3 ms·

Meanwhile in the real world we now have 4 year olds reading this evil product of Cultural Marxism. Just one small example. Many states have legislated against

by xcv123 3y ago

Meanwhile in the real world we now have 4 year olds reading this evil product of Cultural Marxism. Just one small example. Many states have legislated against it because it is becoming an actual problem for society. https://x.com/ada_akpala/status/1680152633737093120?s=20 https://x.com/ada_akpala/status/1680152633737093120?s=20

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
that's the same nonsense you posted earlier, so here is the same response to it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38320042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38320042 p.s. you sure seem to say marxism a lot, are you sure you know what it means? You haven't actually articulated any specific complaints about it, other than you don't like it because it criticizes systemic racism or something? Or that it seeks change? That'd be good if true, not bad, obviously. For example, here's a quote from you: > "And it goes on to a list a bunch of Cultural Marxist bullshit. It is basically Neo-Marxism. Indoctrination into their twisted belief system and political revolutionary ideology. "Critical" as in rejecting and overthrowing the established order of things to make way for their bullshit utopian vision of society." rephrased without fox news scare jargon: > It teaches people about the world so they can make it better So scary! So horrible!! :)
- xcv123 3y ago
  > p.s. you sure seem to say marxism a lot, Marx is referenced constantly throughout all university curriculum on Critical Theory. He is a foundational thinker in the field. I quoted one example in one of the above comments in this thread you are replying to, which you obviously did not read. Try actually reading something before replying. https://crittheory.ucdavis.edu https://crittheory.ucdavis.edu To insist that Marx and his revolutionary ideology has nothing to do with Critical Theory makes you look incredibly stupid and ignorant here, especially to students and lecturers of CT.
  - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
    You actually never responded to the very first sentence, so here's a link to that post again: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38320042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38320042 In your flagged response to the above post, you admit to lying to make your point (incidentally, if your claims were true, you wouldn't need to lie), then you attacked me for pointing out you lied, then you insulted autistic people, then you attacked me again. Are you sure you're on the right site? Maybe gab or truth social would make you feel at home? Either way, keep it classy, the rest of us will keep making the world better regardless of your crazy conspiracy theories copied from random hard right conspiracy theorists' tweets, or gabs, or whatever.
orwin 3y ago
I don't see anything from critical theory there: the first sentence maybe? As it is an idea's genealogy (is it true BTW? Is the origin of racism the 16th/17th century? But even if it is, this is like 10% of the work, the idea behind the genealogy is finding the origin of idea, it's sisters and cousins.). This in fact is typically something that is interesting to critisize: where do those ideas come from? Who wrote this? From which country? Who is addressed by it? And that's what I mean when I say CT is mostly useless (when it's not used on historical disciplines): even with responses to those questions, what can we do about it? It's useless. I don't know what cultural Marxism is? Are you talking about historical materialism?
- xcv123 3y ago
  > I don't see anything from critical theory there This is how it ends up with Critical Race Theory being force fed into people that end up writing these Children's books. This is how it is in practise in the real world. > I don't know what cultural Marxism is? Critical Theory IS Cultural Marxism, at least part of it. The academics in this field are openly and proudly Marxist. It is a Marxist field of study.
  - orwin 3y ago
    OK, I don't think it is, but I obviously won't research who the author of this book is (I highly doubt she/he is a CT academic, as those are pretty rare anyway outside of Germany), so I guess the conclusion is that when you take a sightly complex theory outside of academia, it becomes a huge mess because people are too dumb to read by themselves (That makes CT a bit like particle physics, which, yeah, fair, you might be right). So I checked, Cultural Marxism is the modern version of Cultural Bolchevism (those idiots couldn't even really create a new name, not really surprising tbh). It's allegedly supported by those pesky 'communist jews' and you might want to read around that and learn about who you learned that word combination from, before any further reading (I'll still advise you to read Baudrillard, but I fear it might only be interesting to standard conservatives). I'm sadly not interested in reading Evola, but I know a bit about Gentile through a postfascist friend, and unless you read as much as he does, I want to advise you on that: neo-fascism/neocon is mostly whiny paranoia. One reason I did like the intersectionnal movement is its whininess, but god at least they don't whine as much as neofascists. Their 'thinkers' don't have any new idea since the late 60s, through Evola (and since the 30s if you want ideas that aren't just dumb), and their big 'new' idea from Renaud Camus was born in 1906, and is basically protofascism, before it integrated Nietzsch's philosophy and collectivism through the military. The Cultural Marxism seems to be the exact parallel to Cultural Bolchevism in Germany, so I guess they did read a little? Gosh I can't believe I didn't made the link the first time :/. But yeah, you should check that.

