Comments by "Edward Bernayse666" (@edwardbernayse6665) on "True History Of "Cultural Marxism"" video.

a better and more accurate albeit still a little vague would be "judeo-christian based culture."
2
it's not supposed to be that way. there should be a way of addressing the problems of getting overly PC without being accused of being a racist or a sexist.
2
as a matter of fact, assuming that a person is racist who sees and addresses problems with overly PCing everything is one of the problems with it right there. it becomes a codeword to shut down any real criticism or dialogue to address the problems.
2
@marco morelos was alan touring a jew?
2
cultural marxism does exist. it's just not anything that marx himself directly wrote much about or even coined the term. some people long after his death played with some of his ideas and came up with a model based mostly on their interpretation of what marx wrote albeit loosely. it was supposed to be a way to socially engineer everybody to not see society/culture or other people in a hierarchical way. there are many problems with it because it conflicts with how humans brains naturally work and have evolved to be and to counter this, more manipulative means were utilized. this is how the term cultural marxism came about. the ones trying to socially engineer society might not have used the term to describe themselves and it might have come from other people but still the term fits the description of them.
2
@the phantom thieves of hearts cultural marxism is an attempt to try to get people to quit seeing each other and society in any hierarchical way. they want everybody to see each other as equals where one person isn't any better than anybody else. i think there are flaws philosophically because it seems to contrast with human nature and when that happens, the social engineers become more manipulative and either group think sets into the individual or even the ability to critically think at all gradually dissipates in the individual. that's my problem with it. i'm fine with multi-culturalism and seeing the laws of the land be fair to everybody and fairly enforced without one group being targeted more so than others. multi-culturalism is what built america and was never a destructive force. i wish racists and xenophobes hadn't hijacked the conversation on multi-culturalism and equated it with cultural marxism. you can believe in multi-culturalism and still be critical of cultural marxism.
2
i think that he is trying to separate his and many other progressives that he knows ideas from the idea of cultural marxism. the logic that he uses is that since he and many others with similar views didn't arrive to holding their views by studying the frankfurt school or marx for their ideas therefore the idea of cultural marxism doesn't exist and bringing it up is pointless to a progressive. his logic is flawed on this one but........
1
cultural marxism is an attempt to try to socially engineer people to not see each other or society in a hierarchical way. the theory is that if people quit seeing each other that way then racism, sexism, homophobia, etc will end which in theory it really would. the problems arise because the idea contrasts with human nature and human nature is a hard thing to try to contain and control. it's especially hard when social engineers try to use manipulation tactics on people who aren't falling in line with the ideas and these people can see that manipulation tactics are being used to try to control what they think and feel. it's a nice goal but the theory is flawed psychologically and something better to combat prejudice needs to be implemented.
1
cultural marxism seems to be about trying to get people to see each other and society from a non-hierarchical structure. i think it might contrast with human nature therefore make it difficult for social engineers. in order to attempt to get people to not see things in a hierarchical way, manipulation tactics end up being utilized because human nature is a tough thing to control and contain. really a civilized society is a difficult thing to bring about and whether it's cultural marxism, randian libertarianism or christian theocracy that people want to see happen, it goes against people's human natures.
1
where do you live? if you are from the american continent and you aren't part of a native tribe than you don't belong here either and your ancestors would be just as guilty of destroying the local indigenous population too.
1
@proud californian they weren't countries. they were tribes for the most part who often times fought each other and the bigger tribes would pick on the smaller ones and think that they were superior to them. the only civilizations comparable to european civilization were the aztecs, incas, olmecs, etc and they ruled over the neighboring tribes sometimes ruthlessly. what destabilized them was plagues and diseases that they hadn't built up a natural immunity to.
1
@marco morelos the reason why white people in amercia dominated is because their were many millions of white people and only a few thousand native americans per tribe. if you added all of the native americans up that would be considered within the borders of the usa, there would've still been 10 or 20 times more white people.
1