[Sp5]

(08-09-2013 07:52 AM)N°6 Wrote:  

(08-09-2013 07:05 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

So, are capitalists the real "Cultural Marxists?"

I think so but they are better described as oligarchs than capitalists. It wasn't the union movement which abolished the Christian, Sunday day of rest for a materialist day at the mall instead of a family lunch. It was profit-maximising capitalism.

It wasn't the Soviet Union that filled the world with porn.

With the Cultural Marxist identity politics of the New Left from the 1960s, niche markets have been created for identities that hadn't even existed before.

We have already discussed women's liberation into the workplace being the means to tax the other half of the population and increasing consumption. We can also say the creation of the homosexual movement created a new market of consumption by people who spend money on themselves rather than on children.

Also, in the US and UK, there is now no credible union movement to oppose finance-capitalism since the New Left (now called liberals) took over from the traditional unions. Yes, I'd say that backing Cultural Marxism was a good investment for capital.

During the Cold War, the CIA was motivated to stop sympathy to Communism from increasing in the US and Western Europe so it probably thought it prudent to divert youth interest into the 60s Counter Culture.

Both the Marxian and Randian point of view is purely materialist. Questions of culture seem to have little to do with either. Nor does the family, except as an economic unit, spirituality, or art and music except as commodities.

Remember this: the main "person" in market economies now is the corporation. And corporations are essentially sociopathic, in that their only purpose is to return value to shareholders.

Greece and Rome had widespread homosexuality and imperial government. Nothing to do with "cultural Marxism."

Most of this "cultural Marxism" BS is just another way to distract people while they are picking your pocket.

[Sherman]

It should be apparent that the capitalists have given their stamp of approval on cultural Marxism. It took billions of dollars along with the cooperation of the media, government, and institutions of society to effect the massive social engineering we our experiencing. Some of these leftists are so dysfunctional they can barely tie their own shoe laces. They obviously had help. If the elites didn't want the changes they would have simply crushed the leftists.

A good book that explains this is "Revolution from Above" which explains how the elites are using the Cultural Marxists to provide pressure from below to complement their pressure from above. It also provides documentation that left wing groups, including feminism were funded by the CIA during the 1960s.

[TonySandos]

I'm linking some threads that already did some delving into this topic.

http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-42094-page-2.html

[TonySandos]

From a reactionary blog that focuses on looking past the Frankfurt school as the cause of progressivism. http://www.moreright.net/frankfurt-schoo...ressivism/

[GeroMeroHero]

It is worth noting that the specific failure of Marxism CM hopes to address was how WWI failed to cause a revolution despite being the bloody conflict necessary in their eyes.

This was because workers fought for their country and not their class.
So CM is primarily interested in destroying culture and national identity.

Feminism is just a means to an end. Destroy the family to collapse the birth rate and destroy any tried and true idea of courtship so men chase women or whoever takes away their porn instead of the grooming gangs.
But it is not the end game in of itself. That is forced diversity and mass immigration.

[N°6]

Western conservatives correctly point to the failed working class revolutions causing some Marxists to politicise victim groups instread. However they rarely consider the split between Lenin/ Stalin and Trotsky and the Anarchists during the early years of the Soviet Union. By the time of the Cold War when Stalin correctly identified the UN as an organisation that was dominanted by US-led cosmopolitianism, the US Establishment joined forces with disaffected Trotskyites against the USSR. This marriage give birth to the "New Left".

[TonySandos]

Interesting comment N6. I like how that reactionary blog pointed out cultural precursors to the left we see today aside from the Marxism aspect.

[N°6]

(01-21-2015 01:22 AM)TonySandos Wrote:  

Interesting comment N6. I like how that reactionary blog pointed out cultural precursors to the left we see today aside from the Marxism aspect.

A few examples: Gloria Steinham as a CIA asset during the Cold War;

The 'Old Left' Marxist belief that unemployment and increasing the labour pool increases the power of capital at the expense of productive work. New Left: join forces with capital to import as many cheap labourers as possible.

The heroines of the West, the nihilists of Pussy Riot in the Moscow cathedral.

[TonySandos]

Please elaborate on the Gloria Steinham angle