Society/Culture Jordan B Peterson

[Scallop Industry Thug]

JP gives him entire schools, organisations - Zizek drops the entire subject and his ticks take-over and we are back in the land of sparkling disconnected ideas.

No; he doesn't.

At least JP knows of the criticisms of his characterisation pomoneomarxists. His counter is just incredibly weak.

The substituion of the proles/bourg for identity groups just doesn't work. He's tried to overlay his criticism of identity politics on to Marxism. It doesn't belong there.

Id pol is about groups asserting their own group's desires. It demonstrates agancy, and often can be done within a capitalist framework. Also, poo history goes out of it's way to contest the oppressed/oppressor dynamic that JP bastardises. I can recall seeing a pomo history of the colonial wars, and it emphasised the agency of Indigenous warriors in becoming the arseholes themselves in weapon construction and treatment of others.

Marxism made the point that history was happening to the proletariat. They weren't choosing; this was what would happen. And it absolutely rejected capitalism.

 

[yebiga]

I think people focus on Zizek's delivery to much and dont try to understand why he is sitting there in the first place. JP went in looking to confirm the existence of the liberal godless post modern cultural marxist, this is his wheelhouse, hes built his entire career on this boogie man as a prominent cultural conservative. The cultural marxist is his natural enemy, if the enemy doesnt exist then the cultural conservative has to start looking inwards to find the reasons why his own culture is 'deteriorating', and that is toooo spooky, he needs an enemy to blame.

Zizek already knows the the nature of the cultural marxist (fictious) so instead of playing into JPs argument and countering by blaming the Right for Trump blah blah blah he flipped it and attempted to get his opponent to perhaps look inwardly a little and ask themselves does this boogieman actually exist. Clearly JP gave a weak answer to this, one mumbled name and then dropped his head.

Zizek didnt what the prove the right are a bunch of monsters, Zizek wanted the right to look inward and self reflect on its role in western culture and perhaps see if their capitalist tendencies actually gel well with their cultural tendencies, and to see if those capitalist tendencies are actually a primary player in the in the dilution of western culture, infact far more detrimental than any purple haired lesbian scretching at a uni campus.

This is also why the dumb youtube liberal not really left left are mad at Zizeks position during the debate. they wanted fireworks, they wanted beat downs. coincidentally this is exactly what JP wanted to, it galvanizes the cultural conservatives boogie man. The right doesnt realised just how ****** at weak the real left are right now. Look at these US elections its such a cluster**** on the left, we are for sure getting a two term trump.

Ok let’s forget the debate topic Marxism v capitalusm
Let’s forget what the half arsed definitions: left right cultural Marxism, post modernism political correctness and identity politics.

Let’s forget them because every other person defines it differently and discussions go at cross purposes.

What Jordan is talking about is a global phenomena of emotional over reaction to anything someone might say which could conceivably denigrate any - non white male - identity.

This has become an obsession and the obsession that is omnipresent at universities, at work, in the media in the arts.

This obsession is so crazy and superficial that whilst it receives all the attention - in practice it is unable to make any head way in the real business of capitalism. White run multi nationals dominate global industry and resources. And white run governments continue to exploit non white countries - as they almost always have.

So what is going on?

Well Western culture is disconnected from reality, agency and praxis. Western culture makes a lot of platitudinous noise - but it’s all for nothing. The noise makes westerners feel good about themselves - it’s a sugar fix because it is all nonsense.

Stripped of all the various trappings - this is what JP is saying. Zizek is not saying anything different. It’s just that being more of a progressive disposition - zizek simply isn’t going to develop anything approaching a unified prescription.

JP does - and it is that and that alone - which makes him - extraordinarily courageous.

And his prescription is an amazingly simple rock solid description of the human condition in its very essence.

It’s an outstanding achievement.

Yes the left is lost - JP knows that has stated that
The left is off script and has been since Reagan

Zizek is brilliant but he doesn’t have the something - maybe courage - to tie his mast to anything solid. He just wants to dance. Nice guy. Let him dance.

