What the hell is Cultural Marxism?

I hear every goddamn right winger mention this along with the Frankfurt School of Wizardry and Witchcraft and I never understood what they meant by it. Is critical theory this so called "Cultural Marxism" or is it literally a term they made up?

Attached: 1544763434033.png (1080x1080, 415.71K)

Other urls found in this thread:

ecofascism.com/article35.html
youtube.com/watch?v=jalF9ulBw5M
youtu.be/-G_eLMkJkNw
youtube.com/watch?v=4jef2C4T1_A
amazon.com/Islamic-Jihad-Cultural-Marxism-Transformation/dp/0692771948
amazon.com/Red-Trojan-Horse-Analysis-Cultural/dp/154883050X
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

as far as i'm aware it's just the idea that the current left is applying marxist theory to social problems, and that Marx is completely responsible for the gays and the minorities wanting more rights.

They have ass-backwards belief that politics is downstream from culture rather than the other way around like in reality. This ties in with their belief that after the failure of the Soviet Union, which was a setback, we've instead opted to hijack the culture and brainwash their children with our Jewish sorcery. It's not worth paying much attention to.

Pillars of "Cultural Marxism:"

There you go.

"boohoo the West can't be chauvinist anymore"

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (400x280, 219.43K)

Cultural Marxism is something that got mainstream lately, but Adolf Hitler couldn't stop bringing it up in his speeches so I always just assumed it's NeoNazi shit

basically we've had a secret programme to brainwash and corrupt the youth in western countries for a while now but Zig Forums and Jordan Peterson recently found out all about it

It’s literally “Jewish Bolshevism” under a more culturally acceptable term. Maybe not every right winger knows its origins but it’s heavily linked with that

Essentially, it's a conspiracy theory by American paleoconservatives. The people who perpetuate it are literal anti-intellectuals (usually Protestants) and go out of their way to avoid actually researching things they talk about.

cultural marxism is when you are marxist and cultured. marxists usually are ignorant as fuck

Cultural Marxism is the opposite of the natural order. It is a man-made system of psychological warfare against humans that are reverting to their natural state, a state where there is no equality and there is no attempt to subvert in-group preference.

Lol

It's a far right conspiracy theory based on the NSDAP propaganda about "Cultural Bolshevism"… The American New Right just rebranded this old idea by changing the name and conspiracy behind it slightly. Here's a paper about it.

The thing is that you don't have to read shit to understand nature, you can watch it and it immediately makes sense, because you are a part of it. The only way the weak can overtake the strong is to subvert nature and introduce artificial constructs that punish strength and rewards weakness, like welfare.

Surely you won't object to Marx's historical materialism which observes the natural development over time of human societies then. After all humans come from nature themselves.

strong in what

Like cavemen using tools?

Wouldn't the weak banding together to murder you make you the weak one, reactionary fuck? Survival of the fittest indeed. Guess your genes might turn out to be self-removing after all.

Like, say, building a wall?

this, unless he doesn't think tools and basically everything we do is not natural(there are people who think true survival is without medicine, because only primitive tools count as natural apparently)the weak acting together are actually the fittest.

Attached: tom cruise.jpg (500x333, 54.02K)

You can feign ignorance all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that the meaning behind Cultural Marxism is what I said it was. It has nothing to do with feelings or using tools or building walls or whatever other flak you want to throw at it. It's a subversion of nature for the sole benefit of giving weaklings an upper-hand. You know, jew stuff.

Argument not found

thanks for at least taking off the mask

also i doubt anyone here calls himself a cultural marxist, knows what it is exactly or agrees with it

Social Darwinism is objectively wrong, spergo. And even if it wasn't, most of Zig Forums would be untermensch.

Stop being a schizo

I never said they did. Was explaining what the term meant and then people get all defensive.

Attached: lil reactionary.jpg (768x344, 107.53K)

What are you arguing about?

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (512x512, 251.04K)

because you're wrong

It's the same as every other political idealogy. They're all the same they just walk in different directions over the same shit.

What is cultural Marxism then?

prolly trying to apply abmarxist method to social stuff.

The only "real" element to the conspiracy theory that is Cultural Marixsm is >muh frakfurt school, and its only real because it existed. These dolts dont know how Adorno, Horkheimer etc ae, just they were Jewish and gay and wanted everyone to suck off Caitlyn Jenner using Xhe/Xo pronous

Can you elaborate? I think my answer was pretty clear, but for some reason it's wrong. How is it wrong?

nothing is real

An oxymoron.

And that relates to Cultural Marxism how?

The words "Cultural" and "Marxism" don't seem to make an oxymoron, at least not like one that is obvious like "Military Intelligence" or "Friendly Fire". Can you explain how it is an oxymoron?

they kind of do make an oxymoron

See

How though?

