Written by ‘Classical Liberal’
~~~***~~~
The term ‘cultural Marxism’ has been increasingly heavily used in discussions about contemporary social issues in recent years. I briefly touched upon cultural Marxism in a recent article on the origins of political correctness (PC), as PC is very much the ‘enforcement arm’ of cultural Marxism. This article will examine what cultural Marxism is, what its roots are, as well as how to understand the movement.
To begin, we must look at the foundations of Marxism; and then analyse how it was appropriated into what is now called ‘cultural Marxism’. Marxism began in the nineteenth century with Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Marx argued that both sociology and anthropology can best be understood by gaining an understanding of class systems. He also argued that there is an essential economic divide that occurs within capitalism. People are basically divided into two groups: the bourgeois and the proletariat. The bourgeois are those who control the means of production. The proletariat are those who are used and abused by the bourgeois; and do not really have a say in what happens within capitalism. Marx argued that this class dynamic creates a class struggle – between the ruling class and the working-class. For Marx, this class struggle determines the basic structure and foundations of society. Marx believed that all of the other inequalities within a capitalist society can essentially be boiled down to these economic inequalities.
Marx was also a follower of Georg Hegel – a prominent nineteenth century philosopher who argued that history is in a process of change and that this change is positive because history is essentially improving. Marx subscribed to certain aspects of Hegel’s philosophy, while rejecting others. Therefore, Marx created his own view of world history. Marx argued that the logic of historical progress dictated that it was inevitable that there would be a socialist revolution, which would lead to a new form of state that we now know as communism. Of course, we have seen how things turned out with various communist governments coming into power in the twentieth century. The results were disastrous, to say the very least.
Certain thinkers took Marx’s ideas about economics and applied them to other areas of social life – most notably the Frankfurt School and ‘Critical Theory’, which I covered in a previous article on the Frankfurt School and the origins of PC. What is really important about critical theory and how it affects us today is this: with critical theory, Marx’s ideas were developed and expanded to relate to all areas of thought.
While Marx thought all different social relations were essentially and foundationally based upon economics, critical theory took Marx’s narrative of an oppressed group and an oppressor group and began applying it to various aspects of social life. The oppressor was no longer seen as just the bourgeois who controlled the means of production, but was expanded to issues of race, gender, sexuality, and many other categories that can be discussed in this way as well. It’s argued that those who are oppressors are ‘privileged’ and those who are oppressed are ‘under-privileged’. Hence we have all the talk of ‘white privilege’, ‘male privilege’, ‘heterosexual privilege’, etc. And, people of colour, women, and members of the LGBTQ+ community, etc are ‘victims’ of the ‘white patriarchy’. Thus, when we hear people talking about an oppressed class and an oppressor, and making arguments for certain laws and ideas that make the oppressor less privileged so that the oppressed can gain some kind of benefit, this essentially is what we know as cultural Marxism.
There are three main problems with the theory of cultural Marxism. First, it is problematic when people are treated first and foremost according to whatever particular group they belong to, rather than as the individuals that they are. Certainly, we have an identity in our groups and communities as well as we do as individuals. But, these group identities do not define absolutely everything about us. This leads to a second problem.
Second, a lot of these groups are really rather arbitrary. Why, for example, is every white person classified in a particular group because of race, when those white people may be of extremely different economic statuses, from very different parts of the world, and have completely different life experiences, and nothing really unites them at all other than that they have the same skin colour. It’s too simplistic to identify and lump people together into groups in this way. There are so many things that determine what one’s privilege is. It doesn’t just have to do with skin colour, gender, sexuality, or race; it could be related to one’s attractiveness, athletic ability, etc. Some people are now talking about being disabled as another kind of under-privileged group; as well as able-bodied people having privilege. The point is that this list could go on and on. There are so many different factors that determine what somebody’s privilege and under-privilege might be, that you really can’t classify it simply in any way at all. Who has more ‘privilege’: a heterosexual woman or a gay man; a wealthy black man or a poor white man; a white lesbian or a heterosexual black woman? The whole exercise is demented.
