Philosophy of cultural marxism

[Anonymous No.6160571]

I see this is a board of scholars in philosophy!

Can you tell me whether cultural marxism is a conspiracy theory or a valid philosophical idea?

Did Adorno, Fromm and Marcuse really seek to destroy Western culture by ia. trying to destroy rational thought?

Or is this BS?

[Anonymous No.6160581]

It (kinda) exists, but it is not a conspiracy. They are not trying to destroy western civilization.

If you want the root of all evil, go read the Dialectic of Sex by Shulamith Firestone.

[Anonymous No.6160599]

>>6160581

It exists in a sense they failed to comprehend the disastrous effects of their philosophy?

[Anonymous No.6160607]

The KGB just subverted the Western media to sissyify the white man to weaken the West, it has noting to do with Cultural Marxism it was just realpolitik at it's finest ;)

[Anonymous No.6160613]

The Frankfurt School did not want to destroy western culture, but it wanted to, and did, analyse it dialectically. Most of their members were very, very hesitant to promote any actual policies or action. Living in exile in the US, Adorno actually had a lot of positive things to say about the "western world", as opposed to nazi germany and the soviet union.

[Anonymous No.6160615]

>>6160607

You really think the KGB had anything to do with this?

[Anonymous No.6160617]

>>6160599
>they failed to comprehend the disastrous effects of their philosophy
They died way before the fusion of capitalism and their theories gave birth to SJWs and ultra multikulturalists. Most of the evil against western culture is actually from the liberal universalist brand, not marxism.

[Anonymous No.6160624]

>>6160613

Yes, but his analysis of the US as a breeding ground for fascism (the F-scale) has been a hoi topoi ever since. What a piece of shit.

[Anonymous No.6160625]

I think that when people blame the Frankfurt school for SJW shit they're missing the target completely. It seems to me that SJWs are the descendants of French guys like Baudrilland, Foucault and Derrida.

[Anonymous No.6160628]

>>6160571
They didn't want to destroy western civilisation. They pointed out that it could not deliver on the promises it made. Their vision of communism is much different than that of the soviet union or other countries as it is not a positive utopia but one that can only be established negatively by dialectics.

[Anonymous No.6160639]

>>6160617
So, what philosophers should we blame?

And why do modern liberals want to destroy cultural institutions even when they see the disastrous effects?

They want freedom, even from ratio. That's not freedom, that's slavery.

[Anonymous No.6160640]

>>6160624
The F-Scale was not aimed at americans specifically, the studies were conducted in the US because Adorno happened to live there. I agree that the studies on the authoritarian character are questionable, but they are by no means a center point of his philosophy.

[Anonymous No.6160641]

>>6160625
Why do you say that? Genuinely interested and not up to date on those philosophers.

[Anonymous No.6160643]

It's all true! Wahahaha!!

[Anonymous No.6160644]

>>6160625
this.

[Anonymous No.6160647]

>>6160640
Well, he is the philosopher of critical theory, all the central tenets of Western culture are in the F-scale, so why not?

[Anonymous No.6160649]

>>6160617
Don't confuse american "critical theory" (Judith Butler etc.) with the Critical Theory (Kritische Theorie) of the Frankfurt School. They are very, very different from each other.

[Anonymous No.6160656]

>>6160617
You have no idea about what Adorno thought and wrote.

From Minima Moralia, Aphorism 66:

"66
Melange. – The usual argument of tolerance, that all human beings, all races are equal, is a boomerang. It opens itself up to easy rebuttal by the senses, and even the most compelling anthropological evidence for the fact that Jews are not a race at all, will in the case of a pogrom hardly change anything at all, since the totalitarians know very well who they want to kill and who not. If one wished to proclaim the equality of all those who bear human features as an ideal, instead of establishing it as a fact, this would be of little help. The abstract utopia would be all too easily reconcilable with the most devious tendencies of society. That all human beings would resemble each other, is exactly what suits this latter. It regards factual or imagined differences as marks of shame, which reveal, that one has not brought things far enough; that something somewhere has been left free of the machine, is not totally determined by the totality. The technics of the concentration camps was designed to turn prisoners into guards, the murdered into murderers. Racial difference was absolutely sublated, so that one could abolish it absolutely, if only in the sense that nothing different survived anymore. An emancipated society however would be no unitary state, but the realization of the generality in the reconciliation of differences. A politics which took this seriously should therefore not propagate even the idea of the abstract equality of human beings. They should rather point to the bad equality of today, the identity of film interests with weapons interests, and think of the better condition as the one in which one could be different without fear. If one attested to blacks [Neger], that they are exactly like whites, while they are nevertheless not so, then one would secretly wrong them all over again. This humiliates them in a benevolent manner by a standard which, under the pressure of the system, they cannot attain, and moreover whose attainment would be a dubious achievement. The spokespersons of unitary tolerance are always prepared to turn intolerantly against any group which does not fit in: the obstinate enthusiasm for blacks meshes seamlessly with the outrage over obnoxious Jews. The “melting pot” [in English in original] was an institution of free-wheeling industrial capitalism. The thought of landing in it conjures up martyrdom, not democracy."

[Anonymous No.6160657]

>>6160649
> American and Frankfurt School critical theory are vastly different
In what sense, aren't they branches of the same tree?

[Anonymous No.6160659]

>>6160571

No. Actually go read before even entertaining right wing conspiracy bullahit

[Anonymous No.6160660]

What are the links between Cultural Marxism, subjective reality, and Kabbalah?

[Anonymous No.6160663]

>>6160641
It's more the people who misinterpret them. Postmodern philosophy is extremely cynical, sceptical, and suspicious of everything, to the point where everything is judged on the basis of someones ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation etc. This is a stereotype of it of course and I don't think the philosopher themselves succumb to it that much, but thankfully that wave of idiots are dying off and people are becoming practical again.

[Anonymous No.6160670]

Pic related is the only true descendant of the Frankfurt School

[Anonymous No.6160671]

>>6160613
Marcuse, at least, had an interesting influence on US Denazification policy.

[Anonymous No.6160675]

>>6160659
>edgy post
There's a core of truth to it, not as a conspiracy, but as a name for a branch of postmodern philosophy.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.6160677]

>>6160625
Blog warriors are the not the descendants of any intellectual tradition anymore than conservative radio hosts are the descendants of the "Founding Fathers"

[Anonymous No.6160682]

>>6160625
>the descendants of French guys like Baudrilland, Foucault and Derrida.

This is demonstrably false, privilege theory and associated ideas are essentialist while Foucault and Derrida were the complete opposite.

SJW discourse is based on the ideas of American feminists and minority activists, not French post-structuralists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory#Key_elements
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microaggression_theory#Description_and_prevalence

[Anonymous No.6160683]

>>6160677

This

[Anonymous No.6160686]

>>6160670
0/10
Weak bait

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.6160692]

>>6160624
Adorno considered pop culture as a tool of fascism, whereas he considered ;highbrow' Western culture as liberating and intellectually stimulating.

[Anonymous No.6160700]

>>6160571
Watch this OP, particularly from 6 minutes onwards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pzfy2izu44

[Anonymous No.6160703]

>>6160677
Objectively good post.

[Anonymous No.6160706]

The Family can't stand up to criticism, it relies on contradictions and abuses which are ignored because they are conducive to the interests of the ruling class.
Take for instance, how childbirth isn't considered a sexual act, when by any metric it should be. This definition is held in place by sheer convention. Rational thought cannot be destroyed, but it can certainly destroy the legitimacy of just about any historical power dynamic.

[Anonymous No.6160712]

>>6160682
I think it's more to do with idiots misinterpreting their work

[Anonymous No.6160713]

>>6160677
Well struck.

[Anonymous No.6160731]

Cultural Marxism is a good term to descript the strain of Marxism that is born in the post-WWI environment, when the scientific outlook of Orthodox Marxism is discredited by the absense of world revolution during the war.

