However, you Marxists have a hell of a lot to answer for where feminism is concerned. If feminism is your schtick, then own it. If not, then decades of feminist theory goes down the drain, and you’ve got to articulate that as well.

If you’re up for it, I’d publish your views on feminism — as a Marxist of course (featured guest). Let me know.

Really? I think it’s impossible to understand what’s happened in “the West,” and indeed, the World, without talking about the economic and political crises of capitalism. But I’m a classical Marxist, not a “cultural Marxist” (whatever that is).

Your summary of the history of the Frankfurt School is not incorrect in the broader strokes. Much of it does have to do with the rejection of the international working class in favor of “other” forces, most notably student radicals and third world revolutionary groups. However, I would say that this rejection makes it a rather un-Marxist movement.

Essentially, it was necessary to rewrite history from the perspective of viewing almost everyone as having been ruthlessly oppressed by straight, white men for all of history, and reduce our understanding both of all of the past and the present structures in society to a vision which views the entire narrative as one extended campaign of white male rape and domination of everyone and everything else.

I fail to understand the relationship between this view of the world and Marxism. Nor do I think that you make a compelling case that the two are connected. To turn your statement about activists and radicals who do not realize they are “Marxists” around, I would posit that not everyone who says they are a Marxist is one. It’s not a question of being “more Marxist than thou.” Rather, it’s an attempt to point out that there are some core principles of Marxism (class struggle, the nature of the state, value theory of labor, and others) that, once abandoned, leave something perhaps influenced by Marxism, but certainly other than.

In other words, even those activists who would not admit that they were Marxist, or who would truthfully deny that they believed in Marxist ideas, nevertheless drew from a revisionist history which was, itself, thoroughly Marxist in content.

This is, in my opinion, where you fail to close the sale. You do a lot of talk about how the interpretations of certain middle class professional radicals is “Marxist” but you don’t really say how. Many criticisms of Marxism view it as excessively economically deterministic. Other criticisms of Marxism view it as unduly dismissive of racial, gender, and national questions. It is worth noting that Marx wrote nothing that I am aware of about homosexuality, and explicitly Marxist movements have a pretty bad track record on such issues.

there is a quite strong alignment of interests between the elites and the radicals, such that the entire society has been recast in ways that actually serve to preserve the power of the current elites by dividing the rest of the population against itself.

This is not an attempt at being cute, but this sounds rather (ahem) Marxist. Marxists (beginning with Marx, and continuing on with Lenin who basically spent a decade and a half writing poison pen letters to Kautsky) have long critiqued professional radicals of a middle class bent as being part and parcel of the capitalist system. Indeed, in a world where the capitalist order is breaking down, having some radicals around to deflect criticism (see Noam Chomsky) and /or divide people by non-essential categories (pick your favorite identity politics radicals) can be quite valuable in a revolutionary situation.

A pre-requisite for that is understanding this cultural Marxist apparatus that has been set up to screw us, and the fact that the social conservatives are collaborating with it.

Despite your protests to the contrary, this seems rather conspiratorial. Assuming that the rest of your argument is correct- and it should be obvious that I don’t- wouldn’t a more reasonable proposition be that men getting screwed is just the situation getting played out to its logical end?

The step beyond that is true male liberation.

Which is what precisely? And more to the point, does this include stepping on other people? And if it does, who and why?

I would like to finally add in passing that the history of the Marxist movement is largely made up of men who were trying to do something which on the surface seems rather manly. Specifically I mean fighting for a better future for themselves, their children, and their families. The writer of this article, however, has precious little to say about this. I am curious to know what, if anything, he would have to say about the literally millions of men both in the United States and internationally who subscribed to Marxian socialist politics. Before you attack your beta male straw man, I suggest you look into the biographies of people like “Big” Bill Haywood and Farrell Dobbs, to say nothing of the nameless, faceless men who fought and are not remembered by history books. The idea that they are weak and passive is laughable on its very face.

How many would-be analysts of elite power actually know anybody in the elite? There’s an unreality to much social theorizing, especially when it is reduced to concepts of power and control.

I second the recommendation for Jim Kalb’s The Tyranny of Liberalism. As a Yale grad, he has some experience of the elite. He also focuses on explicit ideology rather than analysis of what “really” happens.

Has Paul Gottfried come up on this site before? He has much training in the culturally Marxist Frankfurt School, but is very much a man of the bourgeois Right.

