Is Cultural "marxism" really just cultural liberalism?

Where do liberalist social values come from? Are they a sort of watered down version of Marxism?

Other urls found in this thread:

They're descended from Puritanism and Quakerism, imo

Lets make Cultural Puritanism-Quakerism a meme.

Yeah, what righties believe is cultural Marxism, it's actually just cultural liberalism or capitalism.

It makes sense, really. In a society where money buys everything people are more inclined to be unauthentic, shallow and "degenerate".

Adorno has wrote about it, but they'll never read it because they think he's behind it. They really are utterly stupid.

Watch the video. I think you'll find it interesting.


Or at least, in America, they are. I couldn't speak for Europe.

Some of them don't think the Frankfurt school invented it.

Moral relativism.

Real cultural Liberalism is like when they try to make everything political and identity political.

By the way, to counter that meme just name the most degenerate rich people who are not Jews. Then ask them how they want to avoid this sort of behaviour if they leave capitalism in power.

They'll have no answer to that besides "promoting traditional values" which is weak af

The "Marxism" part is a meme descended from an old Nazi propaganda term, Cultural Bolshevism. There is no real reason to assume any actual relation to Marx; rather, the reason it propagated was because it was a convenient vessel for an existing belief of global communist conspiracy by the right wing.

They seem to think that Marx invented equality.

'cultural marxism' isn't some kind of proletariate subjectivity, or a proletariate ideology, I've never personally seen it anti-capitalist in the least.

I'd say it is more capitalism, socdem at it's most radical lol.

It certainly doesn't look at all like some Gramscian War of Position (which is what I think they think it is, even though they don't know who Gramsci was)

Where does it come from?

Literal Nazi propaganda. They called it Cultural Bolshevism back then.

No I mean the actual culture not the term.

Trying to establish capitalism with a human face by appealing to the most primitive emotions of people regarding their "in-group" by commodifying them at the same time - for example how Christopher Street day is now 100% consumerism and spectacle


I'm not Holla Forums I believe you.

Nah I didn't think you were, Wikipedia really isn't that much of a valid source, but I just don't get why most people who continuously point that out don't just check the sources at the end of the article

Adorno was just one guy in the think tank. And yeah, he made the blindingly obvious observation that commercial music is contrived and inauthentic. Whoop dee doo.

Meanwhile, the bulk of Critical Theory is exactly Cultural Marxism, or, if you prefer, Cultural Nihilism

Because "circumstances that enslave human beings" is so vague, subjective, and at the whim of some out of touch stir-crazy egghead and their indoctrinated juvenile wards who pay them, it can be used to attack anything and everything, and it is.

Because Critical Theory directs one's attention away from one's aims and duties and toward how "societal institutions" are "enslaving" them, it turns them into infantile, grievance-obsessed hysterical paranoids who are incapable of agency and so vulnerable to collective authoritarianism and its platitudes as a savior.

Criticial Theory is Cultural Marxism is Cultural Nihilism. It is the root of the the SJW grievance culture. It is indoctrination to always destructively find fault with your environment rather than look for constructive solutions that harmonize with it.

free love, gay acceptance and woman's liberation evolved closely to Anarchism but isn't really tied to it.

Racial egalitarianism comes from classical liberalism(Jacobins abolished slavery), although some liberals dropped it later on.

"Privilege" theory comes from post-colonialism (which is very vaguely related to Maoism) and desconstructivism.

Also considering Catholic faith was responsible for most of those "conservative" social values they their decline coincided with the decline of religion, starting with the protestant reformation and the acceptance of divorce and usury and
then followed by secularists, deists and atheists questioning outdated religious hierarchy and practice.
Communists were all atheist so they get the blame for the natural secularization of society by scientific progress, what can you do.

Critical Theory is Cultural Marxism because Critical Theory is Cultural Marxism –your post

It creates an ideological vacuum that a new ideology can rush inside. Because it creates dysfunctional people, that "something" will certainly be some kind of socialism.

It's a conspiracy theory which states that a bunch of fringe marxist theorists wanted to destroy western civilisation. It's basically a rehash of nazi 'cultural bolshevism',

Right so we should all just blindly accept all of society's established norms and cultural trends without questioning them?

Cultural Marxism isn't a thing because Marxism is a materialist philosophy that views culture as an outgrowth of material economic conditions. Liberal ideas like liberal feminism, post-colonialism, etc aren't Marxism just because they follow a dynamic of dominant vs subjugated groups in society. They have at their core a fundamentally different view of what the central divisions of society are, on what basis these different groups gain their power, how they interact with one another, and how to go about liberating the subjugated group.

really made me think

former-Holla Forumsyp newbie who just started discovering leftism, I must say catposters have been one of the most based in my journey so far



Communist Manifesto, Origin of Family Private Property and the State, and pretty much anything by Lenin, Marx, Stalin or Engels that touches on the subject of culture.

