Cultural Marxism, a Political Ideology or Conspiracy Theory?

a reply to: strongfp

It creates class.

That's the whole point of understanding Marxism.

And to understand the flaw in Marxism you have to realize there is no economic system we have ever tried which has eliminated social classes, and some of the most authoritarian governments in history have been heavily socialist nations with very poor populations. It's also crucial to realize there is nothing intrinsically evil about different social classes, especially if we live in a healthy economy where anyone has the ability to work their way up the social ladder if they are willing to put in the hard work. I certainly wouldn't want to live on a society where we are all exactly the same, none of us grew up with hardships, we all own a mansion on the river side, we all get what ever we want with very little effort because technology has solved all our problems... never going to happen. There are always going to be those jobs where someone needs to be willing to get down and dirty, not to mention there simply isn't enough space or materials for everyone to own a river side mansion. Like I said these are Utopian pipe dreams, and while they are based in good intentions, they almost always pave the path to hell.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

The capitalist class becomes ridiculously rich in wealth not because they 'worked hard', they exploited places all over the world. Neo-liberalism has been a failed experiment which has just created a new wave of colonialism and massive amounts of people being displaced in it's wake which has caused a migration problem.

See how capitalism destroys more culture than a Marxist revolution?

a reply to: strongfp

Great. So now allow for people to critique capitalism.

It just happens the thread I wrote before this one was on that very subject. It seems to me our culture is currently overflowing with narratives involving criticisms of capitalism, which is one major reason we're seeing so many people fall down this path of envy and hate. Obviously there are flaws with capitalism, but this childish attitude I see from so many people is not going to solve anything. We should be glad that Western culture has produced so many wealthy people instead of viewing as a bad thing. If 100 people became billionaires tomorrow then wealth inequality would grow on paper, but in reality no one is worse off, and 100 people are a lot better off.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder

These exaggerated narratives do influence how people think even if they weren't really designed to. Similar messaging can also easily be found in abundance among a wide variety modern movies and television shows. Now ask yourself how often you see extreme forms of socialism depicted in modern films and video games, despite the fact such governments have caused more poverty and death than any other.

Not only that they result in a type of subjugation to authority that goes far beyond any of the corporate oppression we see depicted in these fictional hyper-capitalist societies. It's also worth noting that most of the more pro-capitalist nations in the real world are also some of the most wealthy, but I've discussed all that before and that isn't the main purpose of this thread so I'll get to the point.

...

Obviously it's not fair to say they are all completely wrong, there are certainly many flaws with modern capitalism and there are valid reasons to want things to change. The real issue is these people completely fail to see all the good aspects of capitalism and western culture in general... it's to the point where they despise seeing the flag of their own nation.

I thought the point of posting this topic was to describe Marxism as a socialist virus infecting capitalist biology and giving our socioeconomic system the Chinese flu? Or did I misunderstand the message here?

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

If 100 people became billionaires tomorrow then wealth inequality would grow on paper, but in reality no one is worse off, and 100 people are a lot better off.

It depends on how they became rich.
What's your take on Bill Gates buying up rail roads and becoming the largest farm land owner in the world?

a reply to: strongfp

Ah I see, so no one who is rich ever got rich due to hard work, it was all because of colonialism. This is exactly the type of attitude I'm talking about... it's based in envy while claiming to be a righteous attitude. I think it's very important not to deny the fact hard work does play a large role in success while also have a realistic understanding that life can be unfair and we wont always be rewarded for the work we do. However persistence and determination will almost always pay off in the end. If a normal guy wants to become a quantum physicist at the age of 40 I say to them it's possible to achieve almost anything we set our minds to if we truly want it bad enough. For anyone living in a developed nation I think there are very reliable ways to pave a path which leads to great wealth if that's what you truly want from life. But I would suggest thinking long and hard about what you really want and whether or not money will really give you all those things.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

My bosses and founders of my company I work for worked extremely hard to get to where they are. And they are filthy rich.

But, if they want to get any 'richer' they need to get into a world beyond hard work. That's the modern take on Marxism and criticizing capitalist ventures. When I mean 'rich people' I don't mean the person down the road with the nine sports cars and giant home. I mean the people who get to a point where wealth is measured not in money, but power and influence.
A good example is let's take a CEO of a leading publishing firm, or leading media outlet. They take a massive percentage of profits off the top of the numerous authors, editors, journalists, etc. Sure they get exposure, but someone or a few people at the top are doing nothing to get a massive profit. Ontop of that rhetoric they also dictate who will get published and who won't.

a reply to: strongfp

A good example is let's take a CEO of a leading publishing firm, or leading media outlet. They take a massive percentage of profits off the top of the numerous authors, editors, journalists, etc. Sure they get exposure, but someone or a few people at the top are doing nothing to get a massive profit. Ontop of that rhetoric they also dictate who will get published and who won't.

I don't really see how this has anything to do with capitalism, it has to do with human greed. Every single business that exists make a choice how much to pay their employees. You can try to regulate these human conditions by redistributing wealth but it's highly likely to cause more harm than good. Increase taxes and businesses just increase prices or move to another country with lower taxes. Over-tax rich people and they do the same thing, taking their wealth and business with them.

