Enthralled by Cultural Marxism
Antimulticulture
Four Horsemen of The Frankfort School
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/society/cultural_marxism.htm
Chuck Morse
January 2002
In his new book The Death of the West, Patrick J. Buchanan examines
the origin of what he contends is the modern decline of America. He
asserts that while Soviet style Marxism is largely dead, our society
remains enthralled by Cultural Marxism, which is strangling our
freedom, and threatening our future. This threat to our culture and
way of life accelerated to a deadly speed with the establishment, in
1933 at Columbia University, of the Institute for Social Research,
originally called "The Institute for Marxism." This institution
became known as the Frankfort School.
The destructive nature of the Frankfort school, founded in New York
after it 's theoreticians fled there from Frankfort, Germany when
Hitler came to power, is obvious from even a cursory examination of
its primary texts. The four horsemen of the school were music critic
Theodor Adorno, psychologist Erich Fromm, sociologist Wilhelm Reich
and professor Herbert Marcuse. Their ideas, echoing through the halls
of academia and from the ink stained hands of writers and
journalists, would lead to, as Buchanan calls it, the establishment
of today's politically correct catechism.
The original strategy to destroy America, employed by the Frankfort
School, came from Italian Communist Antonio Gramsci who realized that
in order to achieve a Socialist victory, cultural institutions would
have to be infiltrated and subverted. Gramsci realized that America,
steeped in traditions of freedom and liberty, would never to succumb
to a frontal assault and its workers were too busy accumulating
capital to allow themselves to be used as cannon fodder for a bloody
revolution.
The Frankfort School would patent the familiar "Critical Theory"
which was accurately defined by a student as the "essentially
destructive criticism of all the main elements of Western culture,
including Christianity, capitalism, authority, the family,
patriarchy, hierarchy, morality, tradition, sexual restraint,
loyalty, patriotism, nationalism, heredity, ethnocentrism,
convention, and conservatism." Under Critical Theory, anything
emanating from the west is to be libeled and attacked over and over
again while at the same time, anything emerging from a "progressive"
country or group is to be applauded including the murder of over 100
million people. All blame for societal and economic ills are to be
shifted to the west.
The saturating drumbeat of Critical Theory would lead to "Cultural
Pessimism" which is when a person grows to loathe the society, which
nurtured him and provided him unprecedented levels of success. This
describes the attitude of so many leftists living in comfort and
safety yet viewing America, the society that made their lifestyle
possible, with hatred and contempt. I am amazed by the degree in
which both Critical Theory and Cultural Pessimism has been
internalized by all of us.
Erich Fromm's "Escape from Freedom" and Wilhelm Reich's "The Mass
Psychology of Fascism" and "The Sexual Revolution" are central texts
of Critical Theory according to Buchanan, who also calls "The
Authoritarian Personality" by Theodor Adorno the "altarpiece of the
Frankfurt School." Adorno's thesis is that anyone imbued with middle
class, conservative, or Christian values is a racist and a fascist.
Charles Sykes, senior fellow at the Wisconsin Policy Research Center,
says Adorno's book is "an uncompromising indictment of bourgeois
civilization, with the twist that what was considered merely old-
fashioned by previous critics was now declared both fascistic and
psychologically warped." This libelous indictment of the American
people is comparable to Hitler's equally libelous indictment of the
Jews of Europe.
The Frankfurt School introduced the idea of psychological
conditioning as a means of changing the culture to fit their image.
This would largely replace the traditional American approach to
learning which was rational philosophical argument. Buchanan calls
this the root of the "therapeutic state" where "sin is redefined as
sickness, crime becomes anti-social behavior, and the psychiatrist
replaces the priest." To Adorno and his comrades, all Americans who
refused to conform to the new morality were viewed as mentally ill
and in need of treatment. The Soviet Union offers a clear example of
this philosophy in action with it's millions sent to gulags
for "mental" maladies such as "anti-social" attitudes.
