Is cultural marxism just a myth or conspiracy theory created by right wing conservatives?

[Xantippe]

Why hasn’t it been addressed?

Presumably because that’s the local situation and the bishop either agrees or disagrees and thinks it would cause more harm to do something than not do something.

Plus, if it’s a problem with a religious order, that might be a different chain of command.

 

[J_the_Centrist]

You may be right there but I still genuinely don’t understand. I have homosexual relatives that I love, and I mean genuinely love for whom I have sacrificed for, but love doesn’t mean you change what cannot be changed because it’s fashionable. That’s my opinion anyway.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Winning what?

Our own country, free from the blights of diversity, socialism, and feminism based on Christianity and confidence in the superiority of Western culture.

 

[starshiptrooper]

When dignity remains intact, then something remains that is worth defending. As Churchill put it when he was asked to cut arts funding to support the war effort, he replied: “Then what are we fighting for?”

For victory obviously, we can figure out what our next steps will be after we get there.

You don’t get to heaven by selling your soul to the devil. You’ll win nothing but condemnation for yourselves. And you’ll have earned it. Turn back and repent.

You do not get to Heaven by burying your head in the sand and pretending that passivity in the face of evil is a virtue. Extremism in defense of justice is no vice.

 

[Xantippe]

Winning what?

Our own country, free from the blights of diversity, socialism, and feminism based on Christianity and confidence in the superiority of Western culture.

Some thoughts:

–diversity (for some senses of the word) is Western culture
–feminism (for some senses of the word) is Western culture
–socialism (for some senses of the word) is Western culture, or at least a product of Western culture
–I think we probably have a lot of differences of opinion with regard to what is Western culture. The last several years, I’ve had a growing appreciation for Enlightenment/American constitutional values of tolerance, liberty, free speech, equality under the law, privacy, rationality, and checks and balances. One of the gripes I have with the new right/alt-right is that they don’t seem informed by those Enlightenment/constitutional values. So we get an American nationalism without much appreciation for the genius of the American project, which is weird.
–Another gripe I have with the new right/alt-right is that there’s a lot of freedom for me but not for thee–at least with regard to how the new right/alt-right views women. The new right/alt-right is often pretty clear about not wanting women to have the normal civil rights of American citizens–hence the popularity of discussions about how they’d win if women just didn’t have the vote. The alt-right has nothing to offer women, not even (or especially not) equality.
–I have a lot of concerns about the relationship of ends and means with regard to “winning”. For example, I don’t get how sending a guy to the Senate who had well-documented issues with chasing young girls gets us more Christianity and Western culture. Ditto sending a three-times married cheater dude who has trouble keeping his hands to himself to the White House. In fact, I think there’s an argument to be made that either of them makes Christians look terrible and hypocritical. This is especially important if Christians wish to re-evangelize the US on the subject of sexual morality. (Here’s where I stop and say that I understand people who voted for either Roy Moore or Trump as a calculated decision and without enthusiasm–it’s the enthusiasm that I don’t understand. And I also disapprove deeply of any Christian who tried to guilt fellow Christians into voting for or supporting either Donald Trump or Roy Moore against their conscience–it should be obvious to any Christian of good will why a fellow Christian would not feel comfortable supporting them.)

 

[Xantippe]

For victory obviously, we can figure out what our next steps will be after we get there.

You have to know what you’re fighting for in order to know how to fight for it, and what means are counter-productive.

 

[ATraveller]

Nationalisation of industries relates to state control of the means of production, which is consistent with Marx.

Nationalisation is also consistent with conservatism. It’s only in America, though successfully spread to other parts, that government intervention in economic matters is not conservative. That’s possibly a recent thing because in the quote in my last reply, I omitted the part where Republican President Dwight Eisenhower nationalised highways in the US due to the character limit.

But this has nothing to do with gender ideology etc. So-called ‘cultural marxists’ seem to have little interest in nationalisation of the means of production, or in abolishing private property etc. They do however seem focussed on gender theory etc. They seem to be liberals rather than social marxists. Marx may have been many things, but I don’t think you could call him a liberal.

In my previous reply, the quote pointed out Marxists have moved beyond economics.
And I don’t believe there’s a group of individuals in Frankfurt pulling strings and that stuff. I believe simply many in power have bought into such views.

I think there is a confusion about what is meant by ‘the left’ and I believe it is an error to roll everything on the ‘left’ together under the same label. Marxists and liberals are very different animals, very different indeed.

That is true. It’s worth mentioning liberals can also be on the ‘right’. Reagan was an economic liberal so was Thatcher. The current UK PM is more liberal than conservative from economics to social policies. Labelling does have it’s limits considering such things evolve easily. I agree ‘cultural Marxism’ is vague and many have different ideas of that is. But there appears to be many Marxists who do happen to subscribe to gender theory or leftist activists pushing same-sex ‘marriage’ and etc. who find inspiration from Marxism. Many ‘social justice warriors’ have much in common with Marxism. Marxism, parts of it and its offspring, is arguably still alive and well.