- Mythology based on a kernel of truth
- Emotionally-charged beliefs that cannot be questioned lest you be branded a heretic
- Inculcated via mass-repetition upon the population across time
- Relics and sites held up as prima facie evidence (independent examination or skepticism met with violent emotional response)
- An official version of Truth (scriptures), often replete with ‘miracles’
- Attraction fed by wallowing narcissism (victimology, guilt, or similar ego masturbation)

Secular religions (aka conspiracies) use the same mechanics.

We can control our use of language.

And, as keyboard warriors, what is it, exactly, that is our weapon? It is our words. Our words control thoughts. If there is no word for something, that something does not exist in many people’s mind. If you could go back 50 years in time and talk to someone about “date-rape”, they would look at you as if you had been sniffing glue. But, by putting a name to something, you expand concepts in people’s minds that were not previously there.

That is very powerful. Jack Kammer talks about this in his online book, http://www.deltabravo.net/files/ifmenhav.pdf , in regard to the words “misogyny” vs. “misandry.” Why do so many people think there is no such thing as “man hatred”? Because there simply is no word for it. There is a word for “jaywalking” to indicate the illegal crossing of a street… but, there is no similar word for legally crossing the street… it is simply, “crossing the street.”

Marxists battle for YOUR MIND. That is what “the personal is the political” is all about. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the populace was soooooooo screwed in the head, they could scarcely even comprehend how to live their lives anymore… they wanted the old way back.

It is often noted by people who lived under Communism/Marxism that it was not actually the totalitarianism or the threats that go along with it which they found the most distasteful. Nope. What they say was the worst was all the LIES.

Basically, controlling language is controlling other’s thoughts.

Think of this one simple example: Why did the word “gender” get introduced into the language?

We already had a word to indicate this concept: “Sex”

On my birth certificate, from 1970, it says “Sex: M”

However, “sex” is a very narrow concept. It only allows for “Male” and “Female.”

Up until recently, “gender” was a word solely used to describe masculine and feminine in language – as anyone who has studied a romance language, such as French, will understand. “Le” is masculine, and “La” is feminine. This was the meaning of the word “gender” until the Cultural Marxists co-opted it for their own purposes.

What happened when they co-opted the word “gender”?

Well, they expanded it. “Gender” is now a term used to describe Male, Female, Gay, Lesbian, Transgendered etc. They expanded the concepts of sexuality beyond what was previously there, and in doing so, introduced concepts into the minds of the populace… even into the minds of those who really couldn’t give a crap about what they are talking about.

“Partner” instead of “Husband or Wife” does the same thing.

“Traditional Family,” by virtue of even having to define it as “traditional”, indicates that there are indeed “other” kinds of families… now the push is on, here in Canada anyways, to have all families declared “equal.” What rubbish. Single Mother Households are broken families, they are not “equal” in any way whatsoever. Not from income nor in ability. A gay marriage “family” is not equal, because there is no ability to reproduce – except through State Totalitarianism methods which are now being applied (favouring gays over straights for adoptions & foster care service etc).

Tell someone from 100 years ago that you stand for the “Traditional Family” and they would look funny at you. Wtf, “traditional?” There is only one kind of family. The defenders of “traditional family values” have ALREADY LOST by saying that they defend “traditional.” They are loading the enemy’s guns for them, because they are already acknowledging there ARE other types of families than the traditional.

It really doesn’t take as long as you think.

I remember about 4 or 5 years ago, the whole MRA-sphere was up in arms about the term “anti-feminist” and the negative connotations that went along with it… lol, except for me. I was damned proud to be anti-feminist.

At any rate, this is when the word “misandry” started being used often by online activists.

It is now 4 or 5 years later… and guess what? The word “misandry” is being used more and more and more… even getting into mainstream articles often. In another 5 years, I predict misandry will be as commonly understood as misogyny. Way to go MRA’s! And you didn’t even have to win an argument! All you did was say “misandry” over and over and OVER and OVER again, in all your articles and comments!

Authors of articles and blogs, could easily do such things. It is not all that difficult to type in a different word, or to omit certain words.

Get back to saying “sex” instead of gender. Take that shit back from them!

Make a readily identifiable word of our own, perhaps to describe “fake rape” or “attention rape” and in a few years time, the notion that women manipulate the “rape system” will begin to permeate into society.

It is the back door approach – but, it casts its nets far and wide, because after a while, even those not directly interested in the issue WILL get exposed to the word, and begin to subconsciously understand the concept behind it.

