Skip to comments.The Anatomy of Cultural Marxism and Why it Always Leads to Aggression and Divisiveness
Posted on 10/02/2018 12:08:05 AM PDT by LoveLedUsHere
We all see there is an abnormal amount of tension in todays political discourse. Also, many see deep, inherent problems in the progressives worldview, also known as cultural Marxism. Its important to understand the inherent problems in many of the policies that the progressives advocate today and why these policies automatically lead to increased levels of antagonism, and maybe even to a violent future that will harm us all.
Economic Marxism, as practiced in the USSR and Communist China, followed the following pattern.
The Marxists said their laws would make the world a better place. They said that compassion for the poor was their motivator.
They took away natural rights from all citizens (the right of ownership) and replaced these natural rights with politically-created rights.
They called all those who disagreed with them, who said that taking away the natural right of ownership would cause more social problems than it solved, nasty names (The nasty bourgeoise).
They shut down free speech, not allowing people to discuss the possible negative outcomes of taking the right of ownership away from everyone.
There were people who saw the damage that would happen when natural rights were violated and those who couldnt. Those who couldnt increasingly just believed in the rightness of their cause.
The State, having sided with those who couldnt see the damage that was inherent in violating natural rights, became increasingly authoritarian and aggressive against all those who saw the decay that would happen. Millions of enemies of the people were killed.
The leaders had comfortable lives, but the lives of ordinary citizens became increasingly worse. Most citizens ended up living on the poverty line.
Eventually, after all the killing was done and the decay was seriously evident, these nations returned to the natural law of the free market economy. And their nations went through an economic boom. But the killing and decay was done. Decades of suffering needlessly created.
On the other hand, cultural Marxism is a term that applies to a growing body of poorly thought out laws that follow these same dynamics. They also bring about a constant decline in social well-being rather than improvements.
For example, the politically-created right to abort a fetus, a new life, is one of these laws.
Out of compassion for the woman, the law takes away a childs natural right to life and replaces this right with a politically-invented right for women.
When looking at the research to understand what happened to society after the legalizing of abortion we find that the negative, wider, social outcomes of passing abortion law far outweighed any positive benefits that society gained. After abortion was legalized, almost all measures of social well-being declined rather than improved.
For example, rates of single parenting didnt fall. They rose. Also, many men, who would have normally married their pregnant girlfriend, now encouraged her to have an abortion. Since marriage is one of the primary ways to bring about the socialization of men, the lack of marriage caused many more men to carry on their carefree lives. As marital rates fell, incarceration rates rapidly increased from two hundred thousand inmates in the early seventies to over two million some twenty years later. We saw this scenario occurring in many African-American communities where Planned Parenthood built an abortion clinic. Out-of-wedlock births increased. Marriage rates fell. Drug rates increased. More violence occurred. Many more males ended up in jail. Worse outcomes for these and many other communities.
Today, those people who disagree with the legalizing of abortion because they see the worse outcomes that are inflicted on a range of other citizens, women included, are often told they are nasty. The ability to speak freely about abortion becomes increasingly confrontational.
Again, there are those who can see the harmful outcomes that affect us all and those who cant.
The redefining of marriage so as perfectly suit the non-reproductive unions of gays and lesbians is another politically-invented right, again created in the name of compassion for one small group of citizens. In redefining marriage, the politicians took away the natural rights of many other citizens.
For example, they took away the natural right of the child to be raised by a mother and a father. Extensive research clearly shows the increased risks that can beset any child if either a father or mother is missing from their life.
The politicians also extended a political right to homosexuals allowing them to buy and sell babies, all against the natural will of the child - - something that we found, in the era of slavery, causes emotional harm and violates a persons natural rights.
The politicians also took away the natural right of heterosexual children to be just taught about their own sexual nature, something that ultimately leads to worse life outcomes for some of them.
And also, the politicians took away the natural right of heterosexuals to have a word that specifically applies to their baby-making unions. Historically, marriage has always been seen to be first and foremost about protecting ones biological children. In redefinition, obviously, this central meaning has to be removed. It is replaced by a meaning that is centered on the love between adults. But heterosexual couples already have that love. They dont need to marry to have that. So, in redefining marriage, heterosexuals lose the social request that they marry for the sake of their biological kids, a request that is really important to society. Research in almost all those countries where marriage is now redefined shows that immediately after redefinition there was a rapid decline in heterosexuals marrying. They increasingly entered fragile cohabitation instead - - something that leads to, on average, worse life outcomes for adults, children, and the wider community.
In redefinition, many others also lose their natural rights and suffer worse outcomes. For example, those who provide wedding services and also see the damage that redefining marriage creates also might lose their natural right to freely express their conscience. They are not homophobic. They are participating in an act of civil disobedience, refusing to participate in a law that they know hurts many groups of people.
