least exposing the paper trail leading from Lyndon Larouche to both Paul Weyrich and Fidel Castro can cause some of the more gullible to pause before they leap into the abyss. If not, at least we can always fall back on those death panels mandated by our foreign-born Muslim socialist president, himself a tool of the Frankfurt school,[17] to keep those who resist our plot to destroy Western civilization in line. Oops, sorry, more beans spilled…
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15275
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby jakell » Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:59 am

JackRiddler » Fri Mar 25, 2016 12:40 pm wrote:Yes, why don't you? The outside text provided here by AD (so what?) is to the point and an excellent response to the nasty delusions of the OP. There are many clips of articles on this board posted by various members, nothing necessarily wrong with it:



I will get around to it, but as the only person who has managed to critique anywhere near a substantial number (a paltry 10%) of AD's pastes, I think I've done pretty well. Really though, simply posting articles as a response (copypasta war) is a very poor substitute for dialogue and certainly doesn't catch my imagination.
If he manages to keep it to this one it will probably be about 50th in the queue, I'm still looking at his 'antifascistnews' ones regarding Alt-right/Heathen-Harvest and the Benjamin Zephaniah piece. What guarantees a queue jump is pasting something about my own country, which he does less of lately.

At present though, I haven't finished with the OP article, and see no need for haste.
" 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 » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:19 am

tapitsbo » Thu Mar 24, 2016 4:09 pm wrote:
Wombaticus Rex » Thu Mar 24, 2016 4:50 pm wrote:
tapitsbo » Thu Mar 24, 2016 1:10 pm wrote:Without reading the article I just think it's funny that "cultural marxist" and "white supremacist" which people now don't call themselves (demanding explanations of what the terms they are being called mean) - were once self-identifying terms.


For the sake of my smug, didactic compulsions, that's not the case for "cultural marxist," which was conceived of and implemented as an epithet. There was never a school of earnest "cultural marxists," and if we're gonna talk about the Frankfurt School, I'm pretty sure the existing term of "Frankfurt School" suffices nicely.


Was there a school of glib, insincere ones?

I can believe that "cultural marxist" was coined by the right but I am convinced it was used at times to self-ID by the sincere...

It's ironic that rightists like Schmitt and Heidegger have plausibly influenced leftist cultural warriors more than the Frankfurt School has.


To be honest I often have to remind myself what the term "cultural Marxist" means because it's not used in organizing or activism.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4954
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby jakell » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:31 am

Post #2

jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 11:01 am wrote: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.


Sounder and I sort of agreed that it is a terminology problem, and that it can be said to possibly be a 'thing', whatever the name.

Identifying Cultural Marxists is a problem (but a gift to rhetoricians in the sense of pitting the general against the particular) but as a concept it could be said to be useful. It's already all over the Soros thread and possibly the 'Coercive migration' one too, just under different names. also I liked this from the article:

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


So maybe now the debate can move on to deciding whether it is a 'thing' or not, whatever we call it. Not a bad place to start.
" 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 Wombaticus Rex » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:19 am

jakell » Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:31 am wrote:
So maybe now the debate can move on to deciding whether it is a 'thing' or not, whatever we call it. Not a bad place to start.


Debate?

:thumbsup Enjoy that monologue, buddy.

It is a calculated insult with a profitable history behind it. "Cultural Marxism" is about direct mail fundraising, not philosophy, not history.

If you believe it is a useful 'thing,' that just means you're squarely in the target demographic.

Wombaticus Rex » Thu Mar 24, 2016 3:50 pm wrote:...and if we're gonna talk about the Frankfurt School, I'm pretty sure the existing term of "Frankfurt School" suffices nicely.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10614
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby American Dream » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:28 am

Yes, I am still a believer in our No Platform policy for reactionaries (i.e. racists, fascists, sexists and other such bigoted people), which we all effectively agreed to a long time ago, and are still supposed to be upholding on a clear and consistent basis.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby jakell » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:33 am

Wombaticus Rex » Fri Mar 25, 2016 2:19 pm wrote:
jakell » Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:31 am wrote:
So maybe now the debate can move on to deciding whether it is a 'thing' or not, whatever we call it. Not a bad place to start.


Debate?

:thumbsup Enjoy that monologue, buddy.

It is a calculated insult with a profitable history behind it. "Cultural Marxism" is about direct mail fundraising, not philosophy, not history.

If you believe it is a useful 'thing,' that just means you're squarely in the target demographic.

Wombaticus Rex » Thu Mar 24, 2016 3:50 pm wrote:...and if we're gonna talk about the Frankfurt School, I'm pretty sure the existing term of "Frankfurt School" suffices nicely.


No particular enjoyment, just some writing n' stuff.

The jury could still be out on whether there is a 'thing' there or not, and my position is that, as a belief system that some may act upon, it is a useful marker. It is hinted at all over the board though (and not by me), firstly we have the creation of this thread (with added bold which may give a useful cross reference of what would otherwise be seen as another paste), in the Soros thread and, less obviously, in the 'coercive migration' thread, just different terms.
" 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 » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:01 am

I'll bite.