The forth horseman, Brandeis professor Herbert Marcuse, was the pied
piper of the sixties as he fostered the development of, as Buchanan
points out, "radical youth, feminists, black militants, homosexuals,
the alienated, the asocial, Third World revolutionaries, all the
angry voices of the persecuted 'victims' of the West." In "Eros and
Civilization" Marcuse encouraged sex and drugs and
introduced "polymorphous perversity" where all moral and cultural
order is rejected. Marcuse coined the slogan "Make love not war" and
was a cult figure on College campuses. His book "One Dimensional Man"
advocates educational dictatorship. He calls for "Repressive
Tolerance" which means "intolerance against movements from the right,
and toleration of movements from the left." When the left speaks of
tolerance, this is what they mean.
The Frankfurt School would mainstream the dicktat of the Moscow
Central Committee laid down in 1943. This declaration, right from the
horse's mouth, illustrates exactly what were up against:
"Members and front organizations must continually embarrass,
discredit and degrade our critics. When obstructionists become too
irritating, label them as fascist, or Nazi or anti-Semitic.The
association will, after enough repetition, become 'fact' in the
public mind."
--
Jim
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Western_Nationalist
Unite Against Multiculty
"Abolish Multiculty and String Up The Traitors!"
fyf...@gmail.com
emanating from the west is to be libeled and attacked over and over
again while at the same time, anything emerging from a "progressive"
country or group is to be applauded including the murder of over 100
million people. All blame for societal and economic ills are to be
shifted to the west. "
Stop your critical nonsense! Critical theory does not say any of what
you have said.
burrah
<fyf...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1138627086.4...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
You think not FP.
Sorry to disillusion you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory
>
Stan Pierce
Francis, it doesn't *have* to be critical of the West, it so happens that the
people who study the Critical Method are anti Western to begin with and use the
technique to justify attitudes. It's all Marxist interpretation of
everything...anti-Christian.
Tempest
"Antimulticulture" <Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:43ddf407$0$32649$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Enthralled by Cultural Marxism
Those who do not read and obey the Holy Bible have no culture. Only those
obedient to God and Jesus will survive the coming apocalypse.
fyf...@gmail.com
Method' are a bunch of 'flowery' people who have absolutely NO clue of
what Marxism has to say in this regard. They abandoned the old but have
nothing new to hold onto. Thus they operate 'in the name' of Marx but
not really understand Marxist ideas. Marxism is an ideology describing
economic history and how it is related to the "development of economic
forces". THAT IS ALL! It does not have anything to say in the area of
"applauding including the murder of over 100 million people". Looking
back, it was his semi-educated disciple Heagel who finally attempted to
put some substance in Marxist writing or tried to make it 'operative'.
Marx was not such a naive guy, but I think that guy named
ANTIMULTICULTURE is. The latter is naive enough to have attributed
every piece of leftist extremism and extreme acts to what Marxism has
to offer!
Ever since Marxism came into birth, various political leaders in the
world have used this theory to justify all sorts of acts that are done
to their interests. Mao and Stalin, for example, nationalized all the
land and factories and even private properties of the masses and did so
IN THE NAME OF MARXISM. Karl Marx would have risen up from grave to
give each of them a kick in the ass if he could have been able to do
so.
On the other hand of the spectrum, all sorts of extreme rightists are
operating IN THE NAME OF ANTI-MARXISM against immigration, non-white,
muslims, ethnic food,,,,,,
No..NO...NO! Marxism has NOTHING to do with what the extremist
leftists or rightists or floweries are doing/saying. But then again,
the Marxist theory taught in Affirmative Programs may be interpreted
differently from where I learned it...a Marxist expert at the Uni of
California at Berkely, Dr. A. James Gregor. By the way, this professor
is an Italian. For whatever only-God-knows-what reason, he was not
proud of his Italian name but had to hide behind an Anglo name. Lately
on, he divorced his Anglo wife and was kidnapped away by a dragon
Chinaman's daughter from Taiwan. The lady forced him to go back to his
Italian name which goes like ....Gioenno or something like that.
Stan Pierce
<fyf...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1138679975.4...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
(snipped)
>I think those who happened to end up in the department of 'Critical
> Method' are a bunch of 'flowery' people who have absolutely NO clue of
> what Marxism has to say in this regard. They abandoned the old but have
> nothing new to hold onto. Thus they operate 'in the name' of Marx but
> not really understand Marxist ideas. Marxism is an ideology describing
> economic history and how it is related to the "development of economic
> forces". THAT IS ALL! It does not have anything to say in the area of
> "applauding including the murder of over 100 million people".
