I watched a documentry called The Frankfurt School: Destruction of Western Civilization. Which stated that Cultural Marxists planned to destroy the West and all it stood for in order to bring forth a Communist dictatorship.
The history of the Frankfurt School is something I often encourage people to read about when discussing these matters. I don’t know how in-depth the documentary you saw was, but if you study it deeply enough you will also learn about the school’s ties with radical feminism and cultural relativism (Boasian school of anthropology). Almost everything within the neo-intellectuals’ idealism consists of the desire to break down western civilization, primarily through the attacks on the family (male-female relationships) and cultural pride and nationalism.
…of course, the majority of them aren’t the type to pick up a book.
Quite. This train of thought is also why leftist groups seem to support radical Islamic supremacy goals as well. They couldn’t bring down governments so they want to destroy society. Hence, they support all of the modern -isms. The “long march through the institutions” indeed.
You can’t call it a coordinated thing though. Big businesses have as much interest in keeping things the way they are now, and furthering them, as your radical feminist does. Lots of people are extremely wealthy because of the sexual revolution. We cannot ignore these vested interests. While parts of the origin lie in the radical intellectuals and political activists of the 60s, it’s now driven by others. Also, said 60s radicals didn’t make up anything either, this stuff has been happening for hundreds of years.The few times I’ve discussed with my friends they like to jokingly accuse me of my “conspiracy theory” tendencies
With regards to the counter-culture movements of the last century not being coordinated, I respectfully disagree. To examine that more fully though would derail the thread and examine what is an uncomfortable topic to many, so I’ll bow out of that argument.
. The difference between more isolated sexual self-expression and the current flaunting of “anything goes” sexual relationships we see now though, is that the previous deviations from the standard male + female = aspiration toward marriage have not been quite so publicly embraced, nor by as many people as it has been in recent decades.Sorry, I think you misunderstood. The counter-culture movements were, indeed, coordinated, and they still are to some extent today, though they’re more fragmented. I was talking about who helped to bring it up to full speed. But then again, this thread is, as you said, about “root causes”.
I was actually thinking more of philosophical trends that led to the sexual revolution, such as materialism. These stem more from Enlightenment ideas though.Perhaps extreme, but I thought of Caligula and the Marquis de Sade right off the top of my head when I read your statement
Indeed. It’s rather scary now that you mention it. Then again, the very concept of a nation state is relatively modern, and some say that nationalism is one of the “root causes”. (Back in the day, there was “Christendom” and then others. We had different kingdoms, but we were generally more united than not.)
Interesting - I hadn’t considered materialism.
How would you relate the two? And do you think there is a connection between materialism and extreme individualism?
We will end up as corporatism, then maybe corporatism that has socialism as its core. Corporatism is the way things are moving, and I think the pendulum will prevent anything else.
Good observation.
You’re not doing it right.
I know what you mean Ed, I know which lines you refer to. But then, it also contained the line, “Imagine all the people, living in harmony,” a line perhaps all too forgotten - even (if not especially!) on these forums!
As Catholics, married sexual activity was meant to be kept private from all. "repressed is a radical, anarchist, sexual deviant, Hippie term.
“Affluence”? That’s a ridiculous word to use. The radical, anarchist, sexual deviants wanted us all to be like them so they opened Adult Bookstores, strip clubs and topless bars. The new OPIUM DENS.
Please elaborate. Do you not think that excessive disposable income played no role? Maybe not by itself, the Kinsey types and the deviants helped, no doubt, but the consumerisation of everyday life certainly is an attitude that effected how many look at relationships. Everything is about “consumers” and “consuming” and “markets” these days. Nothing is treated as off limits from this perverse mindset where everything is a commercial transaction for one’s own benefit.
I agree. They also wanted to make money. Like drug dealers, they lure people in with cheap thrills, then get you hooked. These facts don’t disprove that affluence played no role. In fact, the rise in disposable income fuelled the growth of these establishments.
And the threat, for the first tim ein history, of total annihilation from nuclear war… the effect on our social psychology was a sense of hopelessness (doom) and fostered a Jack Kerouc, Jim Morrison “live for the moment” hedonistic narcissism…
Amen to that!
But why is this? Is this not because you Americans would rather engage in sycophantic hyperbole than address issues? Why let this happen? Why not eschew the garbage, lay off the binary and the “X is better than Y, so I’ll vote for X to keep Y out” when you have Z and A and B? If Americans truly want what is said here, they won’t support the same old garbage. Yet they do. They choose X or Y when there is Z and A and B. They play into the propaganda of X and Y only. They are blind to the fact that no other democracy in the world is stuck with a binary.
Speaking of hyperbole…
Makes me think of the scenes in movies where the enlisted soldier gets assigned overseas. He’s making out with his girlfriend in the car before he’s due to leave, and then comes the whole “You *have *to put out, I could die tomorrow!!!” line.