Third, this can actually lead to the same power dynamic that the so-called Social Justice Warriors claim to be pushing against. Those who are considered to be under-privileged are using this narrative, as a way of gaining an upper-hand against those who are considered to be privileged, in order to put themselves in power. And isn’t this really just the same kind of power dynamic that they are accusing others of.
We should not accuse everyone who speaks about victimisation or inequality of being a cultural Marxist because these things are not necessarily tied to cultural Marxism. Nonetheless, the idea of cultural Marxism is certainly behind a lot of the arguments that people are making in society today.
The radical left has tried to convince us that cultural Marxism doesn’t exist; that it’s simply an anti-Semitic conspiracy invented by the alt-right. This is a downright lie. Black Lives Matter (BLM) is perhaps the most obvious proof that cultural Marxism exists. BLM frames everything in terms of oppressors/oppressed and privileged/under-privileged. And, as I showed in a recent article on the radical ideological influences behind BLM, two of BLM’s three co-founders proudly proclaim that they are ‘trained Marxists’; BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors also publicly acknowledges that Eric Mann – a convicted terrorist and former member of the radical left militant group the Weather Underground – is her ‘mentor’ and that he trained her in revolutionary activism for over a decade.
Photo by Cosmopolita. 
Excellent read. Thank you. These short articles by Classical Liberal are very good.
Cultural Marxism is Western Marxism (aka the New Left or neo-Marxism) and the long march of Western Marxists through the institutions and corridors of power began from the Arts and Social Science faculties of our universities, whose graduates have now been in positions of power for decades.
Not only do Cultural Marxists dominate our state apparatus, they dominate independent institutions such as the Anglican Church or even the National Trust. The universities are the platform from which these neo-Marxists have launched their successful indoctrination & re-education of the Western mind.
It’s none of the above. It’s all about inherent intelligence.
Some groups are less intelligent than others, ergo end up less well off.
Viv will know the old Welsh saying. “You can’t educate pork”.
So, there’s no remedy for the situation other than keeping these groups apart. If you don’t, jealousy and hatred creep in.
Havn’t a clue what you are on about Harry Again.
Which groups are less intelligent so end up less well off?
Keep the groups apart? Where? How?
Pauline……I think Harry Again is sharing the same bottle of Single Malt with TG Spokes, and who knows even the odd slice of Dundee Cake as well…..
The whole of Africa for a start. The people living in council estates. “Single Parents”. 99% of politicians. Socialists. Liberals.
If you’re inherently stupid, you do less well.
You can pick them out here by their posts on this forum by their stupid conspiracy theories.
Harry. I’ll treat that with the contempt it deserves.
I too don’t know what Harry is going on about except to point out
“The poor are always with us”
And to observe
If you start off poor there’s a more than even chance you will continue getting even poorer.
Particularly in relationship to the bosses always getting richer exponentially so.
It was said a Master should not earn more than 4 times his worker then that was increased to 6.
I shudder to think what the rate of difference is now.
Life, science, things are often not one or the other, They are often a spectrum. Trying to shove a spectrum into one or another is a sign of lack of brain. So Marx, Engels etc Eutopean intellectuals all wanting to be noticed were just idiots not clever or even mistaken. Just evil in trying to impose what is not onto what is. To suit their own ends.
Thank you Classical Liberal. A very good summary.
‘Hey man – I am height challenged – I insist I am under privileged and the whole world should stoop and bend it’s knee before me!’
Seriously, I never did reach 5ft. and it does frustrate me that everything is designed for those who are normal height.
In 1848 Marx and Engels visited England, observed it and decided it was not ‘ripe’ for revolution. The rest of Europe did have a rash of such revolutions. But I’m not sure they were because of Marx’s ‘dialectic materialism’.
I suppose the French Revolution was basically a case of there being two classes one grossly over privileged and the other oppressed. There was probably very little in the way of a middle class.
On the other hand, right back to our Civil War, England had a middle class. It was the merchants of London who resented Charles1’s arbitrary imposition of taxes.
So perhaps Marx’s whole theory of Dialectic Materialism was based on an over simplification of how society ‘works’.
Anyway, I agree Cultural Marxism does exist and has been creeping through our institutions for many years.
Evil is as evil does and we see plenty of such doings from the so-called left. Between them and the present government they will destroy life as we know (knew?) it.