Francis, the English language has that ability to use the same words across
*all * fields of thought. Maybe Chinese is different. I believe you have to
point to written symbols when a word is used out of context as a help to
understanding. We use euphemisms.
But you are right to say some use Marx as a reference without having read what
he said. In fact, most students have never read Marx but only what other have
said about him.
fyf...@gmail.com
view that Marxism endorses murder of innocent civilians. That is why
he causally spilled out "applauding ...the murder of over 100 million
people". What happened in Cambodia was not Marxism! Just calling it
madness or satan's work is more accurate.
The Great Leap Foward movement was launched by Mao in contradiction to
everything Marxism has to teach. It led to millons who either perished
or suffered immensely from the economic destruction that followed. You
notice carefully that after these silly political movements, the word
Marxism was less mentioned but stead the word Maoism stood out. Mao
even exported his ideology, which was against what Marx had to say.
During Mao's time period, the Chinese government and what it did was
the most anti=Marxist the world had ever known prior to that, albeit
the absurdity was exceeded later on by what was going to happen in
Cambodia.
burrah
<fyf...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1138679975.4...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I think those who happened to end up in the department of 'Critical
> Method' are a bunch of 'flowery' people who have absolutely NO clue of
> what Marxism has to say in this regard. They abandoned the old but have
> nothing new to hold onto. Thus they operate 'in the name' of Marx but
> not really understand Marxist ideas. Marxism is an ideology describing
> economic history and how it is related to the "development of economic
> forces". THAT IS ALL!
Not so, FP
as Marx himself said, and is accepted by his followers as one of his
memerial phrases:
'the philosophers have only interpreted the world, the point is to change
it' (thesis 11 )
Marx was a revolutionary
> It does not have anything to say in the area of
> "applauding including the murder of over 100 million people". Looking
> back, it was his semi-educated disciple Heagel
Ummm
Marx was the semi-educated disciple of Hegal.
He discovered the Young Heglians when he was about 20 years old. He then
committed the next ten years of his life trying to understand Hegal. He
finally arrived at a position , along with Engels where they decided to turn
Heglianism on it's head.
>who finally attempted to
> put some substance in Marxist writing or tried to make it 'operative'.
> Marx was not such a naive guy, but I think that guy named
> ANTIMULTICULTURE is. The latter is naive enough to have attributed
> every piece of leftist extremism and extreme acts to what Marxism has
> to offer!
>
> Ever since Marxism came into birth, various political leaders in the
> world have used this theory to justify all sorts of acts that are done
> to their interests. Mao and Stalin, for example, nationalized all the
> land and factories and even private properties of the masses and did so
> IN THE NAME OF MARXISM.
Yes, they certainly did that, with disasterous results.
But as the looney lefties were wont to say, they didn't go far enough with
their Marxism.
In other words it wasn't tried properly.
Well eventually it was tried properly in Cambodia. They followed everyone of
Marx's tenets to the letter, and we all know the result.
The fall of Marxisms can, as a political philosophy be taken back to that
homicidal event, when the scales fell from the eyes of the most hardened
disciples, especially the more intelligent ones.
A lot of the insane Marxists who post on this newsgroup, such as fasgnagh,
dont of course fall into this catagory.
The fall of the Berlin Wall was a result of the revulsion against what
happened in Cambodia, felt throughout the areas controlled by Marxists.
burrah
<fyf...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1138688370....@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> It is quite obvious from the post of ANTIMULTICULTURE that he is of the
> view that Marxism endorses murder of innocent civilians. That is why
> he causally spilled out "applauding ...the murder of over 100 million
> people". What happened in Cambodia was not Marxism! Just calling it
> madness or satan's work is more accurate.
>
> The Great Leap Foward
You do know where the phrase came from, dont you FP?
From none other than our good friend Lenin, of course.