No, but you should understand their purpose and have a plan before burning them to the ground like a tabula rasa leftist retard.

Humans aren't computers you can program. We're animals with evo-psychological needs, and conservatism often, not always, but often, organically evolved in response to those needs much more effectively than leftism.

Humans want/need to own things.
Humans want/need to care for their biological offspring.
Humans want/need to believe in the supernatural.
Humans want/need to defend themselves.
Humans want/need privacy.
Culture needs a means of incentivizing reproduction of high quality humans.

Of course, leftism is out of touch and scientifically outdated by about 100 years in this regard and still holds to the "everything is subjective/people can just be indoctrinated" worldview, which is retarded and leads to the constant ruin you see it generate. No one wants what it's selling.

If leftism wanted to reform itself into something functional, it would need to examine what postulate and test functional, satisfying replacements for everything in conservatism it destroys.

Criticising something destroys it?

Does it? Proof?

Proof that "leftism" says that everything is subjective, that is.

It's because anarchists are the best humanity has to offer

It underlies everything leftist. It's impossible not to see it. The fundamental belief of leftists is that subjectivity and theory are everything and people are programmable.

Did Marx build a functional society before advocating tearing down the present one? No. Same with critical theory. Attack everything that's "oppressing" you according to your subjectivity.

Do you have any experience or data with something to replace with besides your stupid ideas? No? Well, fuck it, burn it all down anyway.

For leftists, nothing is evaluated ("discriminated") or tested functionally and exposed of real-world consequences before being vomited out–if you just have complete mental conviction, against everything else, it will all work out.

If the facts don't agree with the theory, so much the worse for the facts, as Marx's predecessor Hegel said.

Cultural marxism is an extension of a conspiracy theory. It serves as a strawman, where if you criticize the status quo, you will be labeled part of an elitist conspiracy to destroy " " " the West " " ".
It is funny enough that right wingers claim cultural marxism is a conspiracy of the rich financial elite (the joos) to gain absolute power, which is the opposite of marxism.

Yup it's a make-believe conspiracy alright

I asked for proof, not your feels. Criticising an existing system is not 'everything is subjective'.

Was Kierkegaard /our guy/?

Did you read the rest of the sentence? I hope you are trolling.

Critical theory is not a conspiracy. The conspiracy is the assertion that the goal of critical theory is to hand power to the joos. It is not.

Observe for three seconds and the proof is obvious in everything leftists do, you unbelievable fuckwit. They never test anything or bootstrap a functional working model–they just start screaming and tearing shit down and demanding their rights.

For example, why aren't any of you idiots out building a commune?

More feels.
Proof, please.

Prove to me there's no proof.

It's good that the Gadsden flag here says "please tread on me" and that you picked it, you fucking cucked bootlicker

You're making the claim, provide proof that left wing thought relies on "everything being subjective".


Looks like you don't have any proof that I'm wrong. Still waiting on that proof.

…And I'm out. Bring some proof next time, buddy. At least try to back up your claims.

A working model of what?

Just imagine a workplace, but instead of being owned by an individual, it's owned by the workers.
Do you think you're incapable of managing your workplace?
Worker's coops do exist even in the current capitalist system.


Well, there's that word. You can't imagine it, you have to build it. And more than that, you have to build it in such a way that it can compete with capitalism, or capitalism will always defeat it.

The present world is free enough that it's very possible. We have unprecedented powers of research and organization.

Still waiting on the proof.

I think it's time to stop posting fam, they're clearly trolling

What is Stefan opinion about Anders Breivik?

And you ignored the co-ops existing part.

You make a claim, you provide proof. Prove there isn't an invisible milk bottle hovering above your head.

Are you telling me that because we don't live in a communist society at the moment means that communism doesn't work? By your logic, feudalism is a lot more reality-based and objective system because existed for more than a millenium.

Sweetie, when people discuss things, it's presumed that all parties have a certain baseline level of experience and can agree upon certain obvious facts.

For example, if I were to present to you a red apple, you would say "prove to me the apple is red." Sadly, now there are no grounds for discussion as you cannot contribute anything but silly demands.

lol where the fuck else would culture come from? is it bestowed upon us by odin?

If you consider "everyone was impoverished and enslaved" to be "feudalism works." But I would expect that from a communist.

Human nature, which is a dirty word to commies.

Cultural Marxism is just a delusional swipe at cosmopolitan values and attitudes which as Marx pointed out are ideologically fostered within capitalist society to provide justification and a cultural and political vanguard for the fact that Capitalism requires a constant revolutionizing of the means of production and thus all of social life along with it.