JP ain’t dancing - he is serious

 

[Steinfreo]

Ok let’s forget the debate topic Marxism v capitalusm
Let’s forget what the half arsed definitions: left right cultural Marxism, post modernism political correctness and identity politics.

Let’s forget them because every other person defines it differently and discussions go at cross purposes.

What Jordan is talking about is a global phenomena of emotional over reaction to anything someone might say which could conceivably denigrate any - non white male - identity.

This has become an obsession and the obsession that is omnipresent at universities, at work, in the media in the arts.

This obsession is so crazy and superficial that whilst it receives all the attention - in practice it is unable to make any head way in the real business of capitalism. White run multi nationals dominate global industry and resources. And white run governments continue to exploit non white countries - as they almost always have.

So what is going on?

Well Western culture is disconnected from reality, agency and praxis. Western culture makes a lot of platitudinous noise - but it’s all for nothing. The noise makes westerners feel good about themselves - it’s a sugar fix because it is all nonsense.

Stripped of all the various trappings - this is what JP is saying. Zizek is not saying anything different. It’s just that being more of a progressive disposition - zizek simply isn’t going to develop anything approaching a unified prescription.

JP does - and it is that and that alone - which makes him - extraordinarily courageous.

And his prescription is an amazingly simple rock solid description of the human condition in its very essence.

It’s an outstanding achievement.

Yes the left is lost - JP knows that has stated that
The left is off script and has been since Reagan

Zizek is brilliant but he doesn’t have the something - maybe courage - to tie his mast to anything solid. He just wants to dance. Nice guy. Let him dance.

JP ain’t dancing - he is serious

To sum it up even more simply, JP believes better yourself first then help others, Zizek believes help others to better yourself. The thing is, in my limited reading of JP, without the cultural Marxism ghost hes back in Canada lecturing to 20 people, thats the thing I resent about JP. Zizek took a part his political position so effortlessly it was barely noticed. The thing is with JP its his poltical stances not his psycho analysis that is the reason theres even a forum on bigfooty devoted to him, hes just be another author in the self help section of dymocks (a good one no doubt) without it and its entirely built on something that is imaginary.

Zizek is a lost soul at the moment, his spontaneous nihilism is present almost everything he says, he hates the left and the right these days and they both hate him. Hes so jaded with the debate he just wants us to replaces our bosses with * robots and all stay home watching movies.

 

[yebiga]

To sum it up even more simply, JP believes better yourself first then help others, Zizek believes help others to better yourself. The thing is, in my limited reading of JP, without the cultural Marxism ghost hes back in Canada lecturing to 20 people, thats the thing I resent about JP. Zizek took a part his political position so effortlessly it was barely noticed. The thing is with JP its his poltical stances not his psycho analysis that is the reason theres even a forum on bigfooty devoted to him, hes just be another author in the self help section of dymocks (a good one no doubt) without it and its entirely built on something that is imaginary.

Zizek is a lost soul at the moment, his spontaneous nihilism is present almost everything he says, he hates the left and the right these days and they both hate him. Hes so jaded with the debate he just wants us to replaces our bosses with **** robots and all stay home watching movies.

The cultural Marxist trope is really quite incidental to JPs thoughts and in many ways it obscures the core of his message .
The contention It has created is of course what our media loves.

JP has been a hit - for using phenomenology supported by psychology to obliterate schools of ideological thought from Plato to Descartes. And even more astoundingly to elucidate a profound behavioral and agnostic understanding of myth and religion.

This is singularly one of the most remarkable acheivements in modern thinking and is destined to have far reaching transformational consequences.

our jaded cynical culture is suspicious of any kind of definitive world view and when that view is audaciously critical and chastising the respinse is inevitably going to be contemptuous.

 

[Steinfreo]

The cultural Marxist trope is really quite incidental to JPs thoughts and in many ways it obscures the core of his message .
The contention It has created is of course what our media loves.

JP has been a hit - for using phenomenology supported by psychology to obliterate schools of ideological thought from Plato to Descartes. And even more astoundingly to elucidate a profound behavioral and agnostic understanding of myth and religion.