"Lenin, also, studied the philosophy of dialectics. He summarized the
dialectics of Marx and Engels as six basic principles of development:
* a development that repeats, as it were, stages that have already been
passed, but repeats them in a different way, on a higher basis ("the
negation of the negation"),
* a development, so to speak, that proceeds in spirals, not in a straight
line;
* a development by leaps, catastrophes, and revolutions; - breaks in
continuity";
fyf...@gmail.com
followed everyone of Marx's tenets to the letter, and we all know the
result. "
I don't think what happened in Cambodia is anything near Marxism. I
could have gone on calling it peasant stupidity but Pol Pot had been an
'educated' student from France. I think either his French professor
fucked up or he fucked up Pol Pot or both of them were intellecutally
fucked up.
Fran
Marxism's projections for the future centre on developing industry,
urbanisation, overcoming "the idiocy of rural life", collaboration of
working people on a world scale and of course, the sine qua non of all
Marxism is the existence of a working class. Marx saw the advent of
industry as the first step in human conquest over nature, and as
heralding the end of capitalism by creating the working class which
would seize it for all of society.
Pol Pot's first acts were to empty the cities, including even the
hospitals and force the mass of the urban population out into the
fields to grow rice -- the idea being to make "Democratic Kampuchea"
self-sufficient in it. Like many peasants, the Khmer Rouge (KR) saw the
cities as dens of vice and iniquity. The KR wanted a return to what
they saw as the glory days of medaieval cambodia. They saw working on
the land as purifying and fiercely persecuted anything smacking of
intellectualism or ideas from outside Cambodia.
Far from a pursuit of Marx "to the letter" this is the opposite of
Marx's position, since the KR were smashing industry in favour of what
he would possibly have called "the Asiatic mode of production". The KR
position directly turned progress on its head and at massive human
cost. While the brutal Stalinists of Russia engaged in forced march
industrialisation in an effort to achieve "socialism in one country"
the KR tried to turn Cambodia into an isolated rural backwater free
from what they saw as contaminating foreign influence. Ethnic
Vietnamese and Chinese in Cambodia came in for especially harsh
treatment. The KR were not Marxists and did not follow Marx or even Ho
Chi Minh. They were crazed peasant atavists with an ambition to
recreate the middle ages with themselves as high priests. In many
respects, they are best understood as a fundamentalist religious
movement, drawing on elements of Buddhism and Taoism, focusing on
purification, identity with the land and the soil and rigid hierarchy.
Their development in this direction largely reflected the destruction
of the much more orthodox Stalinist cadre in the course of the US
terror bombing of Cambodia in the early 70s and the maintenance of the
movement through recruitment of ruined and barely literate or
illiterate peasants.
Fran
burrah
"Fran" <fran...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1138802015.1...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> fyf...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Burrah wrote:"Well eventually it was tried properly in Cambodia. They
>> followed everyone of Marx's tenets to the letter, and we all know the
>> result. "
>>
>> I don't think what happened in Cambodia is anything near Marxism. I
>> could have gone on calling it peasant stupidity but Pol Pot had been an
>> 'educated' student from France. I think either his French professor
>> fucked up or he fucked up Pol Pot or both of them were intellecutally
>> fucked up.
>
>
> Marxism's projections for the future centre on developing industry,
> urbanisation, overcoming "the idiocy of rural life", collaboration of
> working people on a world scale and of course, the sine qua non of all
> Marxism is the existence of a working class. Marx saw the advent of
> industry as the first step in human conquest over nature, and as
> heralding the end of capitalism by creating the working class which
> would seize it for all of society.
Ohhh lookeee
Another politically correct sermon on the savior of the human race, the
parasite Marx.
>
> Pol Pot's first acts were to empty the cities, including even the
> hospitals and force the mass of the urban population out into the
> fields to grow rice -- the idea being to make "Democratic Kampuchea"
> self-sufficient in it. Like many peasants, the Khmer Rouge (KR) saw the
> cities as dens of vice and iniquity. The KR wanted a return to what
> they saw as the glory days of medaieval cambodia. They saw working on
> the land as purifying and fiercely persecuted anything smacking of
> intellectualism or ideas from outside Cambodia.