 

[Brendan_64]

In my previous reply, the quote pointed out Marxists have moved beyond economics.

But I do not see what this has to do with Marx. Can you find anything in Marx’s teachings that relates to gender ideology, sexual liberalisation etc?

I think there seems to be a tendency (which seems to prevalent within the right in the USA) of lumping everything they consider on the left that they don’t like under the banner of Marxism.

Marxism is an economic, political and social ideology/theory, not an identity. What constitutes Marxism is not determined by those who oppose Marxism or even by those who identify as Marxists. Marxism is determined by the teachings of Marx.

Was it Marx, or was is Trotsky, who said, “Scratch a liberal and you’ll find a facist underneath”, or words to that effect. Social liberalism and Marxism are very different things. I believe that both are very harmful, but they are not the same things.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

In 2014, the top 1% (incomes in excess of $615,000) paid nearly half (45.7%) of the individual federal income taxes collected.

The top 20% (incomes above $134,400) contributed nearly 84% of all federal income taxes.

These figures are quoted without comment. I don’t know what conclusion you intended to draw from them. If it is that the tax system is unfair to higher income earners, I will point out that the inequality in wealth has only grown over the years, so the “top” people do not seem to be unfairly affected by these “unfair” taxes. For example, in 2013 the top 10% of families held 76% of all the wealth, while the bottom 50% held only 1% of the wealth. Wealth inequality has only grown since 1989. So how does that figure into whatever conclusions you hoped to draw from your stats?

 

[philipl]

Wow could you stuff anymore straw into the question? Cultural Marxism better known as being PC correct is real. It is used to silence those that refused to follow the culture of only government knows what is best for you.

 

[Xantippe]

Some more thoughts on the alt-right:

Based on observation, the new right/alt-right seems to be about enjoying the hot fudge sundae of misogyny, racism, resentment and self-pity while passing on more solid American traditional conservative fare such as market economics, the Enlightenment political theory that gave us the US Constitution, active membership in religious communities, family formation and active involvement in the local community. Obviously, there are internal tensions within old school US conservatism, but it’s been a very good recipe, and I personally think that the combination of traditional religion and Enlightenment values has been very wholesome with regard to producing domestic tranquility in a country where the largest religious group is only 20% of the country. Also, having spent a couple years learning about non-Enlightenment US Christians and their beliefs, I have ever more respect for the modern synthesis between traditional faith and respect for the individual and their rights.

I think there are a lot of traditional US conservative values and traditions that the alt-right just doesn’t get. I also think that as a group they are very naive (perhaps because of political inexperience and lack of historical background) and that because of that naivete they are ultimately a very cheap date for the political figures that seek their favor. They are happy with very, very little (promises and a tweet here and there)–but I suppose that given their beliefs, that’s probably for the best for the country.

 

[otjm]

The response was to a prior comment indicating that the rich do not pay a fair share. We can chat about the Rockefellers and other dynasties; but much of the wealth of the rich is from starting businesses from scratch. Take a look at the originator of Domino’s Pizza - no one handed him anything. Take a look at Bill Gates or any of the other wizards in the general area of computing - no one handed them anything. The bottom 40 to 50% have little or no skin in the game.

It is the wealthy who invest in business, through direct ownership, stock ownership, and seed capital. And it is those businesses which give the bottom 50% a job. Shall we take away seed money, and reduce the number of jobs being created? Our tax system has generally been skewed to taxing the most from those who make the most. I am not saying “don’t tax the rich”; I am saying, we are already taxing the rich. I get tired to the envy and the “1%” crowd who feels they have a right to a free lunch, a free education. They have a right to do what I did - work hard and save.

 

[J_the_Centrist]

The Alt-Right is a reactionary movement and a response to decades of aggressive left wing ideology. If it is racist or part of it is, I admit I am not familiar with all of their ideologies, then it’s only a reaction to the many whites who have been marginalized by the left, many of whom are underprivileged and impoverished and supposedly those to be looked upon with affection by the left. However, the left seems to have a fetish for despising white poor people and I know this from experience because I, myself, have been financially struggling my whole life and I don’t have to be Alt-Right to know of the left’s hurtful, pompous and insufferable arrogance where only black and brown poor need be cared for. They don’t even care for people of color either as they only pretend to care for them and only want to manipulate and control them. For example, have you heard of anyone on the left address the broken families issue in the black community and how increasing the number of two parent households would be of a greater help to them then any form of government legislation? Of course not. Have you heard of any desire for refugees or illegal aliens to live in these people’s communities? Of course not and you will not either because all of this “compassion” is only about control and manipulation and very little else. If you keep people poor and desperate they will always have a need of you. That is, except if you are white and poor, in that case you’re just “trash.” The lefts concept of “compassion” is nothing more than a self serving ego trip.
I’ll put to you this way, when you have Ivy Leaguers with degrees telling factory workers to, “check your privilege” you are not only attacking the already economically disenfranchised but you also look stupid and incredibly stupid. I do not mean you of course but you know what I mean. I wouldn’t underestimate them either as they are, presumably, also among some of the most armed citizens in the country. I am also not entirely certain if they all support the president either.
This country has reached a fever pitched divide. I had an incident with my non-white neighbors years back and they now accuse me of being a nazi, but I don’t grovel to them begging for forgiveness as many whites are unwilling to do this anymore. The accusation is stupid but I will not play that game, although I am culturally conscious which doesn’t help things and I am not ashamed of that. I leave money for their poor without their knowledge and pray every single day for them, but I cannot reconcile with them because they smeared my name unjustly. Am I Alt-Right or nazi? No, but I won’t bow to anyone but God either, I also want peace but it is impossible. However, a different man may have become those things for the reasons I already addressed. Scripted lines will not work any more. The Alt-Right is a reactionary movement to the authoritarian and emotionally unhinged left. My situation is a microcosm of this and I am not a monster and will allow no one say otherwise.