This is singularly one of the most remarkable acheivements in modern thinking and is destined to have far reaching transformational consequences.

our jaded cynical culture is suspicious of any kind of definitive world view and when that view is audaciously critical and chastising the respinse is inevitably going to be contemptuous.

Is there anything about JP's thinking that puts you off? Ive been listening to him all afternoon while gardening and I just cant buy it. Hes absolutely a product of today, if ISIS, the GFC, the rise of china did not happen hed be a nobody, he is a subsistute for spiritualism, the thing the masses turn to in hard times. If you do exactly as he says, our culture stays exactly as it is, but guess what the rest of the world doesnt. The more I listen to more I hear Chomsky in him hahaha. Both a product of their time but some how lacking, the difference being Chomsky was appealing to a generation of disenfranchised young white uni students that had external tools (the entire global economy) at their disposal to fuel change, capitalism these days is leaving us with far fewer.

 

[Snake_Baker]

.............and off it goes again.............

 

[yebiga]

Is there anything about JP's thinking that puts you off? Ive been listening to him all afternoon while gardening and I just cant buy it. Hes absolutely a product of today, if ISIS, the GFC, the rise of china did not happen hed be a nobody, he is a subsistute for spiritualism, the thing the masses turn to in hard times. If you do exactly as he says, our culture stays exactly as it is, but guess what the rest of the world doesnt. The more I listen to more I hear Chomsky in him hahaha. Both a product of their time but some how lacking, the difference being Chomsky was appealing to a generation of disenfranchised young white uni students that had external tools (the entire global economy) at their disposal to fuel change, capitalism these days is leaving us with far fewer.

There are aspects of JPs thought which I find inadequate and even annoying. So it is a good question. To clarify my thoughts I will proceed. But, I must say, it is a tad presumptuous of you to ask for criticisms when you don't acknowledge his strengths.
For me the problem with JP is his treatment of evil or malevolence. For a long time, I thought my problem with him was his reluctance to state clearly, one way or another, his religious beliefs. But in the end, we are all entitled to our own opinions on that matter and particularly if we aren't publicly evangelising.

JP has connected myth and story to biology and evolution. He connects our stories to crucial lessons and archetypes that have evolved from the dawn of time. He draws clear lines from our murky past to elucidate how we got to where we are in the present. Underpinning all of it are ideas of how we should live or even stronger than that, ideas of how we must live. Another way of putting it, might be, that he scaffolds the anatomy and process of living a good life and extrapolates how that connects to the family, community and the world. It's not a shabby effort by any measure.

My problem with him is that he doesn't scaffold the anatomy and processes of living a bad life. How does evil get in there and how is it sustained? Repeatedly, he will state how there is evil in all of us and how all of us confronted by malevolence in the world and within ourselves. And he leaves it hanging there. He merely hints at the germination of evil in our envy or our regret or our sorrow but it is all merely brilliant flourishes - much as Zizek offers brilliant critiques of modern culture - the scaffold, anatomy and evolution is missing.

Now, remember he is a psychologist, who tells us how he has studied evil in books and seen it in his practice. He tells us evil is in all of us. Whether it's books on nazi's or books or gulags or Dostoyevski's books he is always referencing Malevolence. But then, he leaves it hanging in the wind, he leaves it unexamined but omnipresent. So ultimately JP endows evil with more power than good itself. For he tells us how good works, how it is found and how it has evolved. He tells us our responsibilities, to pick up our burden and carry it. He tells us how to find meaning in our lives.

All that is great, but if evil is omnipresent and always a threat to us, then, surely, we should examine it and understand it, to all the better avoid it. This is the 21st century, his approach is akin to the way the catholic church treated its parishioners with threats of fire and brimstone or parents once told their children stories about the boogey man. Yet, we have learnt from modern psychology many insights into what makes a monster, what drags us down. We know the harm cause by a violent and neglectful upbringing.

Evil doesn't just happen, it happens for reasons. Understanding those reasons reduces the power of evil, transforms it from something omnipresent and powerful to happenstance, tragedy, poor thinking, impatience, fear, loneliness. It reduces evil to a manageable size. Understanding the good life is good but I would go so far as to say, that we can learn at least as much if not more from understanding the pitfalls of envy, lust, greed, vanity, anger, vengeance, the hunger for power, narcissism and a range of other pathologies and how they manifest in an individual, a family, a community, a nation.

