Posted on 10/12/2018 4:15:06 PM PDT by Para-Ord.45
Another name for the neo-Marxism of increasing popularity in the United States is cultural Marxism.” This theory says that the driving force behind the socialist revolution is not the proletariat — but the intellectuals. Marxist theory flourishes today in cultural institutions, in the academic world, and in the mass media. This “cultural Marxism” goes back to Antonio Gramsci and the Frankfurt School.
... The believers of neo-Marxism are mainly intellectuals. Nowhere was socialism established as the result of a labor movement... The leaders of the revolution have been intellectual party politicians and military men. It was up to the writers and artists to conceal the brutality of the socialist regimes, and to give socialism a scientific-intellectual, aesthetic and moral appearance. In the socialist propaganda, the new system appears to be both fair and productive.
The cultural Marxists believe that someday they will be the sole holders of power and be able to dictate to the masses how to live and what to think...
... To the extent that the neo-Marxists altered classical Marxism and eliminated its basic tenets, the movement has become even more utopian than previously socialism ever was.
As the successors of the New Left, the "democratic socialists" of the present time propagate a hodgepodge of contradictory positions. Because of the character of this movement as a promoter of group conflict, neo-Marxism is ineffectual to serve as an instrument of gaining coherent political power as it were necessary for a dictatorship. Yet this does not mean that the neo-Marxist movement has no impact. On the contrary: because of its inherent contradictions, the ideology of cultural Marxism is the main source of the profound confusion that has grabbed almost every segment of the modern Western societies and which is about to swell into even more dangerous proportions.
(Excerpt) Read more at mises.org ...
Intellectuals of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your brains!
Whatever they want to call it it has no place in the U.S.
I can understand why some people became Marxists a hundred years ago. It seemed like an answer to the problems of a very rough world. But anyone who has embraced Marxism after about the mid-1930s, after Stalin, after hundreds of millions were sent to the boneyard around the world in the decades afterward, after hundreds of millions more lived without any hope of freedom and basic human dignity, has some serious mental and moral issues. They are no better than Nazis in my book, and people who care about having anything approaching a sane and humane society need to find that out and keep it in mind.
Well, there is more to observing the Democrat Party as exhibitors of cultural Marxism than meets the eye...a lot more.
An article noting the use of violence by the Democrat Party serves to introduce some thought regarding the violence not only of the Democrat Party, but the association of violence with all of the spectrum of the West’s socialist spectrum of “isms”. To begin:
“It bears repeating that Democrats, unable to win an argument on the merits, or obtain power through elections, are now calling for violence. I include Antifa when I discuss the Democrats because Antifa is their private militia. The media are their propaganda arm.”
The excerpt above is from today’s AmericanThinker:
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/violence_its_not_only_the_right_who_will_bleed.html
But, there is more. The relationship of cultural Marxism is associated historically as well as in the immediate present by the association of Marx and Mohammed, in stunningly realistic events occurring in Europe and North America.
The excerpt represents exactly the way Mohammed came to power.
Unable to win his political cult’s non-mainstream message to Meccan’s...with his life and political/religious movement in danger from the Meccan backlash, Mohammed fled (the Hegira) to Medina and concluded that all resistance to his demands must be eliminated by....violence, and so the world’s oldest, most successful totalitarian mechanism for rule (Mohammedanism is 86% of Islamic doctrine) came into existence (Jihad) and has remained the prime originating example for totalitarianism for 1400 years.
The evolution of modern socialist totalitarianisms ranging from communism to Nazism, gushing forth since the 1850’s in the West, with spinoff variations (progressivism, statism, corporatism) owe their base modus operandi to Ilsam with plenty of history to confirm it.
The currently catastrophic socialist civilizaational alliances of Islam with today’s socialism’s, enveloping Western Civilization, is a natural one, the socialism’s having arisen with Islam as the model in the first place.
That is why the Islamo/Socialist Spectrum concept, their alliance, in that order of supremacy, makes sense viewing the swallowing of Europe’s socialist civilization by Islam.
For example, London is more Islamic than many Islamic countries!