Lets go point by point

Spooky moralist rubbis, theres no such thing and there is no one definition, free from context
Its almost immediately obvious you have no clue what youre talking about, and go on to embarrass yourself further by saying;
Again, >nature, but even if the frankfurt school WAS spreading some form of hidden communism or agenda, they did it entirely by promoting subversion. It was their literal agenda, to subvert the mainstream schools of thought. My god.

But of course, i cant bring you up on your nature bs bc you said

" you don't have to read shit to understand nature, you can watch it and it immediately makes sense, because you are a part of it"
What are you, a flat earther? And, again, even if this was true, showed you that this was the bread and butter of the so-called perpetrators
This was so vague and ridiculous you actually made the board funny for once by clowning you with your own logic

" It has nothing to do with feelings"
re read ur own post, bucko

Ur dumb, kid

Yeah, except I was able to distill that down to simple language that could be understood immediately. Something that seems to be beyond most people posting here.

you are groundbeef

you literally said you dont have to read to understand nature

simple language is evidently all you understand

Was waiting for for the ad-homs to kick in.

That's right, you don't have to read to understand nature. What did the person that wrote the book about nature do if not observe nature and write down what they saw? Do you think that everything we know comes from books only? You aren't making much sense are you?

ecofascism.com/article35.html

youtube.com/watch?v=jalF9ulBw5M

It's a boogieman phrase that's meant to sound as scary as possible that just means "thing I don't like". There is literally nothing else to it, it's a meme created by paleocon burgers.

"Nature" isnt something tangible. It doesnt fuckin exist. Its a subjective idea. Your using nature in its most literal, materialist form, which in itslf is surrounded in dogma and ideology about how things "should be".

Define nature, and i will give you centuries worth of thought and philosophy, all saying completely different things far more eloquently than u and ur monkey brain

For the same reason "Secular Islam" would be an oxymoron. Changing the material conditions of society through cultural manipulation is an inherently anti-Marxist notion.

So basically you can't refute what I just wrote and are now moving on to some other thing, making me define what nature is, when we all know what it is. Fine, but if you don't reply with "centuries worth of though and philosophy then I'm going to think you are asking in bad faith. Nature, as I was referring to it in this discussion, means the behaviors of non-domesticated animals. Animals would include insects, fish and other life on earth that has two sexes and can be viewed as a simplified version of a human.

youtu.be/-G_eLMkJkNw

Subjective knowledge is politically useless.

Cultural Marxism = destruction of Western middle-class families via family courts, homosexual propaganda, pro-drug propaganda, etc

this (dubs confirm)

and this

In theory it's >>>2773711 but in practice it's just "anything a right-winger doesn't like in a particular moment". Capitalism encourages the throwing away of morals/family/traditions in the name of endless profit, yet it's always communism that's blamed, even though communism/communist countries barely even exist anymore. And when they did, there didn't seem to be much trannies/SJWs/feminism/single motherhood/misc. dejeneracy going on in those countries. Even if the Cultural Marxism theory is 100% correct, it seems to rather conveniently flourish under capitalism, in which case capitalism is completely useless for defending against muh dejeneracy and should still be discarded. Right-wingers can't admit that most of the modern bullshit we see in Western society is the fault of their own system that they whiteknight for endlessly, side-effects of capitalism eating everything in search of endless growth.

Attached: disgusting marxist communist degenerates.jpg (529x448, 59.6K)

meant to link to

Cultural Marxism isn't a thing, there is no such thing as a "natural order", and in-group/out-group is probably the concept in social sciences most abused by brainlet laymen trying to look smart and justify their worldview.

this and the rest of the post is literally just feels>reels nonsense.

Based retard.

Why are Zig Forumsyps the low-IQ untermensch they project others as being?

Yet if a culture is anti-Marxist by nature, then how do you get them to be Marxist?

And you forgot that "The jew" is causing it

you hear the word somewhere, get interested and either like it or think it's too "idealistic" and go say "yeah man i would love a world like that but people are greedy and shit"

More attacks on my intelligence, yet not an argument to be found.

Even before i totally own you epic style, lets get in the bare bones of your definition.

Wrong, literally, it means different things in different languages, and figuratively as its a subjective ideal, not a tangible fact.

Lets roll with this, how does the work of the Frankfurt School, or the writings of Horkheimer and Adorno actively encourage that society regress to the state of binary animals. Please give me something, because so far, i have no actual fucking clue what you are on about with this weird ass definition.

The idea of a human is a spook also bud.

Now, on to "Nature", which is entirely meta physical, and as such completely blows your materialist idea from relevancy.
Hobbes, i think, is most prominent with his idea of a state of nature. By your definition, this would be a state of "behavior of non-domesticated animals." Its not, it chaos. Its man against man. Fortnite but in real life (epic). He described it as;
"In such condition there is no place for industry… no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

Aristotle wrote The Physics and defined nature as "a source or cause of being moved and of being at rest in that to which it belongs primarily". In other words, a nature is the principle within a natural raw material that is the source of tendencies to change or rest in a particular way unless stopped. For example, a rock would fall unless stopped. Essentially momentum, energy.

