What's Worse: Cultural Marxism or Real Communism?

If you’ve ever wondered why the policy positions and tactics of liberalism seem like watered-down Communism, it’s no coincidence. There’s been considerable influence, some from traditional Communism (Marxism-Leninism), but mostly from cultural Marxism. Increasingly over time, this “Communism Lite” version became their guiding ideology. The left wasn’t always like this. They used to have real substance: the trust busters opposing the robber barons, the early labor leaders, Jack London—what the hell happened?

For that matter, today’s mainstream conservative establishment also leaves much to be desired. They have too many careerist politicos sucking up to major contributors and ignoring what’s happening to their grassroots. They’ve allowed themselves to be fettered by political correctness and co-opted by neocon entryists. The fact is, lobbyists and influential players in the background hold the purse strings for both sets of politicians, though all that’s another topic.

How “Communism Lite” differs from the real thing

Less substance, but all the foolishness!
Traditional Communism emphasizes socialist economics, along with the importance of hard work, productivity, and striving tirelessly for the good of the nation. Their historical analysis is all in terms of class struggle. This is a big blind spot; class struggle matters, but other important forces and historical events occur. To them, the proletariat is always good; the bourgeoisie and aristocracy are always bad.

Cultural Marxism diverged from traditional Communism. Note well, this is the “for export” brand. “Essential categories” are emphasized, such as race, gender, and sexual orientation. Like traditional Marxist historical analysis focusing only on class struggle, cultural Marxism sees everything in the lens of privilege and oppression. Class consciousness is still there, but in last place. For instance, all women are downtrodden and patriarchy gives all men privilege, including Jane the CEO and John the coal miner. A wealthy gay fashion designer is oppressed, and a straight grocery bagger is unfairly advantaged. Its stated goal is equality and respect for everyone, but they’re full of double standards.

Traditional Communism has class-based preferences, favoring the workers and farmers and despising everyone wealthier. Likewise, cultural Marxism has its agreed-upon favored and disfavored groups. Some religions are routinely ridiculed; others are off-limits to any criticism. Minority groups are encouraged to have pride, stand together, and organize for their interests, but majority members doing so are vilified. Likely you can think of a few more examples. History is rewritten and current events are spun to suit these agendas, sold by the education and media machines to inflame grievances in some groups and promote guilt trips by others.

If you think any of this is really about inclusiveness, fairness, problem solving, or healing divisions, then I’ve got a bridge for sale in Brooklyn. The real goal from the beginning was to discredit the traditional establishment, drive wedges in society, and promote agendas. It’s all about power.

A brief history of cultural Marxism

How Communism morphed into something really lame
In the beginning, Max Horkheimer and his colleagues of the Frankfurt School—a Communist think tank—formulated cultural Marxism. In the 1930s, they moved to the USA and began subverting the educational system. The media, with many key figures having similar views, started promoting the same things. ...

More at
[link to www.returnofkings.com]