Behind every socialist is apparently an Islamist, even unconsciously in those with no knowledge of history. The “modern politically evolutionary” socialist spectrum, serving now as a massive Trojan Horse masking as well as enabling and protecting the greatest Jihad in history, currently ongoing, is only a a phenomenon that can be linked dating back to the origin of Mohammedanism in the 7th century!
The core of the socialism’s is Marxism with the lesser socialisms linked around that core, and the alliance of modern expressions of the socialist spectrum, all enablers of the advance of Mohammedanism’s agenda, is the most catastrophic force pitted against Judeo/Christian/Greco/Roman Western civilization. The alliance of Marx and Mohammed is in the world’s face/mind and not recognized as such, born out of fear and manifested as willful denial. The socialist spectrum is just a fundamental suicide vehicle for the West as desired by the Islamic Jihad.
American Democrats are now sponsoring about a hundred Muslim political candidates for the mid-term elections in less than a month. Socialist US Dems are indeed, serving as the major Trojan Horse for Islamisation of the US, and, history is ignored.
Islamic cultural and political interests in the US are now institutionalized by the USCMO, the US Council of Muslim Organizations, formed with little media publicity in March of 2014 in Chicago, IL. The Center for Security Policy published an article noting the purpose of that party concerning the 2016 election and its future after that:
The Democrat Party provides support now for about 100 Muslim candidates for office from school boards to state and federal postitions including the upcoming mid-term elections. If the Democrat Party is noted to be culturally Marxist, culturally Socialist, it is also...Islamo/Marxist or Islamo/Socialist and the Democrat protects Islam as its own.
The idea of an alliance of Marx and Mohammedanism is daunting indeed and it is in our face. The model of violence when civility fails goes back to the 7th century, and Democrat associsted AntiFa and Black Lives Matter violent initiatives have their socialist origins related to the Islamic history and practice that preceeded them.
The Mises article is only part of the story.
No, it is the media's ideology.
Antonio Gramsci was a major influence on the Frankfurt School but was not himself a member, being first imprisoned by Mussolini and then dead in prison due to neglect, at the time the members of that school formed their principal bodies of work. It was his insight that the bourgeoisie used cultural hegemony (his term) to control society to their benefit; it was the determination of the Frankfurt School that this could only be overcome by the breakdown of the parent society's culture. Hence Cultural Marxism, a term that is probably making old Karl grind his teeth in Hell.
One of the linchpins of the postwar Communist movement was the deliberate and insidious subversion of Hollywood that actually predated World War II. This, it was theorized, was, as a principal communicator of bourgeois values, a mechanism of oppression and might, through careful manipulation, serve equally well to communicate values that were in the interest first of breaking down the parent culture and reforming it under a new, revolutionary set of values. The people who subverted Hollywood knew what they were doing and their aims were not benign.
Lots more on the topic. When one reads the actual source material of, say, Marcuse or especially Adorno, one is frequently disappointed at just how very intellectually superficial it turns out to be. (I except Gramsci from that charge, he was merely mistaken, if in fact he was). For the rest, all the high-flown jargon and neo-Marxist mumbo jumbo have merely served to create a gigantic mess from which no societal phoenix will ever arise because there's nothing there. My $0.02.
As I recall, the Glorious Revolution in Russia was started by sailors. The “Potemkin” ring a bell? Lenin and Trotsky slimed their way into power over the bones of military men neglected by the Czar during the Great War.
Intellectuals my ass.
Well; whomever is responsible for this cultural Marxism/communism/progressive-ism should be taken for one of Pinochet’s helicopter rides. I hear it’s a real blast/splash from the past.
Their broad plan: Take control of
1. Hollywood—and all main media outlets.
2. Education—Get them when young.
3. Courts—democratically elected reps too slow and may never work.
They have 1 and 2. They almost had 3. But for The Donald. Hence the all out battle re Kavanaugh.
Ben Carson said as much, recently.
And once the Cultural Marxists take control the real Marxists will emerge and the useful idiot Cultural Marxists will be taken out and shot as they historically always are ... fat lot of good that will do the rest of us.
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.