There was a protest in Australia last week regarding climate change https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-15/students-walk-out-of-class-to-protest-climate-change/10901978 Children across the country ditched classes at school to demand we turn from using fossil-based energy to renewable forms of energy such as solar and wind as a replacement. In a sense seeking out forms of energy that can be sourced and are not labour intensive or expensive to extract from the ground is not a bad idea. It means much less pollution and it could drastically reduce our carbon footprint.
So anyway, tens of thousands of students valiantly marched on our state Parliaments across the country to demand we shut down the coal mines and other mineral and fossil-based resources. The reason is that these things cause climate change… well, actually there are sceptics that would disagree who argue that climate change is not anthropogenic https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anthropogenic I have placed a link here where you can view those who are for and against climate change being man-made because that is not the issue I want to discuss. https://thebestschools.org/features/top-climate-change-scientists/
If it was simply a discussion of the science of climate change I admit I am not qualified to write on that issue. I can say I am a sceptic of climate change but that is a discussion for another time.
My primary reason for this blog entry is to discuss the effects one of the primary premises underlying what is called the Liberal left that seems to dominate culture at almost every level of society today it is called Cultural Marxism. For me to conduct this discussion it will be necessary for me to reference a lot of subjects that are affected by this ideology. For me to keep focused on the object of this blog I am not able to give detailed definitions so if you are interested in any further inquiry I have hyperlinked those subjects related to this discussion for brevities sake.
Cultural Marxism ideology underpins many of the advocacy groups who promote equality, gender neutrality, antidiscrimination, tolerance, abortion and just about every minority group you can imagine.
However, it opposes conservative religious groups with a special focus on traditional Evangelical Christianity. It wants to dismantle, change, or eliminate the traditional meaning of marriage and the family unite made up of a mother and father. Lastly, but not finally by any means, it seeks conformity to itself at every level of society through political correctness which is simply another word for totalitarianism https://www.britannica.com/topic/totalitarianism not just politically but culturally.
Cultural Marxism is not simply a philosophy it is an ideology whose premise undermines the very meaning of truth that our society was founded upon. I referred to this ideology earlier as wanting to infiltrate every level of culture and society so that if it succeeds our world will be completely unrecognisable within a generation from now. As it is, society is almost unrecognisable now, from 25 years ago.
This ideology began as a political movement over 100 years ago being the brainchild of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels called Marxist theory. http://www.repozytorium.uni.wroc.pl/Content/40318/002.pdf
Marx did not create communism the phrase was first coined by Victor d’Hupay in 1777 please see History of communism for a more complete explanation as communism this is not the focus of this discussion either. My point here is that Marx and Engel developed their theory of communism to take in social, political and economic factors Ibid.
Communism, broadly speaking caused a cultural/political revolution in Russia, China, Cuba and various other places over a period of 50 years. By the late 1960’s it was clear that nearly all forms of communism were catastrophic failures. Still, those who believed in its veracity, though it was dead, like Russia, turned a blind eye to the stinking corpse in the room and carried on until the late 1980s. More recently China began to turn away from its tyranny for a while although there is another rise in nationalism emerging there.
The Marxist theory evolved between 1918 and 1993 at a University in Frankfurt, Germany that developed some of the theories mentioned below, while infiltrating others. This school was associated with Institute for Social Research at Goethe University Frankfurt called The Frankfurt School. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School The Frankfurt School did not believe social theory was adequate to explain political factionalism or reactionary politics.
In the west, Marxism was already a dirty word so unless one was part of the exclusive elite that still supported it; they called it by another name which is the postmodernism worldview, Postmodernism is the camouflage Cultural Marxists use to misdirect one away from the fact that they are in fact Cultural Marxists. Cultural Marxism, under its pseudonym, Postmodernism, was the ideology that underpinned the leftists push to enlist the intellectual elite. From there it was introduced into Universities and colleges around the world through critical theory, social theory, sociology, psychoanalysis and philosophy. Besides these subjects, Cultural Marxism has infected a plethora of other subjects including Economics social work, media and journalism. Here is an example of the left targeting the right in media https://www.perthnow.com.au/politics/one-nation/pauline-hanson-clashes-with-david-koch-over-anti-muslim-rhetoric-ng-b881138713z
Some might say the interviewer David Koch was justified in his attack on Senator Pauline Hanson but then there is the history and context of Pauline Hanson’s previous statements. Hanson has always pointed out that Muslim extremist is the problem, not moderates. The history of Miss Hanson’s statements in context regard the threat of terrorism by extremists, not moderates. In fact, Muslim extremists murder more Muslims in their own countries than anyone else; that should tell you something.
My point is that the interviewer, David Koch, built a straw man by taking Miss Hanson out of context to make it look like she endorsed the actions of the white extremists that murdered 50 or more Muslims in a Mosque in Christchurch New Zealand on March 15, 2019. Why? Because Miss Hanson is a conservative and the media in Australia is filled to the brim with left wingers.
So now we come back to how Cultural Marxism has infiltrated just about every facet of our lives. This is social engineering par excellence. The premise of Cultural Marxism extends from Marxist theory. On the one side you have the Bourgeoisie who own the wealth and the means of production and on the other side, you have the proletariat who are the means of production.
