Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 month ago

How did cultural marxist theory come to be so entrenched in liberal identity politics?

31 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 month ago
    Favourite answer

    Cultural marxism entered liberal thought when it’s proponents, the Frankfurt School moved to the U.S.  Several of them were U.S. college professors in the 50s, 60s and early 70s, where they influenced young SJWs of the day.  Many of those young SJWs who studied cultural marxism went on to become women’s studies teachers and other such positions of liberal influence.  It’s why so many liberal SJW movements all rely on the same basic victim mentality.   

  • 1 month ago

    Liberals are evil that hate America that’s why.

    And it’s quite disturbing the leader of the Black Lies Matter hate group said their trained Marxists.

  • 1 month ago

    The US has capitalism as a vehicle. It has served us very well and we're proud of that. Other countries where they tried to do a pure communism model have failed namely North Korea, Russia and China. When they introduced capitalism, or allowed it along side their social programs they did much better. Kim Jong Un's father made it totally illegal to trade on any form of capitalism and Kim Jong Un elevated some factions of North Korea by allowing some capitalism, Soviet Russia collapsed the introduction of capitalism help it have a thriving domestic economy. China just soared when they allowed it, even more so because they were doing it domestically and internationally.

    No question, capitalism works. No one is arguing that in America and no one is trying to abolish it.

    If you're talking about social programs that worked for America. After the Great Depression, had we not had social programs at that point, we wouldn't have survived. If we didn't have SSI for the elderly and disabled, we would have a lot more homelessness. The social programs in America have been successful and need to be done the American way.

    It's too easy to fall into the debt trap and once you're in, it's incredibly had to get out, the longer you're in it because of interest compounding against you it becomes increasingly harder to get out. If you have to make a trip to the ER or develop some illness. That's one of the ways to fall in it and contributes to shrinking the middle class. Not educating our future working class also contribute to shrinking the middle class. Debt contributes to shrinking the middle class. Students taking out massive loans who are trying to support themselves and realize they can't school fulltime and work enough to cover all their bills so they drop out in debt without a high-value skill. That shrinks the middle class.

    People who hate social programs only concentrate on when people take advantage of the system but they don't focus on when it works. The question is to create social programs that will do more good. It's an investment. like all investments, some of that money gets thrown away while others pay off. I'm an example. I had a mystery illness to the point where I couldn't function. I was fainting, lethargic and weak. Never had health insurance. I got on government assistance. Had health care for the first time and went to doctors discovered I had multiple diseases and I was allergic to all the food I was eating. They put me on medication and physical routine to help me manage my body. I become more healthy than I ever was. I was making 17k/yr when I used to work took on free internships while I was trying to get on my feet and elevated my salary to 50k. My friend also went on welfare because he was sick of working terrible jobs. He used that time to create his own business. while working he made under 30k/year after welfare he was making over 60k/yr as an entrepreneur then became a homeowner in a course of 3 years. The media never talks about when welfare works to help create productive members in society. The media wants us to believe that the only thing about welfare is that it enables people not to work. Most people can't live without purpose. We live in a superficial world. People don't take pride in taking welfare. People usually associate how they make their living with purpose. Welfare can be used to help people live their dream life of owning their own business or elevate them to get higher-paying jobs.

    Liberals in America want social programs as a tool to stimulate individuals to elevate their skills and ability to make money. No one wants a soul-crushing job they hate but they do it to live paycheck to paycheck. Not everyone has parents to support them to attend college when they do want to apply themselves to acquire higher-value skills. If we make accessibility for Americans, especially in the lower-income and middle class to make it easier to acquire higher income skills we'll in worst-case scenario keep the middle class from shrinking and the goal of it would be to grow and strengthen the middle class.

    The same goes for people who want to own businesses. We can make government tools to help these people become entrepreneurs, or grow small businesses. From the bottom up we can grow more jobs. From Walmart, Amazon people are underpaid while Jeff Bezos just profits. That shrinks the middle class. Smaller businesses may pay the same but if we have more of them. Monster companies where they are too big to fail and have permission undercompensate workers and get huge government perks to enable them to become even more powerful. Trying to break them up. If there were more competition for employees Amazon would compensate more and this would be a step towards singular companies becoming less of a giant that become above our government. Our senators make less than 250k/year from their government office position, some of them are worth more than $200 million. They're being bought by corporations to do their bidding. If Bezos wanted to buy a few politicians to have his way. That's not difficult. 

    For example, Bill Clinton tried to change taxes so that the government would file it for you. Not us individually. But H&R block & turbotax lobbyist stopped that. Then either Bush or Obama tried to make the same change and H&R block & TurboTax made their lobbyist so powerful we'll never be able to have that. Don't give H&R black or Turbotax a cent of your money. Your state might give you free web services to do your taxes. You giving money to turbotax paid for all of us from having the government do our taxes.

    The downside of capitalism is, more money equals unchecked power. If we can subsidy and grow the strength from the bottom up we'll have a stronger economy because we are as weak as our weakest link. Point number 2 is, if the lower-income and middle class are strong enough we can check the wealthy in power. Whereas, politicians are up for grabs. Even the Supreme court. Who in the world actually believes that the Supreme Court should have rule corporations are people too. This was done so it's easier for them to give campaign donor money.

    We can use subsidy to stimulate and grow the middle class and combat corruption. We want it as a tool not a replacement to capitalism. The competition in capitalism is driving innovation but it isn't a system without it's flaws. Capitalism's flaw enables corruption. The weakness of capitalism is greed that will sacrifice the well being of others to serve it. There needs to be a solution for that or a check to balance that.

  • 1 month ago

    Republicans threatened everyones life with coronovirus not wearing mask

    Attachment image
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • dumb
    Lv 6
    1 month ago

    Because they can pass it off to people stupider and lazier than themselves, Just steal from people that produce and you got it made.

  • Bill
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    The proper name for it is critical theory, not cultural Marxism.

  • 1 month ago

    Its bad logic to ask how something happened that has not happened.  Its a dirty filthy fascist lying trick.

    lol to the guy below who said go ask those under the rule of Karl Marx.  Karl Marx never ruled anybody. He was never in charge of a country or a politician of a country or in government in anyway. All he did was write a book about a theory that eventually the world would be too corrupted by business and that something should be done about it before it happens...hence Marxism....

  • Jim2
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    Why don't you tell us exactly what 'cultural marxism' is? It sounds like it's all BS anyway.

    Never mind. Here is Wikipedia to the rescue:

    "Cultural Marxism is a far-right and antisemitic conspiracy theory which claims Western Marxism as the basis of continuing academic and intellectual efforts to subvert Western culture."

    It's a conspiracy theory. That means it is not worth considering.

  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    The conservative media declared it was so.

  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    It's just a phrase Reptoids throw around.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.