Because these natural rights have been taken away, a wide number of groups of individuals now have worse life outcomes. The damage done to these various groups far outweighs the small positives that a small number of gays and lesbians experience. This doesnt mean that many homosexual couples cant be very good parents. It just means that a lot of damage is done to others in redefining a word that is really important to everyone else.
There are some who see the future damage and those who cant. Those who cant see the damage call all those who see the damage by nasty names - - bigot, homophobic, etc.
The State, having sided with those who cannot see the damage, becomes increasingly authoritarian towards anyone who sees the damage. Careers can be lost in a sentence. Free speech is increasingly shut down. Massive fines can be imposed.
Those who cant see the damage that the law creates become increasingly aggressive. The Bible, for revealing the damage, is increasingly seen as hate speech. Christians are increasingly seen as nasty people, not as people who care sincerely about the well-being of future society.
All this has the potential to become increasingly nasty.
Trans-theory and trans-rights law-making also can be placed under the banner of Cultural Marxism. Again, this is done under the banner of compassion.
Trans-activists make the claim that Mother Nature has, in Her lawbook, a special set of rights that apply to people who are confused about their sexual nature and that these special rights override the natural rights of everyone else in society.
Thus, in passing any law or policy that is connected to trans-activism, then a range of much larger groups of individuals automatically lose their natural rights. And since natural rights are there to protect the wider society (thats what Mother Nature is all about), taking away so many natural rights from everyone else ultimately leads to much poorer social outcomes for many citizens.
Thus, girls lose their natural right to be able to dress and undress without men, who say they are women, watching them. Fewer girls will go to the gym and many will become increasingly frightened of men in general.
Thus, in athletics, women lose their natural right to just compete against other women with the same XX chromosomes, and many will give up on sports.
And people are increasingly told that women can have penises and that men can have a period - - thus taking away everyones natural right to say what they know to be true.
And gender-confused children are increasingly rushed off to have hormone replace therapies that will destroy their lives, all against their natural right of consent - - consent which they can only fully give when they are a mature, cognitive adult. And this happens even though research clearly shows that the vast majority of these children will grow out of their confusion as they go through puberty.
In trans-rights law-making, these and many other groups of individuals have worse life outcomes. The damage done is far, far worse than the benefits accruing to a very, very, small group of individuals who struggle with gender identity disorder. These are psychologically challenged adults or temporarily confused children. This is what science shows us to be true. And it is the only way for us to save ourselves from harming so many other groups of people within the social fabric, all in the name of compassion.
But still, those who see the damage and say something are called transphobic. And the law increasingly targets them as being nasty people.
All these legal interventions are just part of the body of law-making that comes under the title of cultural Marxism. It is often called politically-correct law-making because the politicians would like these laws to be true and helpful, but science proves them otherwise.
The introduction of Islam into the social fabric of the West also has the same negative dynamics. Sharia law, which is embedded in Islam, automatically takes away natural rights from various groups of individuals, especially from women. Many of those who are against Sharia law becoming part of the social fabric of democratic nations see the harm that its introduction will do. They are not racist or Islamophobic. They just dont want their granddaughters living under a foreign set of laws, laws that will cause their granddaughters harm. They have every right to want to protect them.
Several other laws also fall under this same dynamic.
America today is in a very dangerous place. There are those who see the social damage that these laws have created or will create and they are increasingly targeted by those who cant. Those who see the damage are increasingly banned from campuses. The media increasingly gives them no space to share their views. Social media increasingly shuts down those who worry about these cultural Marxist laws, calling them haters or fake news. In the past - - in China, the USSR, North Korea and more - - this all turned very horrid. Millions were jailed or killed. The current aggression in the debates in the USA is toxic, with those who refuse to look at the present and future damage increasingly seeking to destroy the careers of those who see the damage. It could all turn very nasty.
The challenge is that most of the media no longer want to look at both sides of the argument. They refuse to educate the public about why there are two very different viewpoints. This would diffuse much of the tension. And the universities also increasingly teach the cultural Marxist worldview without looking at the harm that it will create. And the fear of being attacked for speaking what many know to be true keeps many professionals silent.
The West is in a dangerous place. Though the cultural Marxist, social-progressives are preaching that the world is becoming a better, more-caring, more-tolerant place because their efforts, ever-increasing levels of social decline are apparent in almost all sets of social data. Although many people are enjoying better lives than their parents ever had, a vast range of different groups of individuals are now experiencing far worse outcomes, directly because of these cultural Marxist laws. Homelessness, drug abuse, drug overdoses, rates of infertility, sexual abuse of minors, addictions, rates of depression, children with ADHD, rates of single-parenting, loneliness - - and much more - - all are rising and linked to these politically-invented rights.