No one likes a douchy CEO who does little work and acts like they do everything, but obsessing over it and trying to reform society in a way that punishes "rich old white males" is the dumbest possible approach we could take, yet we seem to be taking it and calling it woke. It is extremely dangerous for us to believe this notion that the solution to all problems is just more taxes and more nanny state policies to control every aspect of society. The suffering and poverty which could result will show just how spoiled we really are now.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

You're taking the objectivist approach a little to hard here, well, at least that's the vibes I am getting.

I agree with 'free markets', to a certain extent, but I also strongly disagree with unregulated capitalism as it's main model within an economy is to accumulate, consolidate, and rinse and repeats until, what?
That's the big question, I like to use land, real estate, etc. as a prime example when arguing against capitalism, because it was ultimately 'land' ownership that inevitably lead to the fall of feudalism, and monarchy, hence why banking became the new 'scheme' to put people into debt in just another way.

Time and time again throughout history two main factors lead to 'proletariat' uprisings and revolutions, the cancellation of debts, and redistribution of land. It's inevitable under a unregulated capitalist society. Accumulation is the scripture of a true capitalist. And it goes beyond land and debts, it starts with control of ideas and thoughts.

a reply to: TzarChasm

They're undeniably observable in modern American society.

a reply to: strongfp

And it still is. Today, you are either in an oppressor class or in an oppressed class.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder
This is the link to the political ideology article on wiki: Marxist cultural analysis

It points out:

Since the 1930s, the tradition of Marxist cultural analysis has occasionally also been referred to as "cultural Marxism", in reference to Marxist ideas about culture.[5][6] However since the 1990s, this term has largely referred to the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory, a highly influential discourse on the far right without any clear relationship to Marxist cultural analysis.[7][8]

Guess it is both and that is the reason for two entries.

a reply to: strongfp

I agree with 'free markets', to a certain extent, but I also strongly disagree with unregulated capitalism as it's main model within an economy is to accumulate, consolidate, and rinse and repeats until, what?

Except we don't live in unregulated an capitalist system, and no one us arguing to get rid of all regulations. What the left always fails to realize is how over-regulation and government bloat actually harms the economy, it makes it harder for small businesses to get started and compete with the monopolies. By lowering taxes and trimming unnecessary regulations Trump created a booming economy until a certain virus undid all that work.

You really think I would argue for a system that leads to more poverty? We all want to live in a better world, and I simply believe the highest amount of prosperity is achieved by having a positive pro-business attitude instead of doing everything possible to make life hard for businesses. I used to be a hardcore socialist for many years because I thought that was the best path forward, now I understand it's only a path to tyranny.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I always love hearing that trump tried to deregulate... yet then, he himself put down massive amounts of corportist regulations.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I don't think that this is actually an organised thing, it's more a more a trend than anything else. it's a lot of small groups and individuals jumping on the bandwagon to score cultural capital by virtue signalling the same things.

a reply to: strongfp

He didn't try, he did... can you list the harmful economic regulations he imposed?

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Am I the only one who appreciates the irony of posting a conspiracy topic complaining about a conspiracy theory being acknowledged?

Antisemitism has been a long standing characteristic in WASP culture of which Western culture is a bastardization. Wealthy Protestant elite discriminating against less favorable social classes.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Also, there's no such thing as "either or" in politics and conspiracy. Quite the opposite in fact. Conspiracy is to politics as cults are to spirituality.

PSA: when using Wikipedia as a source, the intent is to condense all bibliographic references in one easy to consume source that can be dissected at leisure. Dissection is the responsibility of the reader, that's what research means. Feel free to discredit any data that is demonstrably false.

Similar to the hogwash theory of pinning "Cultural Marxism" to "far-right antisemites" cited by the OP, your assertion is a merely deflection and obfuscation of where the main source of Jew-hate originates from in modern times.

Militia-Like Pro-Palestinian Gangs Attack Jews Across US, West

I think you're maybe about 80 years or so late with your assessment concerning WASPs.

"1945 called; it would like its geopolitical and social opinions back"

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder

It seems to me our culture is currently overflowing with narratives involving criticisms of capitalism

Perhaps that's because this organization wants to implement 'stakeholder capitalism'.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I don't really want to get into the trump admin. Regulation policies, I was just pointing out that for all the deregulation he took on, he imposed other regulations that were just as poor for the economy as the ones he took off.

And then you get into the moral questions of the deregulation, such as environmental impacts and such.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: strongfp

Cultural Marxism which is in itself an oxymoron, is supposedly based off the study of critical theory, which back in the 1920s - 30s was pinned as and Jewish and subversive

Cultural Marxism... is the spread of Marxist ideologies throughout a culture. It's not rocket science, you don't need studies from 100 years ago to understand the meaning or see how our culture and our political climate is slowly shifting in a certain direction. I doubt there is an evil group of "elite Marxist theorists" coordinating the whole thing, but Marxist ideologies have certainly been pushed by Leftist media and politicians, and I see more if it as the days go by.

Really, I thought that Cultural Marxism was just the idea that the left wanted to squeeze out everything that they didn't like. it's about "behaving like a Marxist", not about actual Marxism as a political ideology or economic system.

The easy was to demonstrate this is the fact that Marxism is a class based ideology, while cultural Marxism tackles almost everything but class.

A cultural maxist is concerned with race, gender, gender identity, and all of those other leftist areas. They aren't concerned with class for the simple reasons that a lot of white conservatives are poor and blue collar, while the left is backed by many wealthy minorities.

Under actual cultural Marxism people like Obama and Opera would be seen as the enemy while white trailer trash would be their friends.