 

[steido01]

Winning what?

Our own country, free from the blights of diversity, socialism, and feminism based on Christianity and confidence in the superiority of Western culture.

“Our” own country? A country for certain whites only? What, exactly, is wrong with diversity of thought, belief, opinion and culture?

For victory obviously, we can figure out what our next steps will be after we get there.

How will you know when you’ve won, if you’ve adopted the same tactics as your enemy? Seems to me you’ve simply become “them.” I think you might’ve already lost.

---

You don’t get to heaven by selling your soul to the devil. You’ll win nothing but condemnation for yourselves. And you’ll have earned it. Turn back and repent.

You do not get to Heaven by burying your head in the sand and pretending that passivity in the face of evil is a virtue. Extremism in defense of justice is no vice.

Justice for ‘some’ is no justice at all. Before you start crying out for justice, bear in mind what Justice would do to you (Amos 5:18-24, Romans 3:23 & 6:23). If you want evil extirpated, start with the planks in your own eye.

 

[J_the_Centrist]

Another thing, I have no love for the right either. I am “politically homeless” and cannot bear even the idea of calling myself an independent anymore. The republicans are dispassionate and all too ready to go to war in my opinion. However, I have to repeat my point again. If you want to address the Alt-Right then you must address the aggressive left wing culture that gave birth to it. Otherwise you will have a dual radicalization of both warped ideologies until my worst fears come true. This country is terrifyingly divided and becoming a powder keg. Merely dismissing your opposition will not work anymore. And I should add that hating people merely because of race is a sin because God sees no difference between the people of the world, He looks to the heart. This matters not if you are Asian, Black, Hispanic and so on. However, this must also be extended even to whites who have to “check their privilege.” God looks to the heart first but we people are so divided that I genuinely fear that we will no longer be able to.

 

[steido01]

They have a right to do what I did - work hard and save.

I’m going to guess you were born in the 1950s or 1960s, saved money when a Big Mac and Coke could be priced with a cents sign (which no longer exists), and you likely worked hard when one could get a pensioned job out of high school or pay for all four years of college by working on Tuesdays during one summer.

How close was I?

 

[Brendan_64]

Cultural Marxism better known as being PC correct is real. It is used to silence those that refused to follow the culture of only government knows what is best for you.

Yes, it is real, damaging and dangerous, but it’s not Marxism. I also think that it is not driven by governments so much as it is driven by forces outside of governments, via the media, and governments are manipulated into towing the line.

I think it is an international movement that operates over and above governments. It appears that under the cloak of tolerance and diversity, an agenda is pushed forward and dissenting voices eventually crushed. But it isn’t Marxism.

 

[Xantippe]

Yes, it is real, damaging and dangerous, but it’s not Marxism. I also think that it is not driven by governments so much as it is driven by forces outside of governments, via the media, and governments are manipulated into towing the line.

I think it is an international movement that operates over and above governments. It appears that under the cloak of tolerance and diversity, an agenda is pushed forward and dissenting voices eventually crushed. But it isn’t Marxism.

Right–why not just say PC?

 

[steido01]

I feel you, friend. I no longer have a political home, either.

Frankly, I was a hard-nosed Randian Republican not too long ago. I drank all the red kool aid. The Poor just needed to “stop being lazy and get a job.” I voted for a guy who said those words, with a little bit of glee. Then he cut my state job, just before Christmas a few years ago.

I was jobless for four agonizing months. I learned the difficulty of navigating unemployment. I feared for my wife and kids, my home, and all that goes with it. Know who floated me a few bucks and occasionally brought my family meals? My Left-leaning friends. I learned that there is a real component of the Left that truly is concerned for the poor, not just abusing them to gain power. Both parties use us, both parties have (some) good intentions within them.

When one side does something terrible, that doesn’t mean we should excuse that behavior on the ‘other’ side too. We can loathe the Left’s tactics without excusing the reactionary mimicry of the Alt-Right.

 

[goodcatholic]

I learned that there is a real component of the Left that truly is concerned for the poor, not just abusing them to gain power.

Its nice when idealism matches reality. Like Christians actually living the Gospel.