Cultural Marxism changes this so that the Bourgeoisie are the conservative right that oppresses social minorities especially if they are LBGTQ who for all intentions and purposes represent the proletariat. I am not trying to target any specific group, this is but one of the more prominent examples where the church may take a stand against a lifestyle that they believe is not in line with God’s created order; so although the church may speak out against the lifestyle they are not targeting or singling out specific individuals.
However, the left is pushing for children as young as 5 to be taught that alternative lifestyles are normal and that gender is fluid meaning if a boy feels like he is a girl then he is a girl. The problem is that it is not uncommon for children to be a little confused about their own gender. Younger children generally don’t really understand the difference between male and female until they reach their late preteens and into puberty; puberty is no better off as young people begin to discover their sexuality and begin to make choices. Cultural Marxism under the guise of gender studies now says that we aren’t born male or female we choose our gender as we get older.
Here is a scenario you may be familiar with: A young boy is seen by his teacher or another person in authority playing with a doll. It is suggested to the boy and his parents that the boy might be showing traits of transgenderism and should be allowed to explore the possibility that he is actually a girl. I find it curious that a child of 5 or 6 or even 10 can choose their gender but are not at an age where they can make an informed decision or give informed consent about much else in their short lives.
Now I want to return to the thousands of students protesting climate change here in Australia. Putting aside the debate on climate change, one needs to ascertain what percentage of the 10000 or more students who ditched school to protest did so to protest, and what percentage ditched school simply to get out of school? That isn’t really my point but I am curious as to how many really understood the issues both for and against climate change.
What I do want to highlight is whether or not our education system is giving both sides of the argument to your children. I believe the answer is no because even during my graduate studies where postgraduates are seemingly treated like adults with critical faculties they are forced to submit to the status quo, or be failed.
If one doesn’t give certain lecturers the answers they want or you don’t use the referencing system your tutor prefers, even though that is the one, your college or University uses, they fail you either on the overall subject or for your essays; yes! This happened to me both because I presented a view my tutor didn’t like or agree with and I used the Harvard reference system, not the Oxford system of referencing that they were familiar with.
At the end of that course, the tutor in question rang me personally and asked me to resubmit my work again and change both my opinion and reference style, to which I said no. When they asked why I told them that I correctly used the standard reference style required by the school. I then told them they had no right to fail me for presenting an opinion that differed from theirs which was more than adequately supported with evidence. The whole point of University education is learning to use one’s critical faculties, or at least that used to be the case. I presented a conservative point of view and criticised the then current practice; my view was conservative right the tutors was left.
My point once more is that Cultural Marxist’s don’t want you, me, or any of its proponents to critically engage the issues they support, Cultural Marxists don’t want students or anyone else to compare and contrast ideas or enter into rational discussion or debate. In the same way, any media outlet that is owned or dominated by Cultural Marxism will support any movement or ideal that is progressive in the sense that it keeps pushing the boundaries of normalcy and common sense.
The Cultural Marxist’s shut down any attempts to engage in dialogue or debate and build straw men (fallacious counter-arguments) that are designed to engage one’s emotions, not calm discussion. They do this by using the exact tactics that David Koch used in his interview with Pauline Hanson. David Koch resorted to name calling and caricaturing Senator Hanson while at the same time charging the emotions to the point where everyone cries injustice or crucify her. What you did not see in the clip provided is Senator Derryn Hinch join David Koch in dressing Miss Hanson down.
Finally, we come back to 10000 children marching on our parliaments to protest for climate change. I can guarantee that any of the students who even have a minimal understanding of the science or issues involved in climate change are only getting one side of the story. Once more that is the agenda of Cultural Marxism to bias thinking one way, their way.
The left accuses the right variously of having white privilege, backward, old fashioned Christian dominated views. Anyone familiar with George Orwell’s work 1984 that doesn’t see the same identical pattern emerging today in society hasn’t taken notice of Orwell’s almost prophetic warning. All I can say is that at least the right is self-regulative. If a group goes too far right we call them to account or disassociate from them just like we have with both white extremists that committed the atrocities in Christchurch and the Muslim extremist in every part of the world.
The left, it seems, has no inclination whatsoever to place boundaries on themselves. Once more all one needs to do is a survey of all types of media, education curriculum, bible colleges and literature… nothing is sacred to the Cultural Marxist. Not even the proponents of Cultural Marxism are safe from being thrown under the bus by their own ilk as was the case recently with Martina Navratilova who stated that transgender women should not compete in women’s sport https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/martina-navratilova-transgender/comment-page-1/
Cultural Marxism is a pervasive doctrine that essentially is the underlying premise by which the left has used to undercut everything that has meaning or truth attached to it. Cultural Marxism preaches tolerance and equality, however, tolerance and equality are limited to only those things it supports and promotes. Cultural Marxism and all its subsidiaries are intolerant to anything that implies conservative or objective morality. Cultural Marxism defines its own morality as being kind loving and doing no harm and yet it endorses abortion, genital mutilation by way of transgenderism, assisted suicide, body dysmorphic amputations, persecution of conservative Christian and other religious groups. Its agenda is very one-sided and will not engage in rational discussion because it can’t, Cultural Marxism does not and cannot deal with facts.
If you would like to investigate Cultural Marxism and other related subjects further please follow the links provided https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8rkxLBCn80&index=36&list=WL