There is a clear split from hobbes and modernity onwards between "nature" and "human nature" with Rousseau writing;
" As soon as we become conscious of our sensations we are inclined to seek or to avoid the objects which produce them: at first, because they are agreeable or disagreeable to us, later because we discover that they suit or do not suit us, and ultimately because of the judgements we pass on them by reference to the idea of happiness of perfection we get from reason. These inclinations extend and strengthen with the growth of sensibility and intelligence, but under the pressure of habit they are changed to some extent with our opinions. The inclinations before this change are what I call our nature. In my view everything ought to be in conformity with these original inclinations."

Bacon, Nietzsche etc tried to define nature without meta physics but ended up more critiquing works rather than proving an impossible concept is practically tangible.

These refrenced items are just a couple of works than span from 192BC through to way past late modernity, and almost none of them define nature in the idiot way you have. Yes, your argument is "but arent they just looking at the world like me" No, theyre looking at the world through the eyes of scholars and philosophers, and are capable of thought far greater than yours, rather than "i see it, it must be as such".

It doesnt get away from the original argument, because this was the shred of logic your argument was based on, and I, a totally epic individual, just owned you like a true sir. Le troll face and so on.

By refuting them. Cultures are not pathological.

nigger there's ton of replies read

I have and most of the replies to my statements are either insults or not a response to what I've written.

So refuting a culture is different than manipulating it. Semantics are fun.

Everything i dont like is """ad hominem"""

Calling me a "based retard" is not an ad-hom?

Yes, because people can be debated and argued with.

so you admit you were defeated by at least one post, dumb nigger

You're dumbness is showing. Is that how we do it?

Maybe you shouldn't have derailed the thread

There have been a couple of mediocre responses, but the majority are as I described.

not when its true :)

/thread

Yeah, I've enjoyed our time together though. Thanks Zig Forums, you guys are funny.

Which means we are not making logical fallacies, only calling you a retard because you sound like one.

That's not what it means at all and you know it. Only your hurt egos make you say those things. See you guys later.

Dumb "i dont read books" user totally BTFO'd with facts, logic, and basic fuckin critical thinking!!!!

Attached: 5afc8fda1ae6621a008b462b-750-429.jpg (750x429, 40.24K)

Zig Forums concern trolling 101

Attached: 7D968AEC-E7FA-4125-A466-7EFC2582E9D3.png (790x635, 485.43K)

Underrated post, although I don't know if communist cultures were that actually reactionary compared to Western ones at the time. Anyways you are right of course and the right-wingers have this belief that culture determines politics (mirroring the "Cultural Marxists" they blame for everything). They feel that the left is in control of culture – and the left is a Jewish invention too of course – so if Black Panther makes $1.3 billion at the box office it's because of Jewish brainwashing. This shapes our politics, they believe, because culture shapes politics. Now this is total bullshit because imagine trying to make a movie about American soldiers being killed and that being presented as a good thing, or like funny or something. Well, the movie will never get made.

Secondly, very few people will go see it because people in the United States don't want to see that. They have things flipped around: it's politics that determines culture (and ultimately politics are determined by economics).

One result is that the right is in a state of anomie all the time. None of these guys on Zig Forums and wherever else are living the idealistic 1950s vision – that is aspirational. Their politics are shaped by the loss of that, although it wasn't particularly all that it was cracked up to be to begin with. They also fail to realize their aims because they are too busy trying to hijack culture. We've had three years of meme warfare and for what end? The LGBT Pride parade in my city isn't getting any smaller. This year it drew such a crowd that the organizers might have to move it to accommodate more people. The right can never find a footing and the rug is always getting pulled out from under them. They are in a constant state of spooked-out glorious uprising ideological fragmentation.

Attached: 6O6EVVZ.gif (317x214, 2.17M)

faggot

U triggered, snowflake?

Attached: 49C15CA4-22AB-41D9-9124-B3A4C58707B8.jpeg (602x503, 228.2K)

nice

Show me where ebin nazi hurt you.

You mind making an actual argument? Because I'm starting to wonder if you're just the faggot from the other thread here who just deflected and spewed word salad without actually describing concretely what he meant and giving no real definitions to his terms besides the most vague subjective bullcrap.

The reason there's a lot of Jews in the school is mainly because Frankfurt once had a large Jewish population and ghetto.
I know this "Cultural Marxism" meme really have nothing to do with Marxism? But I got some questions about it. Mostly about the philosophers and the Frankfurt school in general.

Do they promote fun that these far rightists claim?

Is Marcuse is actually a CIA agent? and did the CIA have a role on the school?

Also, what books I should read about the school? Adorno sounds nice.

Attached: kke_4-koutipandoras-dot-gr.jpg (815x520, 65.62K)