10 ms·

> For all their flaws, Wikipedia is one of the few web information sources that are globally accepted as more or less correct. Only for things that aren’t poli

> For all their flaws, Wikipedia is one of the few web information sources that are globally accepted as more or less correct. Only for things that aren’t politically fraught enough for one person, anywhere on the internet to decide to camp on the article. Look at what you get if you look up “Cultural Marxism”. It redirects to the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory article, with the subheading “Cultural Marxism Conspiracy Theory”. This when there was an excellent article on the academic movement of that name. Very introductory reddit thread on the history of the academic movement https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/8q8p6n/culture_war_roundup_for_june_11/e0hqa2m/ https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/8q8p6n/cult... Cultural Marxism and Political Sociology https://www.amazon.com/Cultural-Marxism-Political-Sociology-Research/dp/0803916450 https://www.amazon.com/Cultural-Marxism-Political-Sociology-... Talk page for the Cultural Marxism Wikipedia article, which now redirects to Frankfurt School Conspiracy Theory https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cultural_Marxism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cultural_Marxism

cooper12 8y ago
The cultural marxism article being deleted was far from the result of "one person". There was a deletion discussion [0] with input from multiple users, as well as a deletion review. [1] In fact, the discussion was closed by three independent and uninvolved admins. Additionally, the contents of the article were merged, so it's not as if any mention of the topic fell off the face of the earth. You should familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's notability guidelines for standalone [2] and what they entail, as well as the criteria for reliable sources. [3] Lastly, the Wikipedia article explains quite clearly that the so-called "academic movement" you're advocating is a term that was later co-opted by conspiracy theorists. Wikipedia is not for fringe theories. [4] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cultural_Marxism_(2nd_nomination) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletio... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2018_September_6#Cultural_Marxism_(2nd_nomination) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable... [4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories
realusername 8y ago
That's because Cultural Marxism isn't part of any serious scientific publication, it's just a non-sense term used by some far right members.
- barry-cotter 8y ago
  As you might have noticed if you had clicked on either the reddit thread or the amazon link that’s not so. Cultural Marxism and Political Sociology was published in 1981. It’s been cited 40 times. That’s not a seminal work but it’s not marginal either. Cultural Marxism was a self-description before it was ever used as a slur. Product Description A thorough examination and analysis of the tensions between political sociology and the culturally oriented Marxism that emerged in the 60s and 70s is presented in this volume. In order to create a strikingly original synthesis, Weiner considers the work of theorists as diverse as Jurgen Habermas, Claus Offe, Alain Touraine, Anthony Giddens and Alvin Gouldner, many of whom fall ideologically outside the cultural Marxism movement. Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture has the following review https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Marxism+and+the+interpretation+of+culture&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&p=&u=%23p%3DmSVf4rJ_pMQJ https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Marx... ... If this collection is long and complicated, that is because Marxist theory has a long and complicated history: no simple summary or static model will suffice for a genuinely dialectical theory, one that works with the essential concepts of contradiction between the emergent and the persistent, mediation, and overdetermination. ...

cooper12 8y ago

The cultural marxism article being deleted was far from the result of "one person". There was a deletion discussion [0] with input from multiple users, as well as a deletion review. [1] In fact, the discussion was closed by three independent and uninvolved admins. Additionally, the contents of the article were merged, so it's not as if any mention of the topic fell off the face of the earth. You should familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's notability guidelines for standalone [2] and what they entail, as well as the criteria for reliable sources. [3] Lastly, the Wikipedia article explains quite clearly that the so-called "academic movement" you're advocating is a term that was later co-opted by conspiracy theorists. Wikipedia is not for fringe theories. [4] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cultural_Marxism_(2nd_nomination) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletio... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2018_September_6#Cultural_Marxism_(2nd_nomination) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable... [4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories

realusername 8y ago

That's because Cultural Marxism isn't part of any serious scientific publication, it's just a non-sense term used by some far right members.

barry-cotter 8y ago
As you might have noticed if you had clicked on either the reddit thread or the amazon link that’s not so. Cultural Marxism and Political Sociology was published in 1981. It’s been cited 40 times. That’s not a seminal work but it’s not marginal either. Cultural Marxism was a self-description before it was ever used as a slur. Product Description A thorough examination and analysis of the tensions between political sociology and the culturally oriented Marxism that emerged in the 60s and 70s is presented in this volume. In order to create a strikingly original synthesis, Weiner considers the work of theorists as diverse as Jurgen Habermas, Claus Offe, Alain Touraine, Anthony Giddens and Alvin Gouldner, many of whom fall ideologically outside the cultural Marxism movement. Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture has the following review https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Marxism+and+the+interpretation+of+culture&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&p=&u=%23p%3DmSVf4rJ_pMQJ https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Marx... ... If this collection is long and complicated, that is because Marxist theory has a long and complicated history: no simple summary or static model will suffice for a genuinely dialectical theory, one that works with the essential concepts of contradiction between the emergent and the persistent, mediation, and overdetermination. ...