Is cultural Marxism even Marxism at all?

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
12,741
Europix
The problem may be that the term "cultural marxist" was hijacked here in the U.S. to mean something differently than what the Frankfurt School intended, although I have yet to see a concise, or even a general, description of what that is.
I'd say that "hijacked" is one of the best characterisations of all about I've heard! Thank You.

A "concise" description is simply impossible, as it's a too diverse phenomenon. A "general" on would be way too reductive.

So, to answer the OP: yes, cultural marxism is a fake marxism.
I disagree.

It's not "fake Marxism", it's just a label created by a political fringe to designate their adversaries and the policies /tendencies they are opposed to and to dismiss them. "Cultural Marxism" simply doesn't exists.

On the other hand, the "Frankfurter school" exists, and it claimed openly it's Marxist heritage. What the promoters of the "cultural Marxism" forget mentioning in their "theory" is that what is cald "Frankfurter school" was an "Institute for Social Research". Another thing that is (conveniently ?) forgotten is that it was basing not exclusively on Marx's heritage, but also Hegel's, Kant's, Freud's.

To cut it short.

It's like I would say that "evangelicalism" is a Jewish sect: It's drawing itself from Jesus, and Jesus was a Jew. Am I right?

Certainly not.
 

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
7,966
Yes, you are correct, the New Left did reject class division. And the article I supplied said that many in the New Left rejected the issue of workers' rights and struggles. So, to answer the OP: yes, cultural marxism is a fake marxism. Then, is western marxism a fake marxism? By the way, keep calling me a crackpot and idiot. You are so smug, yet still can't spell. Not using spell check could demonstrate that either you are lazy, or so irrational that you can't even be patient to check your replies, or maybe both. Am I irritating you?
The New left was not monolithic, it had a wwide range of views, backgrounds, isaying it rejected class divsion is mostly wrong, it just did not view it as central, the absolutely most impirtnat way of looking at things.

Teh New Left were by and large sim0ly NOT marxiism, qs what a lotof the Old Left. There is a lot more to the Left than Marxists. It;s always been a small minority of letftists in the west being Marxisrs at al. You keep defining left through Marxism,. just is not true,

Cultiural Marxism doe snot exist. Is a consipacy thioey peice of bulldist,

Look Cultrial <arxism i*IS* a crackpot ringwing noutjob consipecay theroy like the Flat Earth. You beleive the bulldust your a crackpot. Crackpot is as crackpot does,.
 

Rodger

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,243
US
The New left was not monolithic, it had a wwide range of views, backgrounds, isaying it rejected class divsion is mostly wrong, it just did not view it as central, the absolutely most impirtnat way of looking at things.

Teh New Left were by and large sim0ly NOT marxiism, qs what a lotof the Old Left. There is a lot more to the Left than Marxists. It;s always been a small minority of letftists in the west being Marxisrs at al. You keep defining left through Marxism,. just is not true,

Cultiural Marxism doe snot exist. Is a consipacy thioey peice of bulldist,

Look Cultrial <arxism i*IS* a crackpot ringwing noutjob consipecay theroy like the Flat Earth. You beleive the bulldust your a crackpot. Crackpot is as crackpot does,.
For the record, I do not believe in bulldust.
 

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
7,966
For the record, I do not believe in bulldust.
You believe in Cultural Marxism

You are unable to provide any real basis. Any factual underpinning.

that there is a actual conspiracy to destroy western civilization started by the frankfurt school. That civil rights, feminism, gay rigts are all just some grand conspiracy. That somehow controls the bulk of western societies institutions.

It's a tin foil, crackpot conspiracy.






-
 

Mrbsct

Ad Honorem
Jul 2013
2,579
USA
"Cultural Marxism"=Cultural Capitalism

The decline of manufacturing due to automation and jobs going overseas has led to a larger service sector with both men and women in the workforce. So you want to attract more women in the workforce and you need diversity quotas to make corporations look good. Also with the decline of birth rates, nations want to attract immigrants, so racism is a no go.
 
Jan 2015
5,176
Ontario, Canada
"Cultural Marxism"=Cultural Capitalism

The decline of manufacturing due to automation and jobs going overseas has led to a larger service sector with both men and women in the workforce. So you want to attract more women in the workforce and you need diversity quotas to make corporations look good. Also with the decline of birth rates, nations want to attract immigrants, so racism is a no go.
Agreed.
These new trends have more to do with Capitalism and Liberalism than with Communism.
 

Mrbsct

Ad Honorem
Jul 2013
2,579
USA
Agreed.
These new trends have more to do with Capitalism and Liberalism than with Communism.
Yep. The only reason "Welfare States" can exist in our world is due to modern banking and investment with digital technology allows governments to print and borrow without too much risk(in theory). Automation will make poverty better eventually.

Ironically Frankfurt thinkers were very traditional and though consumerism was a product of a Capitalist society. Funny how George Soros helped bring down the Soviet Union as well when everyone is calling him a "Communist"
 
Oct 2013
12,741
Europix
Yep. The only reason "Welfare States" can exist in our world is due to modern banking and investment with digital technology allows governments to print and borrow without too much risk(in theory). Automation will make poverty better eventually...
I have some doubts on that, to be honest.

"Welfare states" existed before modern banking and digital technology, and the bases for that system goes back more than 100 years for a couple of countries.
 
Oct 2013
1,267
Monza, Italy
Is cultural Marxism fake Marxism? I mean cultural Marxism and the Frankfurt school is associated with hippies and SJW ideologiy. While economic Marxism is about abolishment of private property and wholesale elimination of capitalism, and the USSR was socially conservative, even more so in some areas than say, Iran. And social Marxism and SJW seems to have to problem allowing capitalists to make money, unlike economic Marxists, and in fact could be describe as an informal ideological alliance between social liberals and pro corporate capitalist conservatives, like Amazon and Starbucks. And compared to economic Marxism, cultural Marxism is inherently less disruptive to capitalism and making money.
Personally, as far as I remember, Frankfurt school was one of the most radical and revolutionary criticism of capitalism and liberal democracy as an economic system as well as social values (fake tolerance, fake democracy, oppressive tolerance), especially after Marcuse went to California (actually it was there where he found out that capitalism doesn't necessarily mean economic exploitation as well as psychological manipulation, as a Marxist influenced by Freud). So were the hippies who refused bourgeois confort and went to live in their Neolitichal communes where peace and love won. SJW are something different, but as far as I know today social justice warriors tend to be economically social-democrats (or have nostalgia for the Keynesian consensus) and not at all neo-liberals, like Le Pen and some Salvini supporter say (very few people would go the library and read Milton Friedman or Von Hayek to inform themselves of what they have jsut apllauded at a speech....). I think there's still a difference between right and left, ecen economically. Self-called social-democrats like Blair and Mitterand embraced some of the "conservative" economies' point? Yeah sure but I think that's more with real-politik situations, wether you agree with them or not.