And the national debts of almost every country in Western Europe and of the USA continue their onward spiral upwards as nations seek to pay for all the damage that these decaying laws create. This debt will cause immense harm to all our lives in the near future.
One wonders why people have let so many damaging laws be passed. One of the reasons is that almost all these laws were passed as a means to have compassion on adults, but they mainly involved taking natural rights away from children, from children who could not complain that they were going to have worse life outcomes as a result. The baby in the womb could not complain. The baby that is bought against its will cannot say anything, even if it is, on average, going to have a more difficult life. The children in the classroom who are taught sexual behaviors that might seriously hurt them - - what could they say? They are told they are bigoted if they complain. So, in seeking to show themselves as compassionate to adults, the progressives show themselves to be incredibly hurtful to many different groups of children. And anyone with any sense should know that you cannot cause so much harm to so many children and build a better world tomorrow.
Please progressives in the Democratic party, step back from the brink. We all saw how all these cultural Marxist laws were central to Hillarys 2016 presidential candidacy. In fact, in the last two years of Obamas presidency, it seemed to many that you only had your eyes set on LGBT and abortion rights. Many of you know exactly the kind of authoritarian future you intend to create. And now you know we know your hurtful plans. We do not have to go down the pathway of increasing levels of vitriol, authoritarianism, decay, and possibly mass murders - - only to eventually remember that one cannot take away so many natural rights from citizens and expect to create social well-being. This is not a tolerant Nirvana you are creating. This is a future of deprivation and pain. The Russia communists were blinded by their erroneous beliefs that were also based on compassion. You dont have to be. Please listen to those who see the damage before it is too late. Lets sit down quietly at the table and sort this mess out.
Stephen Stacey is a lecturer and seminar host. He runs marriage education seminars and gives seminars and talks on the underlying principles that underpin the current culture wars.
Marx and Hitler were similar, and to honor Marx is not significantly different than embracing Hitler.
The Forefathers termed socialism as levelling. How do you level the differences in social treatment, unless you oppress those who are perceived as being treated better, through nonsense laws like hate crimes or deliberately cutting them out of social-economic activity of society?
I can sum up this entire op-ed.
Cultural Marxist is a perversion of the God made and natural order of human life. The consequences are and have been devastating.
Imagine the hubris of these Marxists who think they know better than nature and God both.
Funny how barrack obama came to mind as I wrote that last line...
This is comedy. Directing a sound logical argument at libtards. Seriously. Pearls before swine.
See the 3rd quote in my FR profile page, the two paragraph one by Hayek. You are spot on regarding the similarity of Nazis and Communists, and Hayek nailed it in the 1940s.
This is comedy. Directing a sound logical argument at libtards. Seriously.
You cant reason with crazy people. We should stop trying.
Marxist’s rights trump natural rights. STFU is the Marxist mantra, or they’ll kill you - abortion be damned!
You forgot their “Pal’s” Pot, Mao, Stalin, Mussolini, etc.
They took away natural rights from all citizens (the right of ownership) and replaced these natural rights with politically-created rights.
[Well written point!]
A fake right is just an illusion, a sand castle.
While it’s true that Trump’s tweets and actions educate better than most intellectuals ....
I used to be a liberal before the 90s woke me up. This forum helped me learn. And I in turn helped my liberal father learn. He’s a stronger Trump supporter than me now.
Education is the key — especially with impressionable minds before they are set in Soros concrete.
Update on the latest:
TWO MILLION flee Venezuela...
Georgetown prof: White GOP senators in Kavanaugh hearing deserve miserable deaths
D.C. restaurant hires guards after anti-Kavanaugh crowd harasses Ted Cruz and wife
We are now living in the aftermath of this PR disaster,” the owner said in an email to customers. Last Monday, the senator and Heidi Cruz were chased out by about a dozen protesters regarding Ted Cruz’s support of embattled Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh. In the email sent last weekend, owner and chef Fabio Trabocchi said the restaurant had to temporarily take down social media accounts because of hateful comments, and reservation lines...” [snip]
[Rome’s elitist senators grew so hated that they had thugs as well. They mass murdered advocates for Rome’s version of a ‘constitutional amendment’ and banned any anti-senate assemblies until Pompey Magnus was backed by popular fervor and put the senate back into its legal restraints. Then Pompey grew jealous of Ceasar. His supporters attacked Mark Antony to prevent a veto. That was the republic’s downfall — thuggery by the senate. That is where the democrats are heading — thuggery on behalf of despotic oligarchs.]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.