The notion that the author in the original post spends most of their time outlining is of a contemporary version of social justice warriors that they are sad about because they are a threat to rich white male hegemony. Applying contemporary tactics to some historical fantasy about the Frankfort School is probably the wrong approach.

Young black people, gays, women, and Latinos are making their voices heard louder now not because of a theory born in interwar Germany (or some notion of a hierarchical structure continuing today), but because of the democratization of communication. The issues of oppression and stories about them have always existed before "social justice warriors" became a term in popular culture. Rich white men were able to avoid hearing those stories for the most part in the past so long as they tried. Not really covered in the nightly news, and not in most omnipresent entertainment media. They certainly weren't forced to watch The Wire.

There is the small minority of social justice warriors who adopt right-wing, libertarian tactics for purposes of, well, I suppose liberation. It's a very fine line to tread and I don't think it's really appropriate for me to comment on it but there are many reasons for it. This subject actually came up at a black lives matter / socialist panel last night - sometimes rightwing tactics are adopted out of political disengagement, sometimes out of need, sometimes by design, sometimes by the copycat effect.

Thesis: it is not a thing.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4954
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby Luther Blissett » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:08 am

jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 4:11 pm wrote:
Luther Blissett » Thu Mar 24, 2016 8:47 pm wrote:I don't know, I live in a multicultural neighborhood and it's worked for approximately 4-5 decades.


Oh yes, it's 'working fine' where I live too. As long as the welfare state, the NHS, emergency and civil services hold up, the just-in-time supermarkets manage to keep their shelves filled, people will rub along just fine. Funny money from above keeps that illusion going.

At present we have Slovaks (probably the most dynamic group at present), Somalis, Pakistanis, and a few other disparate cultures, plus those with no culture, all sucking on the same teat whilst all mostly ignoring each other and sticking to their own languages, cultures and traditions.
So, we already have tribalism, which is what we get when multiculturalism is done badly, only a small push is needed to amplify all that, and I don't mean a push from the far right (the traditional boogeyman), I mean the inevitable falling away of bread and circuses.


I meant to reply to this earlier as well —

Where I live, we're seeing a lot more attempts at post-capitalist ideas than "sucking on the same teat" luckily. You don't have anyone testing out communes, co-ops, free libraries, tool libraries, seed libraries, free stores, guerrilla publishing, community gardens, free hot meals, or community orgs in your multicultural neighborhood? My perspective might be myopic but I always thought future structures were a hallmark of multicultural neighborhoods.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4954
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Reasons Why People Hate Cultural Marxists

Postby jakell » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:21 am

Luther Blissett » Fri Mar 25, 2016 3:08 pm wrote:
jakell » Thu Mar 24, 2016 4:11 pm wrote:
Luther Blissett » Thu Mar 24, 2016 8:47 pm wrote:I don't know, I live in a multicultural neighborhood and it's worked for approximately 4-5 decades.


Oh yes, it's 'working fine' where I live too. As long as the welfare state, the NHS, emergency and civil services hold up, the just-in-time supermarkets manage to keep their shelves filled, people will rub along just fine. Funny money from above keeps that illusion going.

At present we have Slovaks (probably the most dynamic group at present), Somalis, Pakistanis, and a few other disparate cultures, plus those with no culture, all sucking on the same teat whilst all mostly ignoring each other and sticking to their own languages, cultures and traditions.
So, we already have tribalism, which is what we get when multiculturalism is done badly, only a small push is needed to amplify all that, and I don't mean a push from the far right (the traditional boogeyman), I mean the inevitable falling away of bread and circuses.


I meant to reply to this earlier as well —

Where I live, we're seeing a lot more attempts at post-capitalist ideas than "sucking on the same teat" luckily. You don't have anyone testing out communes, co-ops, free libraries, tool libraries, seed libraries, free stores, guerrilla publishing, community gardens, free hot meals, or community orgs in your multicultural neighborhood? My perspective might be myopic but I always thought future structures were a hallmark of multicultural neighborhoods.


Our realities here are probably quite different as we are in different countries, our welfare state is so overdeveloped that a lot of those grassroots initiatives you describe aren't deemed essential enough to get off of the ground, they are attempted but the welfare state provides too much of a tempting alternative.
I think we also may have a differning perspective on multiculturalism. Where I live it is definitely very different peoples living (for the time being) in a sort of uneasy proximity. there isn't even a common language which is arguably the basis of getting along together. Only the state seems to provide the glue, hardly anything at ground level
Your 'peoples' might have more in common.

A while back I remarked on how I admire the Slovaks around me and I think if any one distinct culture survives it will be theirs. They are used to being transient and yet holding it together and haven't yet entered the halfway house of multiculturalism, although they do have welfare dependency which is the thinner end of the wedge.

Luther Blissett » Fri Mar 25, 2016 3:01 pm wrote:
....Thesis: it is not a thing.


Would you say it could be belief system? My position is that it can and therefore can develop legs and become a 'thing'. As the author mused '....a sociopolitical theology'

I may eventually get around to the Religion of Progress again, but maybe not, I'm sensing the Sword of Damacles.
" 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 American Dream » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:38 am

I'm with Crunch on this- and on white supremacist/colonialist regimes generally:






https://ordoesitexplode.wordpress.com/t ... sm/page/2/
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 15 guests