So in a way you are right, the right, when they invoke the Cultural Marxist meme, are taking a swipe at left-liberal cosmopolitanism and the ideology of the progressive Capitalist class.

but the working class is impoverished and enslaved under capitalism too. but i would expect a lolbert to just ignore that

LOL so it pretty much is bestowed upon us by odin

Read Marx.

considering ~human nature~ and history humans are much more likely to be communistic but ok
human nature my ass

You have a very retarded philosophy tbh. Why do you assume that you are speaking from a objective viewpoint? Why do you think that a such thing as objective viewpoint exists? Hundreds of years ago the "objective" viewpoint about shape of the Earth would have been that it's flat. A viewpoint which is proclaimed "objective" is nothing more than reinforcement of the existing dominant views. If we don't question those views, then society can not and will never progress and we would still be living in caves.

If you consider "everyone was impoverished and enslaved" to be "capitalism works". But I would expect that from a right-"libertarian"

Whose conception of it?
I've never seen one human nature in my life, it's a buzzword unless you define it.

it's capitalist and consumerist degeneration of culture that id blamed on the left.
It dosen't make the situation better that liberals and most of the modern left (especially anarkiddies) are useful idiots to porky when it comes to degeneration

Critical theory is kind of a clear-cut repudiation of Marxism though

nah man adorno caused both 911 and the gulf war

Not sure it is fam.

Read North

Great job sucking the shit from your own ass OP.

Read Adorno

The burden of proof is on the one making the claim

For a guy so keen on incorrectly reducing leftist thought to radical subjectivism, a reactionary position, you sure seem to be leaning heavily on solipsism here

North cites Adorno

I'd be a bit worried if he didn't.

It's cosmopolitan values combined with the cultural reaction of recent economic events.

My point being "read the source material" isn't an adequate rebuttal to a proper critique of the source material

PDF related answers all questions on the cultural Marxism conspiracy theory and its origins in the much older and much less subtle Kulturbolschewismus ("cultural Bolshevism") concocted by actual Nazi regime holders.

The conspiracy usually gets lumped up with anti-Semitic nonsense as well, based on the fact that some Frankfurt School members were Jews.

The old "Jewish Communism" canard.

Fascinating that even back then Nazis were obsessed with portraying themselves as defenders of "Western civilisation". The same vague and conspiratorial terms.

Amazing how little reactionary conspiracies have changed over time.

For ideology to change you have to first give it some thought

true, thinking has never been the right's strong point

We should meme this as the real cultural Marxism.

It is a snarl word used by conservatives to demonize social liberalism.

all of my WEW

Everyone can just critique and spout random bullshit, there is no virtue or value or merit in just going around criticizing things.
Go and make your own thing, worthless fucks. Everyone can go around saying 'I dont like thing'.

All relativists are good for nothing faggots, lowest and objectively worthless people desperate for excuses.

I want to legalize public nudity and public sex, make home schooling and private schools illegal, teach evolution and sex education in schools, air hardcore porn and swear words on in the middle of the day.
traces it back to Puritanism, more or less.

pic related

Virtue, value, and merit? Who judges, and why shouldn't they be on gibbets?

European puritans are what you think of when you mean puritan. The American puritans were what the European puritans would call sinful.

It is objectively the right thing to do. Our universe operates on basic fundamental rules which tell us what we should do in case we desire to exist.
Those who adhere to these principles continue to exist, those who do not get wiped out. The universe wants us to organize and live in this manner.
Because if they adhere to these virtues, values and merits, they are the only ones who can not be put on the gibbets, but can put everyone else on gibbets.

If we never went against the "natural order" we'd have never left caves, Fed-kun.

This is true. Scientific laws are an empirical approximation of these "fundamental rules."
They don't tell us anything, we are left to infer what we can about these rules, often clumsily.

What you're doing is taking the basic assumption of science "the material universe is fundamentally law-governed" and conflating it with the concept of religious or political law, or of guidelines by which one should live life, in order to assert that law in the sense of absolute virtues, values, and merits both exists and is knowable in some sense. That simply doesn't work

You should read up on historical materialism, FBI-kun. Evolution gives the appearance of design the same way social development gives the appearance of divine organization (i.e. by "the universe") because the latter is also an evolutionary process, where the selective pressures are determined by material conditions in general.


I dont understand that.

Well yes you are right but I added the "if we want to continue to exist" part.
So as long as we desire to exist, we must obey the strategy of existing, which is defined by the fundamental rules of the universe that we can all measure and agree upon.
Now I know that this is one of those equations with multiple answers, and I dont know which answer is the best, all I know is that I want to find it, and if it turns out to be capitalism or imperialism or whatever, it is the only morally and politically and culturally and economically and militarily and spiritually acceptable answer.>>1344288

If that were the case then culture would only evolve with human biology. That hasn't changed much in 200,000 years, but culture obviously has, and drastically. Your premise is absurd on the face of it.