>
> Far from a pursuit of Marx "to the letter" this is the opposite of
> Marx's position, since the KR were smashing industry in favour of what
> he would possibly have called "the Asiatic mode of production". The KR
> position directly turned progress on its head and at massive human
> cost.
>While the brutal Stalinists of Russia engaged in forced march
> industrialisation in an effort to achieve "socialism in one country"
> the KR tried to turn Cambodia into an isolated rural backwater free
> from what they saw as contaminating foreign influence. Ethnic
> Vietnamese and Chinese
Chinese less so, due to the need to keeep on good terms with China.
> in Cambodia came in for especially harsh
> treatment. The KR were not Marxists and did not follow Marx or even Ho
> Chi Minh. They were crazed peasant atavists with an ambition to
> recreate the middle ages with themselves as high priests. In many
> respects, they are best understood as a fundamentalist religious
> movement, drawing on elements of Buddhism and Taoism, focusing on
> purification, identity with the land and the soil and rigid hierarchy.
And that is why congratulations were sent by Mao Tse Tung to Pol Pot
for..."crushing, as completely and as quickly, the capitalists, the
exploiting land owners, and the reactionary lackeys, a historic and bloody
achievement." Eh?
Maybe Mao knew more about Lenins (the homosexual ruler of Russia, who died
of syphilis)
http://tinyurl.com/blxjk
thoughts on Imperialism, than some latter day fifth-columnist , who true to
their historical role as "useful idiots" now need to embrace revisionist so
that the can sleep innocently at night.
fran...@hotmail.com
burrah wrote:
> "Fran" <fran...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1138802015.1...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > fyf...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Burrah wrote:"Well eventually it was tried properly in Cambodia. They
> >> followed everyone of Marx's tenets to the letter, and we all know the
> >> result. "
> >>
> >> I don't think what happened in Cambodia is anything near Marxism. I
> >> could have gone on calling it peasant stupidity but Pol Pot had been an
> >> 'educated' student from France. I think either his French professor
> >> fucked up or he fucked up Pol Pot or both of them were intellecutally
> >> fucked up.
> >
> >
> > Marxism's projections for the future centre on developing industry,
> > urbanisation, overcoming "the idiocy of rural life", collaboration of
> > working people on a world scale and of course, the sine qua non of all
> > Marxism is the existence of a working class. Marx saw the advent of
> > industry as the first step in human conquest over nature, and as
> > heralding the end of capitalism by creating the working class which
> > would seize it for all of society.
>
> Ohhh lookeee
> Another politically correct sermon
Not only politically correct, but historiucally correct and relevant,
in sharp contrast with what you post.
> >
> > Pol Pot's first acts were to empty the cities, including even the
> > hospitals and force the mass of the urban population out into the
> > fields to grow rice -- the idea being to make "Democratic Kampuchea"
> > self-sufficient in it. Like many peasants, the Khmer Rouge (KR) saw the
> > cities as dens of vice and iniquity. The KR wanted a return to what
> > they saw as the glory days of medaieval cambodia. They saw working on
> > the land as purifying and fiercely persecuted anything smacking of
> > intellectualism or ideas from outside Cambodia.
> >
> > Far from a pursuit of Marx "to the letter" this is the opposite of
> > Marx's position, since the KR were smashing industry in favour of what
> > he would possibly have called "the Asiatic mode of production". The KR
> > position directly turned progress on its head and at massive human
> > cost.
> >While the brutal Stalinists of Russia engaged in forced march
> > industrialisation in an effort to achieve "socialism in one country"
> > the KR tried to turn Cambodia into an isolated rural backwater free
> > from what they saw as contaminating foreign influence. Ethnic
> > Vietnamese and Chinese
>
> Chinese less so, due to the need to keeep on good terms with China.
>
Nonsense. The Chinese government couldn't give a tinkers' cuss what the
KR was doing within its own borders to ethnic Chinese.
> > in Cambodia came in for especially harsh
> > treatment. The KR were not Marxists and did not follow Marx or even Ho
> > Chi Minh. They were crazed peasant atavists with an ambition to
> > recreate the middle ages with themselves as high priests. In many
> > respects, they are best understood as a fundamentalist religious
> > movement, drawing on elements of Buddhism and Taoism, focusing on
> > purification, identity with the land and the soil and rigid hierarchy.