Now, maybe he will get around to the anatomy of evil but I doubt it. His not up to it and we aren't ready for it either.

 

[swingdog]

H

Evil doesn't just happen, it happens for reasons. Understanding those reasons reduces the power of evil, transforms it from something omnipresent and powerful to happenstance, tragedy, poor thinking, impatience, fear, loneliness. It reduces evil to a manageable size. Understanding the good life is good but I would go so far as to say, that we can learn at least as much if not more from understanding the pitfalls of envy, lust, greed, vanity, anger, vengeance, the hunger for power, narcissism and a range of other pathologies and how they manifest in an individual, a family, a community, a nation.

Now, maybe he will get around to the anatomy of evil but I doubt it. His not up to it and we aren't ready for it either.

Have you read Mary Midgley on this?

Amazon product ASIN B019VKWKSO

 

[yebiga]

H


Have you read Mary Midgley on this?

Amazon product ASIN B019VKWKSO

No I have not
I’ve just read some reviews
Tell me, does she examine how evil forms out of necessity? Does she demystify it?

 

[swingdog]

No I have not
I’ve just read some reviews
Tell me, does she examine how evil forms out of necessity? Does she demystify it?

It's been a while since I read it, so forgive the limited summary. The main takeaway I recall was that, for her, evil didn't exist as a stand-alone thing and that by treating it as such, we were abrogating responsibility for our actions or the actions of others. Rather, an act could be described as evil in nature but wasn't an evil act (if that makes sense - it's about agency).

 

[Hu$tler]

Got famous thinking like a normal person lol crazy

 

[ferball]

Are people using the term "cultural marxism" as if its a real thing not a conspiracy theory invented by neo nazis and fundamentalist nutjobs in the US in the 80s?

 

[ferball]

Here we go - cultural marxism as an appropriate response to Bill Clinton not being impeached for a blow job:

That's why I am in the process of rethinking what it is that we, who still believe in our traditional, Western, Judeo-Christian culture, can and should do under the circumstances. Please understand that I am not quarreling with anybody who pursues politics, because it is important to pursue politics, to be involved in government. It is also important to try, as many people have, to re-take the cultural institutions that have been captured by the other side.

But it is impossible to ignore the fact that the United States is becoming an ideological state. The ideology of Political Correctness, which openly calls for the destruction of our traditional culture, has so gripped the body politic, has so gripped our institutions, that it is even affecting the Church. It has completely taken over the academic community. It is now pervasive in the entertainment industry, and it threatens to control literally every aspect of our lives.

Those who came up with Political Correctness, which we more accurately call "Cultural Marxism," did so in a deliberate fashion. I'm not going to go into the whole history of the Frankfurt School and Herbert Marcuse (Cos that would give you the opportunity to see I'm full of s**t) and the other people responsible for this. Suffice it to say that the United States is very close to becoming a state totally dominated by an alien ideology, an ideology bitterly hostile to Western culture. Even now, for the first time in their lives, people have to be afraid of what they say. This has never been true in the history of our country. Yet today, if you say the "wrong thing," you suddenly have legal problems, political problems, you might even lose your job or be expelled from college. Certain topics are forbidden. You can,t approach the truth about a lot of different subjects. If you do, you are immediately branded as "racist", "sexist", "homophobic", "insensitive", or "judgmental."


Cultural Marxism is succeeding in its war against our culture. The question becomes, if we are unable to escape the cultural disintegration that is gripping society, then what hope can we have? Let me be perfectly frank about it. If there really were a moral majority out there, Bill Clinton would have been driven out of office months ago. It is not only the lack of political will on the part of Republicans, although that is part of the problem. More powerful is the fact that what Americans would have found absolutely intolerable only a few years ago, a majority now not only tolerates but celebrates. Americans have adopted, in large measure, the MTV culture that we so valiantly opposed just a few years ago, and it has permeated the thinking of all but those who have separated themselves from the contemporary culture.