But of course, the left is never going to let it gain currency. They are the intellectuals, they define the terms that shape public discourse, rightists are peasants.

[Anonymous No.6160735]

>>6160706
Huh?

[Anonymous No.6160739]

>>6160706
If the Family is conducive to the interests of the ruling class, why the ruling class (except in countries such as Saudi Arabia) adopt policies that led to the destruction of the family?

[Anonymous No.6160740]

>>6160639
It's a product of naturalism and postmodernism imo, but a single philosopher is not to blame. It's more of a collective spirit that has arisen in the west.

[Anonymous No.6160743]

>>6160731
Then what term is acceptable? New Left seems very dated.

>mfw I have no word to describe the cancer that eats us from within

[Anonymous No.6160747]

>>6160740
>geist

Can you explain how the dialectic of categories would result in the destruction of a seminal (ha) category?

Historical materialist responses are far more cogent than your watered down Hegel.

[Anonymous No.6160751]

>>6160731
See:

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lukacs/works/theory-novel/preface.htm

>The immediate motive for writing was supplied by the outbreak of the First World War and the effect which its acclamation by the social-democratic parties had upon the European left. My own deeply personal attitude was one of vehement, global and, especially at the beginning, scarcely articulate rejection of the war and especially of enthusiasm for the war. I recall a conversation with Frau Marianne Weber in the late autumn of 1914. She wanted to challenge my attitude by telling me of individual, concrete acts of heroism. My only reply was: ‘The better the worse!’ When I tried at this time to put my emotional attitude into conscious terms, I arrived at more or less the following formulation: the Central Powers would probably defeat Russia; this might lead to the downfall of Tsarism; I had no objection to that. There was also some probability that the West would defeat Germany; if this led to the downfall of the Hohenzollerns and the Hapsburgs, I was once again in favour. But then the question arose: who was to save us from Western civilisation?

Well, who was to save us from Western civilization? Lukacs and the intellectuals he influenced (including the Frankfurt School), of course.

But remember kids. This is just a conspiracy theory, after all, this is a term devised by rightists and they are not intellectuals like us, they don't have the right to shape the debate.

[Anonymous No.6160754]

SJWs are descendants of Stirner. What he termed 'fixed ideas' or 'spooks,' they call 'social constructs'

[Anonymous No.6160760]

>>6160682
They don't have to understand the work to base their actions on it. For example in the theist worldview we have RCC and random nonsensical protestant sects at the same time. But unlike for Christianity the rational ideas did not prevail, but instead misinterpretations and half truths.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.6160765]

>>6160754
If they were the descendants of Stirner, then they wouldn't have "social" or "justice" in their name.

[Anonymous No.6160766]

>>6160747
Never read Hegel. I say spirit as in collective mind or prevent worldview. I don't know how similar that is to Hegel.

[Anonymous No.6160772]

>>6160754
"Social construct" is a phenomenological concept. It was coined by Berger and Luckmann.

[Anonymous No.6160773]

>>6160739
Atomization.

[Anonymous No.6160775]

>>6160739
Those policies were never intended to "destroy the family". The destruction of the family as it is defined is inevitable as technology changes and we no long have the majority of the population working in agriculture.

[Anonymous No.6160787]

>>6160775
Also the capitalist mindset of buy new don't fix and individualism. Technology not so much.

[Anonymous No.6160789]

>>6160775
Then the family isn't conducive to the interests of the ruling class.

[Anonymous No.6160796]

>>6160775
Troll the fuck off, there is no way you are this retarded.

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.6160809]

>>6160796
So what are your favorite works of philosophy?

[Anonymous No.6160812]

>>6160775>>6160739>>6160773


There tends to be too great an emphasis on planning... it seems more like there are trends that have their effects seen in numerous spheres, and the question of chickens and eggs is impossible, let alone assuming a mastermind.

[Anonymous No.6160823]

>>6160581
>Shulamith Firestone.
Jew

[Anonymous No.6160838]

>>6160823
There's a surprise. To be fair, they had good reasons to be critical post WW II.