>
> And that is why congratulations were sent by Mao Tse Tung to Pol Pot
> for..."crushing, as completely and as quickly, the capitalists, the
> exploiting land owners, and the reactionary lackeys, a historic and bloody
> achievement." Eh?
When you're trying to work out what kind of bird you're dealing with,
you need to take note of more than its song. Where is this quote,
exactly anyway?
Fact is Mao industrialised, with the results for China we now see
today. It's now a member of the WTO. According to Bush, it's a major
rival to the US, and the way to keep it in check is to disrupt its
access to western markets. Most see it as now a market economy. The KR
deindustrialised, and lasted just four years.
> Maybe Mao knew more about Lenins (the homosexual ruler of Russia, who died
> of syphilis)
This is idiotic and irrelevant to any discussion of Marxism.
> http://tinyurl.com/blxjk
> thoughts on Imperialism, than some latter day fifth-columnist , who true to
> their historical role as "useful idiots" now need to embrace revisionist so
> that the can sleep innocently at night.
>
You're an ignorant, incoherent and stupid ranter. What an embarrasment
you must be to your coterie of anti-workingclass fellow travellers.
Fran
sh...@abertay.ac.uk
Antimulticulture wrote:
> Enthralled by Cultural Marxism
> Four Horsemen of The Frankfort School
> http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/society/cultural_marxism.htm
> Chuck Morse
> January 2002
>
> In his new book The Death of the West, Patrick J. Buchanan examines
> the origin of what he contends is the modern decline of America.
Awkkgh........(Almost spills tea over the keyboard).
Look, hardly anyone over here will have heard of him. And most of those
who have know that he's an idiot...
>He
> asserts that while Soviet style Marxism is largely dead, our society
> remains enthralled by Cultural Marxism,
Which is what, exactly? Gramsci? He doesn't say.....
>which is strangling our
> freedom, and threatening our future.
Who or what is is 'our'?
>This threat to our culture and
> way of life accelerated to a deadly speed with the establishment, in
> 1933 at Columbia University, of the Institute for Social Research,
> originally called "The Institute for Marxism." This institution
> became known as the Frankfort School.
So?
>
> The destructive nature of the Frankfort school, founded in New York
> after it 's theoreticians fled there from Frankfort, Germany when
> Hitler came to power, is obvious from even a cursory examination of
> its primary texts.
>The four horsemen of the school were music critic
> Theodor Adorno, psychologist Erich Fromm, sociologist Wilhelm Reich
> and professor Herbert Marcuse. Their ideas, echoing through the halls
> of academia and from the ink stained hands of writers and
> journalists, would lead to, as Buchanan calls it, the establishment
> of today's politically correct catechism.
Fromm is still influential. Marcuse was largely a sixties phenomenon. I
doubt whether most students would have heard of him today. Reich is a
cult figure, but notpart of the intellectual mainstream (well, in
america at any rate). What these people have in common with late
unlamented Soviet system, God alone knows.
> The original strategy to destroy America, employed by the Frankfort
> School, came from Italian Communist Antonio Gramsci who realized that
> in order to achieve a Socialist victory, cultural institutions would
> have to be infiltrated and subverted.
He didn't actually say that, but.....
>Gramsci realized that America,
> steeped in traditions of freedom and liberty, would never to succumb
> to a frontal assault and its workers were too busy accumulating
> capital to allow themselves to be used as cannon fodder for a bloody
> revolution.
Are you in touch with him by a Oujah Board, or something?
>
> The Frankfort School would patent the familiar "Critical Theory"
> which was accurately defined by a student
By a student? Which student?
>as the "essentially
> destructive criticism of all the main elements of Western culture,
> including Christianity, capitalism, authority, the family,
> patriarchy, hierarchy, morality, tradition, sexual restraint,
> loyalty, patriotism, nationalism, heredity, ethnocentrism,
> convention, and conservatism."
Was it a competition entry?
>Under Critical Theory, anything
> emanating from the west is to be libeled and attacked over and over
> again while at the same time, anything emerging from a "progressive"
> country or group is to be applauded including the murder of over 100
> million people. All blame for societal and economic ills are to be
> shifted to the west.