There you have it. Marcuse wrote lots of stuff most of it concerned with repression in the Freudian sense and how it interacts with political repression. Ironically what Weyrich is objecting to (the sexual licentiousness of the MTV generation and politicians being publically acknowledged not hidden under the bed or in a closet) is exactly what Marcuse thought was a problem. The repression of healthy sexuality thru sexual overstimulation in the culture, leading to the repression of political ideas.

Marcuse was an anti materialist and believed capitalist culture replaced human development with acquiring products. (Homer Simpson when Bart objects to selling his elephant to some ivory collector actually references this process explicitly: On the other hand who's to say what's right these days what with all our modern ideas and products?) Marcuse is criticising "consumer culture" specifically but at a time when the phrase was meaningless.

Cultural Marxism isn't the threat nobjobs like Weyrich and Lind claim it is. They just thought it was great meme to use in creating a form of identity politics they could work with as they virtue signalled to other fundy Christians about how much they'd like to cut God and Judgement Day out of the process and set all the unbelievers on fire right here and now.

“We must shift America from a needs, to a desires culture. People must be trained to desire, to want new things even before the old had been entirely consumed. We must shape a new mentality in America. Man’s desires must overshadow his needs.”

That was an original (I think) senior partner in a now defunct capitalist organisation that lost the financial war of the early 21st century, speaking in the 1920s about the very things that activated the concern of Weyrich and Lind in the 70s. Personally I think the only difference between those times was that Weyrich and Lind were living in a post Jim Crow society (or so they thought). IE They didn't like fellows being free and that was the cause of all of America's problems. Youse don't have to think that tho, frankly I don't care. Scratch the fundy drive to turn back the clock enough and you'll see the fear of ... well being human - paganism, dancing to jungle drums, off your face under the moon and stars before you have a root and wake up to get on with your life - these campaigners hate it and come out of empires that built their power out of hating it. And instead of recognising it in themselves they projected it outward on everyone else (the most visible for them example being Blacks in the South and Midwest, where this movement really got going), in the hope that god would believe their self delusion I spose.

Jazz music, rock and roll, sexual and sensual pleasure, (especially if its missionary sex in marriage that ends with the first, weakest orgasm the guy can muster,) drug use and all the rest of those puritanical bug bears drove these pricks for generations. Now like a *en Christian zombie that's risen from the dead with its bits rotting off and an insatiable hunger for intelligence to munch and s**t out these mid 20th century ideas are coming back to bite. And eat our brains from the inside out.

Marxism is a historical economic theory about a conflict between resource control (called "capital") and labour that happened nearly 200 years ago. Political Correctness today is just politeness enforced by social exclusion/snubbing/shaming that grew out of the necessity to legislate treating other, "different" people with respect cos most humans don't do that and never really have. They aren't the same thing and never will be.

Stop letting Fundy w***ers program your brain for you.

Oh BTW - I'm sure fundy Islam is as bad as fundy Christianity, its just I haven't spent my life living under the Islamic version of "Sharia Law". Just the Christian version. These pricks have way more influence and power over decisions made in our country than bearded arseholes with an early 20th century worldview, Adnan Kashoggi's guns and a hard on for Mohammad have ever had. That's why I'm having a go at fundy Christians - they've had more effect on my life.

Oh BTW again - This is a rant not a scientific treatise. If you disagree with it tough luck. You've only got a limited number of seconds left before you kark it. If you want to waste them arguing with what I typed go for it, just don't expect an answer. (If you apply your brain you'll get something out of it anyway, whatever your opinion.)

 

[ferball]

BTW using fellows in the PC filter for fellows is a great idea. Because we are your fellow people whether you like it or not.

 

[yebiga]

Here we go - cultural marxism as an appropriate response to Bill Clinton not being impeached for a blow job:

That's why I am in the process of rethinking what it is that we, who still believe in our traditional, Western, Judeo-Christian culture, can and should do under the circumstances. Please understand that I am not quarreling with anybody who pursues politics, because it is important to pursue politics, to be involved in government. It is also important to try, as many people have, to re-take the cultural institutions that have been captured by the other side.