by xcv123 3y ago

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago

that's the same nonsense you posted earlier, so here is the same response to it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38320042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38320042 p.s. you sure seem to say marxism a lot, are you sure you know what it means? You haven't actually articulated any specific complaints about it, other than you don't like it because it criticizes systemic racism or something? Or that it seeks change? That'd be good if true, not bad, obviously. For example, here's a quote from you: > "And it goes on to a list a bunch of Cultural Marxist bullshit. It is basically Neo-Marxism. Indoctrination into their twisted belief system and political revolutionary ideology. "Critical" as in rejecting and overthrowing the established order of things to make way for their bullshit utopian vision of society." rephrased without fox news scare jargon: > It teaches people about the world so they can make it better So scary! So horrible!! :)

xcv123 3y ago
> p.s. you sure seem to say marxism a lot, Marx is referenced constantly throughout all university curriculum on Critical Theory. He is a foundational thinker in the field. I quoted one example in one of the above comments in this thread you are replying to, which you obviously did not read. Try actually reading something before replying. https://crittheory.ucdavis.edu https://crittheory.ucdavis.edu To insist that Marx and his revolutionary ideology has nothing to do with Critical Theory makes you look incredibly stupid and ignorant here, especially to students and lecturers of CT.
- ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
  You actually never responded to the very first sentence, so here's a link to that post again: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38320042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38320042 In your flagged response to the above post, you admit to lying to make your point (incidentally, if your claims were true, you wouldn't need to lie), then you attacked me for pointing out you lied, then you insulted autistic people, then you attacked me again. Are you sure you're on the right site? Maybe gab or truth social would make you feel at home? Either way, keep it classy, the rest of us will keep making the world better regardless of your crazy conspiracy theories copied from random hard right conspiracy theorists' tweets, or gabs, or whatever.

orwin 3y ago

I don't see anything from critical theory there: the first sentence maybe? As it is an idea's genealogy (is it true BTW? Is the origin of racism the 16th/17th century? But even if it is, this is like 10% of the work, the idea behind the genealogy is finding the origin of idea, it's sisters and cousins.). This in fact is typically something that is interesting to critisize: where do those ideas come from? Who wrote this? From which country? Who is addressed by it? And that's what I mean when I say CT is mostly useless (when it's not used on historical disciplines): even with responses to those questions, what can we do about it? It's useless. I don't know what cultural Marxism is? Are you talking about historical materialism?

xcv123 3y ago
> I don't see anything from critical theory there This is how it ends up with Critical Race Theory being force fed into people that end up writing these Children's books. This is how it is in practise in the real world. > I don't know what cultural Marxism is? Critical Theory IS Cultural Marxism, at least part of it. The academics in this field are openly and proudly Marxist. It is a Marxist field of study.
- orwin 3y ago
  OK, I don't think it is, but I obviously won't research who the author of this book is (I highly doubt she/he is a CT academic, as those are pretty rare anyway outside of Germany), so I guess the conclusion is that when you take a sightly complex theory outside of academia, it becomes a huge mess because people are too dumb to read by themselves (That makes CT a bit like particle physics, which, yeah, fair, you might be right). So I checked, Cultural Marxism is the modern version of Cultural Bolchevism (those idiots couldn't even really create a new name, not really surprising tbh). It's allegedly supported by those pesky 'communist jews' and you might want to read around that and learn about who you learned that word combination from, before any further reading (I'll still advise you to read Baudrillard, but I fear it might only be interesting to standard conservatives). I'm sadly not interested in reading Evola, but I know a bit about Gentile through a postfascist friend, and unless you read as much as he does, I want to advise you on that: neo-fascism/neocon is mostly whiny paranoia. One reason I did like the intersectionnal movement is its whininess, but god at least they don't whine as much as neofascists. Their 'thinkers' don't have any new idea since the late 60s, through Evola (and since the 30s if you want ideas that aren't just dumb), and their big 'new' idea from Renaud Camus was born in 1906, and is basically protofascism, before it integrated Nietzsch's philosophy and collectivism through the military. The Cultural Marxism seems to be the exact parallel to Cultural Bolchevism in Germany, so I guess they did read a little? Gosh I can't believe I didn't made the link the first time :/. But yeah, you should check that.