Actually, critical theory is largely derived from Foucault and Derrida
etc. But don't let that spoil the flow....
> The saturating drumbeat of Critical Theory would lead to "Cultural
> Pessimism" which is when a person grows to loathe the society, which
> nurtured him and provided him unprecedented levels of success. This
> describes the attitude of so many leftists living in comfort and
> safety yet viewing America, the society that made their lifestyle
> possible, with hatred and contempt. I am amazed by the degree in
> which both Critical Theory and Cultural Pessimism has been
> internalized by all of us.
It's called intellectual enquiry. Try it sometime....
>
> Erich Fromm's "Escape from Freedom" and Wilhelm Reich's "The Mass
> Psychology of Fascism" and "The Sexual Revolution" are central texts
> of Critical Theory according to Buchanan,
Really? I'm not aware that Reich was into discourse theory.
>who also calls "The
> Authoritarian Personality" by Theodor Adorno the "altarpiece of the
> Frankfurt School." Adorno's thesis is that anyone imbued with middle
> class, conservative, or Christian values is a racist and a fascist.
Anyone?
> Charles Sykes, senior fellow at the Wisconsin Policy Research Center,
Who? What is this centre?
> says Adorno's book is "an uncompromising indictment of bourgeois
> civilization, with the twist that what was considered merely old-
> fashioned by previous critics was now declared both fascistic and
> psychologically warped." This libelous indictment of the American
> people is comparable to Hitler's equally libelous indictment of the
> Jews of Europe.
Rubbish! You are comparing apples with oranges!
>
> The Frankfurt School introduced the idea of psychological
> conditioning as a means of changing the culture to fit their image.
That was Skinner and the behaviourists. Look up the work of Stnley
Milgram.
> This would largely replace the traditional American approach to
> learning which was rational philosophical argument.
Except where evolution is concerned?
> Buchanan calls
> this the root of the "therapeutic state" where "sin is redefined as
> sickness, crime becomes anti-social behavior, and the psychiatrist
> replaces the priest." To Adorno and his comrades, all Americans who
> refused to conform to the new morality were viewed as mentally ill
> and in need of treatment. The Soviet Union offers a clear example of
> this philosophy in action with it's millions sent to gulags
> for "mental" maladies such as "anti-social" attitudes.
As was the case in America, especially in relation to women....
> The forth horseman, Brandeis professor Herbert Marcuse, was the pied
> piper of the sixties as he fostered the development of, as Buchanan
> points out, "radical youth, feminists, black militants, homosexuals,
> the alienated, the asocial, Third World revolutionaries, all the
> angry voices of the persecuted 'victims' of the West."
I bet he also peed on the toilet seat......
"In "Eros and
> Civilization" Marcuse encouraged sex and drugs and
> introduced "polymorphous perversity" where all moral and cultural
> order is rejected.
Of course, that is the exact opposite of the Soviet ideloogy that then
obtained in a large part of Europe.
>Marcuse coined the slogan "Make love not war" and
> was a cult figure on College campuses. His book "One Dimensional Man"
> advocates educational dictatorship.
Not that I recall.
>He calls for "Repressive
> Tolerance" which means "intolerance against movements from the right,
> and toleration of movements from the left." When the left speaks of
> tolerance, this is what they mean.
>
> The Frankfurt School would mainstream the dicktat of the Moscow
> Central Committee laid down in 1943.
They obviously didn't do a good job of it....
Now please bugger off and let the grown -ups talk.....
Dr. Barry Worthington
Stan Pierce
"Antimulticulture" <Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:43ddf407$0$32649$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Four Horsemen of The Frankfort School
It's Frankfurt.
SR 71
>
>Now please bugger off and let the grown -ups talk.....
>
>Dr. Barry Worthington
>
That's gotta hurt. He's about 80.
fran...@hotmail.com
Maybe he meant some school in this little burg?
http://www.cityoffrankfortky.com/
I'd say this is where you'd find four horsemen:
http://www.allgetaways.com/view_destination.asp?DestinationID=XGP103-SO01
Fran