But it is impossible to ignore the fact that the United States is becoming an ideological state. The ideology of Political Correctness, which openly calls for the destruction of our traditional culture, has so gripped the body politic, has so gripped our institutions, that it is even affecting the Church. It has completely taken over the academic community. It is now pervasive in the entertainment industry, and it threatens to control literally every aspect of our lives.

Those who came up with Political Correctness, which we more accurately call "Cultural Marxism," did so in a deliberate fashion. I'm not going to go into the whole history of the Frankfurt School and Herbert Marcuse (Cos that would give you the opportunity to see I'm full of ****) and the other people responsible for this. Suffice it to say that the United States is very close to becoming a state totally dominated by an alien ideology, an ideology bitterly hostile to Western culture. Even now, for the first time in their lives, people have to be afraid of what they say. This has never been true in the history of our country. Yet today, if you say the "wrong thing," you suddenly have legal problems, political problems, you might even lose your job or be expelled from college. Certain topics are forbidden. You can,t approach the truth about a lot of different subjects. If you do, you are immediately branded as "racist", "sexist", "homophobic", "insensitive", or "judgmental."


Cultural Marxism is succeeding in its war against our culture. The question becomes, if we are unable to escape the cultural disintegration that is gripping society, then what hope can we have? Let me be perfectly frank about it. If there really were a moral majority out there, Bill Clinton would have been driven out of office months ago. It is not only the lack of political will on the part of Republicans, although that is part of the problem. More powerful is the fact that what Americans would have found absolutely intolerable only a few years ago, a majority now not only tolerates but celebrates. Americans have adopted, in large measure, the MTV culture that we so valiantly opposed just a few years ago, and it has permeated the thinking of all but those who have separated themselves from the contemporary culture.

There you have it. Marcuse wrote lots of stuff most of it concerned with repression in the Freudian sense and how it interacts with political repression. Ironically what Weyrich is objecting to (the sexual licentiousness of the MTV generation and politicians being publically acknowledged not hidden under the bed or in a closet) is exactly what Marcuse thought was a problem. The repression of healthy sexuality thru sexual overstimulation in the culture, leading to the repression of political ideas.

Marcuse was an anti materialist and believed capitalist culture replaced human development with acquiring products. (Homer Simpson when Bart objects to selling his elephant to some ivory collector actually references this process explicitly: On the other hand who's to say what's right these days what with all our modern ideas and products?) Marcuse is criticising "consumer culture" specifically but at a time when the phrase was meaningless.

Cultural Marxism isn't the threat nobjobs like Weyrich and Lind claim it is. They just thought it was great meme to use in creating a form of identity politics they could work with as they virtue signalled to other fundy Christians about how much they'd like to cut God and Judgement Day out of the process and set all the unbelievers on fire right here and now.

“We must shift America from a needs, to a desires culture. People must be trained to desire, to want new things even before the old had been entirely consumed. We must shape a new mentality in America. Man’s desires must overshadow his needs.”

That was an original (I think) senior partner in a now defunct capitalist organisation that lost the financial war of the early 21st century, speaking in the 1920s about the very things that activated the concern of Weyrich and Lind in the 70s. Personally I think the only difference between those times was that Weyrich and Lind were living in a post Jim Crow society (or so they thought). IE They didn't like fellows being free and that was the cause of all of America's problems. Youse don't have to think that tho, frankly I don't care. Scratch the fundy drive to turn back the clock enough and you'll see the fear of ... well being human - paganism, dancing to jungle drums, off your face under the moon and stars before you have a root and wake up to get on with your life - these campaigners hate it and come out of empires that built their power out of hating it. And instead of recognising it in themselves they projected it outward on everyone else (the most visible for them example being Blacks in the South and Midwest, where this movement really got going), in the hope that god would believe their self delusion I spose.

Jazz music, rock and roll, sexual and sensual pleasure, (especially if its missionary sex in marriage that ends with the first, weakest orgasm the guy can muster,) drug use and all the rest of those puritanical bug bears drove these pricks for generations. Now like a ****en Christian zombie that's risen from the dead with its bits rotting off and an insatiable hunger for intelligence to munch and **** out these mid 20th century ideas are coming back to bite. And eat our brains from the inside out.

