- Re: Easy targets, especilly that Peterson clown Archived Message
Posted by Ken Waldron
on April 22, 2019, 11:17 pm, in reply to "Re: Easy targets, especilly that Peterson clown"
|
Where are all these "communist subversives"? You talk as though there was some element of threat to the established order from the aforementioned, as though they had some kind of power but avowed Marxists seem as rare to me as the proverbial hen's teeth. I certainly wouldn't claim to be a Marxist: I've not read enough Marx to be frank but even if I had, as Charlie Chaplin is said to have put it: "You don't have to be a Marxist to read Karl Marx." Why is it you get so caught up in this whole belief system of labels and supposed provenances of the things you feel obligated to dislike? Take identity politics for example: I reckon you could see the origins of this so-called "Cultural Marxism" in the anarchist-feminist Emma Goldman who had a lot of US middle class followers and her arch critic the black anarchist Lucy Parsons, who, with a more working class following, criticised Goldman for promoting identity issues and neglecting the main point: that this was really about class and economics: not race nor sexual identity. Of course all this was on the go in the US before those notorious foreigners the "Frankfurt school" got off the boat with their apparent heinous new plan for Marxist world domination by stealth. In effect the discussion was already in place and lively long before the supposedly underhand lefty foreign sneaks actually arrived to subvert the nation... but I reckon it was one really between supporters of change essentially from different classes: I think it still is. Strangely enough we "dupes for such guardians of ideology" on Lifeboat would probably as a whole tend to agree that Parsons in fact was right to point out the dangers of such an approach as Goldman took, but hey, we need our neat label and box too...right? Life is messy Turtleman: the origins and provenance of ideas are often even more messy. The "Sneaky "Cultural Marxist Conspiracy"is bogus because its too neat to be true, and because none of its espousers has paid the least attention to what was going on long before. |