It was done to us… we should do it back.

We are language warriors, after all.

I wrote a series of articles about how to fight Marxism, and put them all together here:

http://no-maam.blogspot.com/2007/09/achilles-heel.html

We can control our use of language.

And, as keyboard warriors, what is it, exactly, that is our weapon? It is our words. Our words control thoughts. If there is no word for something, that something does not exist in many people’s mind. If you could go back 50 years in time and talk to someone about “date-rape”, they would look at you as if you had been sniffing glue. But, by putting a name to something, you expand concepts in people’s minds that were not previously there.

That is very powerful. Jack Kammer talks about this in his online book, http://www.deltabravo.net/files/ifmenhav.pdf , in regard to the words “misogyny” vs. “misandry.” Why do so many people think there is no such thing as “man hatred”? Because there simply is no word for it. There is a word for “jaywalking” to indicate the illegal crossing of a street… but, there is no similar word for crossing the street… it is simply, “crossing the street.”

Marxists battle for YOUR MIND. That is what “the personal is the political” is all about. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the populace was soooooooo screwed in the head, they could scarcely even comprehend how to live their lives anymore… they wanted the old way back.

It is often noted by people who lived under Communism/Marxism that it was not actually the totalitarianism or the threats that go along with it which they found the most distasteful. Nope. What they say was the worst was all the LIES.

Basically, controlling language is controlling other’s thoughts.

Think of this one simple example: Why did the word “gender” get introduced into the language?

We already had a word to indicate this concept: “Sex”

On my birth certificate, from 1970, it says “Sex: M”

However, “sex” is a very narrow concept. It only allows for “Male” and “Female.”

Up until recently, “gender” was a word solely used to describe masculine and feminine in language – as anyone who has studied a romance language, such as French, will understand. “Le” is masculine, and “La” is feminine. This was the meaning of the word “gender” until the Cultural Marxists co-opted it for their own purposes.

What happened when they co-opted the word “gender”?

Well, they expanded it. “Gender” is now a term used to describe Male, Female, Gay, Lesbian, Transgendered etc. They expanded the concepts of sexuality beyond what was previously there, and in doing so, introduced concepts into the minds of the populace… even into the minds of those who really couldn’t give a crap about what they are talking about.

“Partner” instead of “Husband or Wife” does the same thing.

“Traditional Family,” by virtue of even having to define it as “traditional”, indicates that there are indeed “other” kinds of families… now the push is on, here in Canada anyways, to have all families declared “equal.” What rubbish. Single Mother Households are broken families, they are not “equal” in any way whatsoever. Not from income nor in ability. A gay marriage “family” is not equal, because there is no ability to reproduce – except through State Totalitarianism methods which are now being applied (favouring gays over straights for adoptions & foster care service etc).

Tell someone from 100 years ago that you stand for the “Traditional Family” and they would look funny at you. Wtf, “traditional?” There is only one kind of family. The defenders of “traditional family values” have ALREADY LOST by saying that they defend “traditional.” They are loading the enemy’s guns for them, because they are already acknowledging there ARE other types of families than the traditional.

It really doesn’t take as long as you think.

I remember about 4 or 5 years ago, the whole MRA-sphere was up in arms about the term “anti-feminist” and the negative connotations that went along with it… lol, except for me. I was damned proud to be anti-feminist.

At any rate, this is when the word “misandry” started being used often by online activists.

It is now 4 or 5 years later… and guess what? The word “misandry” is being used more and more and more… even getting into mainstream articles often. In another 5 years, I predict misandry will be as commonly understood as misogyny. Way to go MRA’s! And you didn’t even have to win an argument! All you did was say “misandry” over and over and OVER and OVER again, in all your articles and comments!

Authors of articles and blogs, could easily do such things. It is not all that difficult to type in a different word, or to omit certain words.

Get back to saying “sex” instead of gender. Take that shit back from them!

Make a readily identifiable word of our own, perhaps to describe “fake rape” or “attention rape” and in a few years time, the notion that women manipulate the “rape system” will begin to permeate into society.

It is the back door approach – but, it casts its nets far and wide, because after a while, even those not directly interested in the issue WILL get exposed to the word, and begin to subconsciously understand the concept behind it.

It was done to us… we should do it back.

We are language warriors, after all.

I wrote a series of articles about how to fight Marxism, and put them all together here:

http://no-maam.blogspot.com/2007/09/achilles-heel.html