Marxism is a historical economic theory about a conflict between resource control (called "capital") and labour that happened nearly 200 years ago. Political Correctness today is just politeness enforced by social exclusion/snubbing/shaming that grew out of the necessity to legislate treating other, "different" people with respect cos most humans don't do that and never really have. They aren't the same thing and never will be.

Stop letting Fundy w***ers program your brain for you.

Oh BTW - I'm sure fundy Islam is as bad as fundy Christianity, its just I haven't spent my life living under the Islamic version of "Sharia Law". Just the Christian version. These pricks have way more influence and power over decisions made in our country than bearded arseholes with an early 20th century worldview, Adnan Kashoggi's guns and a hard on for Mohammad have ever had. That's why I'm having a go at fundy Christians - they've had more effect on my life.

Oh BTW again - This is a rant not a scientific treatise. If you disagree with it tough luck. You've only got a limited number of seconds left before you kark it. If you want to waste them arguing with what I typed go for it, just don't expect an answer. (If you apply your brain you'll get something out of it anyway, whatever your opinion.)

Marxism = oppression narrative
PC = oppression narrative
Both feed on resentment
Both stifle clear thinking with misdirected emotional outrage

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Marxism = oppression narrative
PC = oppression narrative
Both feed on resentment
Both stifle clear thinking with misdirected emotional outrage

Every analysis of Cultural Marxism is as deep as this.

If we want to talk emotion, why are so many terrorists professing a belief in the existence of cultural Marxism?

 

[its free real estate]

Every analysis of Cultural Marxism is as deep as this.

If we want to talk emotion, why are so many terrorists professing a belief in the existence of cultural Marxism?

It's a bit like terrorists justifying their beheadings and bombings of innocent people as opposition to American and Western imperialism. All those who critique Western imperialism are complicit.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

It's a bit like terrorists justifying their beheadings and bombings of innocent people as opposition to American and Western imperialism. All those who critique Western imperialism are complicit.

Did you think I meant every person who believes cultural Marxism exists is a potential terrorist?

 

[its free real estate]

Did you think I meant every person who believes cultural Marxism exists is a potential terrorist?

No. That terrorists profess a belief in something doesn't mean that belief in something is necessarily wrong. Kaczynski was an environmentalist.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

No. That terrorists profess a belief in something doesn't mean that belief in something is necessarily wrong. Kaczynski was an environmentalist.

There is no evidence supporting the existence of a cultural Marxism that exerts any meaningful influence on anything.

 

[its free real estate]

There is no evidence supporting the existence of a cultural Marxism that exerts any meaningful influence on anything.

Except that there is. Whatever you want to term it, Marcuse and co's influence on liberal-left movements since the 60s literally exists and exerted meaningful influence.

 

[ferball]

Except that there is. Whatever you want to term it, Marcuse and co's influence on liberal-left movements since the 60s literally exists and exerted meaningful influence.

Yeah but trying to describe them accurately using the words "cultural marxism" is stupid and makes people stupi....

Ahhh ... I get it.

 

[yebiga]

Every analysis of Cultural Marxism is as deep as this.

If we want to talk emotion, why are so many terrorists professing a belief in the existence of cultural Marxism?

when it’s expressed deeply it’s said to be gobblygook; made simple it’s dismissed as shallow.

Surely in its simplistic form you yourself can at least begin to apprehend it and commence a dialogue.

As for terrorist proclaimig themselves cultural Marxist - Who? In what context? And What relevance is there if some nutters proclaim themselves Christ almighty? If you have a point to make - make it!

 

[its free real estate]

Yeah but trying to describe them accurately using the words "cultural marxism" is stupid and makes people stupi....

Ahhh ... I get it.

What is a better collective term?

Most of the things described as Nazi or fascist aren’t, so I’m not sure why this term irritates leftists so.

 

[Snake_Baker]

BTW using fellows in the PC filter for fellows is a great idea. Because we are your fellow people whether you like it or not.

Sand fellows or jungle fellows?