Friday 26 June 2015

Jason Wilson on Cultural Marxism

I first came across this poisonous article from The Guardian a couple of months ago; I meant to write about it at the time, but never got round to it. Then a Facebook friend reminded me so I've decided to demolish this codswallop once and for all. See here for the article:
The prejudicial tone is set from the very start where the author, Jason Wilson, uses the words "the barmy theory of 'cultural Marxism'". However cultural Marxism exists; it is a completely real political movement. Its proponents call it different names like "critical theory" and "deep social research", but the content of their work is exactly as its critics describe it. I myself have already addressed some of these issues; see the background links below. After the Bolshevik revolution in Russia in 1917, it was assumed by communists around the world that the revolution would spread to other nations. There were attempts to foment similar coups in Germany, China and other countries, but they all failed leaving Russia standing alone as the world's sole Marxist power. Some Marxist theoreticians of the day claimed that the purely economic and political notions of vanguardist Marxism-Leninism were too crude and unrealistic. In order to change society into the one the Marxists wanted it was going to be necessary to alter people on a mass-psychological and cultural level. These are areas of research orthodox Marxists wouldn't even consider entering. Cultural Marxism emerged about a hundred years ago and centred around the Frankfurt School; its members drew on the works of psychoanalysts like Sigmund Freud and Erich Fromm as well as Marxist theoreticians like Antonio Gramsci and Herbert Marcuse. One of them was Theodor Adorno whom I've discussed before several times because he worked out how music could be used to control people's minds, see: The way to achieve Utopia was to carry out a "long march through the institutions" and install their new ideal communist society by infiltrating education, the media and government. The way to build a new human world... yes, a New World Order... was to knock everything down and build it up again in their image from the very foundations. Therefore cultural values previously assumed to be essential were torn apart and subjected to critical analysis. Traditional human relationships were called into question; those between the social classes, races and creeds, people and the church, men and woman, parents and children, friends and family, were discarded in favour of new models. Controls were suggested on lifestyle, actions, language and even thoughts. This is a process still ongoing today. It is essentially a very virulent form of mind control. George Orwell, who was a member of the British equivalent of the Frankfurt School, the Fabian Society, tried to warn the people with his prophetic allegorical novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. Cultural Marxism is about getting inside out heads and taking a hatchet to our mental integrity. This is why the Frankfurt School were so keen on the work of Freud and Fromm etc.

Jason Wilson uses a lot of snide rhetoric and dysphemism in his article which is intended to mislead and repel the reader. It is illustrated with a portrait of Anders Behring Breivik, a Norwegian who shot dead sixty-nine teenagers and blew up eight more people in a bomb attack in Oslo. Breivik looks to me like an MK Ultra programmed assassin, but that's not relevant right now. What is relevant is that Wilson is hoping to poison the well by associating this deranged killer with anybody who disagrees with his article. Wilson stoops to the nadir of defamation, as well as intellectual laziness, by bringing up that old chestnut of anti-Semitism, yet again. This is a very tiresome ploy that I've had to discredit many times, see: Of course there are those who are opposed to cultural Marxism who do blame it all on the Jews, but luckily these are a minority, certainly at least in the Conspirasphere, and I always debate those individuals when I come across them. Ironically, a lot of the people Wilson is targeting are anti-Islamists and often devout Zionists, at least tactical ones. Wilson only uses the word "racist" in his article once, but I'm sure this is an error on his part. Oppose cultural Marxism and you will quickly be labelled a racist, whether you really are one or not. Also "sexist!", "homophobe!" and many other similarly nasty epithets. The central strategy of modern cultural Marxism is the oppression of white straight males. This is not because the leftist elite favour non-WSM's over WSM's; they want to destroy us all and this is just their current chosen method. If you are a WSM who so much as breathes a word of concern for the well-being of your people then it makes you morally other. In fact for a WSM to be ideologically pure he needs to despise his own people and celebrate their downfall. In today's world WSM's are treated appallingly and hardly anyone notices. We can be refused employment or promotion because we're WSM's; we are banned from some public places, along with dogs. We can be attacked, violated, cheated on, and humiliated. In South Africa we can even be subjected to genocide, see: The justification for this is that our great-great-great-grandfather might have kept a black houseboy and beaten his wife. WSM's are told again and again that we are "privileged", and nothing that is done to us will ever alter that falsehood. It will be assumed that, as Jason Wilson says: "It allows those smarting from a loss of privilege to be offered the shroud of victimhood..." It is an unbreakable premise that this is the one and only reason anybody could ever wish to oppose cultural Marxism. This is sad because I am a WSM and I don't want to be privileged, even if I thought I was. I consider myself about as un-racist as it's possible to be. I served alongside people of all colours in the hospital and regard them as closer to me than my family. I live happily with three Sudanese Muslims. My daughter has a mixed-race boyfriend. I support gay marriage too.
The difficulty in overcoming cultural Marxism is that the Frankfurt School did a very devious thing indeed; they managed to conflate their toxic propaganda with perfectly legitimate civil rights issues. Feminism began because there used indeed to be very real injustices against women. The same goes for black people, Jews, homosexuals etc. The mind manipulators mutated these perfectly righteous grievances into obsessive hatred and division. I do wonder if it's a coincidence that the words "racist" and "rapist" are so similar. Women were incited to hate men; black people were incited to hate whites. White straight males were encouraged to hate themselves, as I said. And before you knew it there was vengeance, resentment, demoralization and conflict everywhere where none need exist. See the fuss being made over a mere flag at the time of writing: This is all part of the dynamite that the cultural Marxists want to use to shatter the walls of society. If you still agree with Jason Wilson and think I'm being "barmy" then consider the words of Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov. Bezmenov was a Soviet agent who once spied on the West but then defected to Canada. He did a series of lectures and interviews in which he describes the psychological warfare Marxists use against their enemies, see: Bezmenov came straight from the USSR itself and never was a member of the Frankfurt School or any of its affiliates, yet what he depicts is the exact same strategy. Here's Richard D Hall talking about this in more detail, see: One of the tactics in destroying the family that Richard understands is the destruction of the father archetype; this can include all masculine archetypes in our lives. Already fathers are seen by many as an unnecessary and even detrimental part of family life. There are outwardly harmless children's TV shows in which fathers as portrayed as unintelligent and deserving of ridicule and contempt, like Peppa Pig. And we've all seen those TV famous adverts for gravy, see: Children are also sexualized at a younger and younger age with more and more explicit sexual themes in media programmes aimed at younger and younger children. Sex education at school begins far earlier nowadays than it used to. Language has been warped by political correctness (a term invented by the Bolsheviks- politishikaya pravelnost). The damage has occurred in ways you might not have noticed. For example you rarely see the words "gentlemen" and "ladies" on public lavatory signs; it's always "men" and "women" as Orwell said about Newspeak, eliminate creative and thoughtful synonyms and use as few words as possible, and only the dullest and most basic ones. Also in tennis when women play, it has always been traditionally called the "ladies" game, but today you'll only ever hear "the women's singles final" etc. There are many other examples, such as the actor Benedict Cummerbatch being forced to issue multiple apologies for merely saying the words "coloured actors", see: Prof. Tim Hunt, one of the country's top scientists and Nobel laureate, made some admittedly ignorant and tactless jokes about female scientists, but he lost his entire career as punishment, even though he apologized. It was as if he had committed blasphemy, and in a way he had, see:

The only part of Jason Wilson's article that is in any way worthy of an analytical reply is where he says: "The whole story is transparently barmy. If humanities faculties are really geared to brainwashing students into accepting the postulates of far left ideology, the composition of western parliaments and presidencies, and the roaring success of corporate capitalism suggest they’re doing an astoundingly bad job. Anyone who takes a cool look at the last three decades of politics will think it bizarre that anyone could interpret what’s happened as the triumph of an all-powerful left." This is the same point made by a Facebook friend, the same one who reminded me about this article. However they both assume that the power structures of the world are geared to further the whims of greedy and selfish apolitical fools who only want material wealth at the expense of others. No; this is a complete misunderstanding of how the world works. Those fools do certainly exist, but they are merely the pawns of those far higher up the chain of command. What Marxists call "the capitalist ruling class" does not rule at all. Corporate dictatorship is a tool being used by the real elite, the Illuminati, to further its ends in one way, but a Corporatocracy is not at the front of the queue nor the end goal. The Illuminati are also behind Marxism and use that as well. The real rulers of this planet are not political partisans; they will use whatever part of any political philosophy that suits them best, both left and right wing. In fact the ultimate model for the New World Order resembles a very extreme form of communism, with a resource-based economy, the abolition of private property etc. What is set out in Agenda 21 and suggested by Bill Gates et al is distinctly anti-capitalist. Far more Pol Pot than Adam Smith. And at a higher level of course cultural Marxism merges with transhumanism and eugenics, see: This is why we have to resist cultural Marxism, and make it clear why we're doing so. It is definitely an issue of social justice and human rights, but deep down it goes much further than that. Here's a radio show I recommend by Tom Barnes and Andy Young on Enemy Within Radio, see:


Anonymous said...

Great article Ben, thanks for your research.

Oh yes - cultural Marxism is a very real movement, infact, it is the theological basis for the 'best bits' of Fascism, Communism and 'Communitarianism'etc, it (The vanguards of the world order) procured from it's so called 'enemies'over the past centuries. One must have the wisdom to realize that our intrinsic nature is that of clarity, wisdom and potential. I always harp on about consciousness being ambivilant because it simply is, it is only our Anxietys, fears, doubts and conditionings that hinder us from freeing consciousness from agendas such as this and indeed our inverted Ego's.

That any 'medicine' be it theological OR SPIRITUAL to alleviate social ills must be illusory/temporary to treat what is intrinsically an equally illusory disease, but what these ideologies all have in common is that they condition you in such away that we are bound to the very 'Medicine' they prescribe and hence we are tied and bound again, just in a more subtle way. The same process is used in the actual treatment of physical disease which as an industry wants to keep us 'ill' so it can continually provide it's 'services' to us.

Cheers Ben, catch you soon . . . . .

Ben Emlyn-Jones said...

You're welcome. Thanks for the comment. All matter come down to the spiritual in the end. I've started reading more CS Lewis on your recommendation. Thanks, it was a hot tip!

Laurence said...

Good piece. It is always good to recalibrate the mind with truth. (As an aside - would it be possible to have black lettering on a white background?)

There are a number of journalists (albeit pushed to the fringes of the mainstream) in Ireland who write on the topic of cultural Marxism, as it relates to Ireland. See the following:
There is, as well, a truth movement within Catholicism, which has it's own monthly paper, including a strong emphasis on anti-truth media. The relentless dismantling of all that made Ireland an independent and remarkably happy nation is thanks in no small part to the cultural Marxists. The state broadcaster RTÉ (the Irish BBC) and the Irish Times newspaper (controlled by a mysterious trust) being the main offenders.
The cultural Marxists have been very successful in a short space of time, most notably the recent referendum on 'equal marriage', which was not as it said on the tin, rather the rewriting of the part of the Constitution defining the family (Article 41). This Constitutional change, unthinkable even a decade ago, was supported by all political parties, industry, all media and so-called 'celebrities', without exception, all funded by US billionaires, an extraordinary example of Orwell's, "groupthink".