Quote: (12-13-2014 12:01 PM)Sherman Wrote:
What I would like to know is where are the Cultural Marxists getting all their money and power? They couldn't do what they are doing without the blessing of the establishment. If the elites didn't approve they would just shut them down. They are in the government, media, and control the universities. The Cultural Marxists are now the establishment.
Quote: (12-13-2014 08:29 AM)Sp5 Wrote:
Market forces explain feminism more than Marcuse. Women buy a lot more shit, so the market was reengineered to give them more independence and their own source of income. This fueled consumption growth, profits, and the GDP.
I think the Frankfurt School's own beliefs explain this quite well. I disagree with them on most things but their concept of the "culture industry" resonates with me. Adorno (or even Marcuse himself) would tell you that all the money is on their side because catering to progressive demands is in the economic interests of the elites. Getting women into the workforce and unskilled immigration drives down the price of labour. Women's lib significantly increases consumer demand. In fact the vast majority of spending decisions today are made by women. Since they profit from feminism, they can use their control over mass culture and mass media to jam that down people's throats through movies, TV and music. They would also argue that using identity politics to pit groups against each other prevents/distracts them from trying to challenge the elites. Have you ever noticed that the economic elites have very liberal social views even though they vote for centre-Right parties?
Quote: (12-13-2014 12:39 PM)scorpion Wrote:
Deluge, what are you trying to say, exactly? That "Cultural Marxism" is an inaccurate term? That the Frankfurt School is being mischaracterized? That there was never any intentional conspiracy?
Cultural Marxism is an accurate term for feminism/progressivism, and I think feminists probably did have an explicit agenda to attack Western values at least from the 60's. But yes the Frankfurt School has been completely mischaracterized, if you were familiar enough with their work you'd be scratching your head wondering why they keep coming up so often in anti-feminist discussions. Like I said there are many other intellectuals out there with far more relevance to contemporary Leftism and even better fodder for conspiracy theories (Gloria Steinem was on the CIA payroll for instance).
Quote: (12-13-2014 12:46 PM)Samseau Wrote:
I've read Critical Theory and Feminism was easily tied hand in hand with the Frankfort School. Although they may have developed independently of each other to claim they aren't natural allies is disingenuous.
Feminists used Critical Theory to advance their critiques of how white men enforced the patriarchy, while race theorists became "critical race theorists." All bedfellows.
As for Cultural Marxists not owning academia, you are mistaken. Pretty much all feminist, frankfort school critiques are simply taken from granted at every philosophy department across the entire western world. You can't even question some of these tenants without losing your job at these places.
1. Of course they were natural allies, after all they both spent plenty of time criticizing capitalist society and the mass media.
2. Agree
3. Definitely you can't question feminism today in academia, but you can definitely disagree with the Frankfurt School at least in Politics and Sociology departments. I think you're getting the two movements too intertwined in your head. Is it really thought crime to say you didn't care much for "One-Dimensional Man" or communicative rationality? I've heard a senior Politics professor tell a class he cares little for the Frankfurt School, and he's a typical Ivory Tower lefty. Most of what the Frankfurt School wrote about has little to do with what Leftists today care about.