A very brief history of globalism and the great reset

submitted by casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's not ridiculous at all. The frankfurt school wrote the textbook on how to destroy western societies- by promoting racial guilt and sexual perversion.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You never read those thinkers.

[–]PrawoJazdy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think problematization of the term Cultural Marxism on non-optical grounds (i.e. that there is something intrinsically wrong with the term) is simply wrong. It seems to suggest one of two things:

  1. Gramsci, Althusser, The Frankfurt School, etc. were simply capitalists. Therefore, 'Cultural Capitalism'.

  2. Gramsci, Althusser, The Frankfurt School, etc. were indeed anti-capitalists but their influence is overestimated to the extent that someone else must be to blame for the things normally attributed to them. Therefore, again, 'Cultural Capitalism'.

The first is obviously unworthy of consideration. I don't see any obvious reason to believe that the second is correct either, since it implies that Gramsciian humanist Marxism is not an influence on contemporary Critical Race Theory, that Althusser was just a nobody rather than somebody immensely popular in academia until the late 1970s or so, that Marx and Engels did not call for abolition of the nuclear family and only had intentions to change the economy, and other implications that are very clearly just plain wrong.

If neither of these claims is true... then what leg does the 'Cultural Marxism is really Cultural Capitalism' narrative have left to stand on?