Discovering Cultural Marxism
Anthony Whelan, MA
Another Conspiracy Theory?
If you research Cultural Marxism, you will face assertions that it does not exist and is a conspiracy theory.
Steve Maltz, who has written extensively on this subject, claims that there used to be a Wikipedia page entitled Cultural Marxism but if you search for it now, you will be taken to a section on the pages about the Frankfurt School – where this ideology came from – entitled Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory.
So, Wikipedia, who loudly declare their neutrality, have already decided anyone who believes that Cultural Marxism exists is deluded.
Maltz describes a dilemma in which two entirely different views about the aims of this institution are present in society. I checked out Wikipedia’s view:
The Frankfurt School (Frankfurter Schule) is a school of social theory and critical philosophy associated with the Institute for Social Research, at Goethe University Frankfurt. Founded in the Weimar Republic (1918-33), during the European interwar period (1918-39), the Frankfurt School comprised intellectuals, academics, and political dissidents who were ill-fitted to the contemporary socio-economic systems (capitalist, fascist, communist) of that time. The Frankfurt School proposed that social theory was inadequate for explaining the turbulent factionalism and reactionary politics of capitalist societies in the 20th century. Critical of capitalism and Marxism-Leninism as philosophically inflexible systems, the School's Critical Theory research indicated alternative paths to realising the social development of a society and a nation. (1)
Here is the problem: is this simply an agreeable bunch of experts giving helpful advice or are they the instigators of, not just theoretical ideas, but a plan of action – a long march – to implement its objectives over a prolonged period?
Maltz clarifies it by saying he subscribes to the more threatening view because he believes that it is where the evidence leads. He continues:
The main reason why many cannot bring themselves to agree with this view is that it reads like a plot of a Dan Brown or Frederick Forsyth novel. I have to admit that the conclusions derived from the clear evidence seem to be downright unbelievable. But that doesn't make it untrue. (2)
What is this evidence Maltz speaks of?
I have had personal experience of this brand of Marxism operating in our culture and you have too, although you may not have realised it. I have also studied it to a point where I can say that there is indisputable evidence that it does exist and that it is the root cause of many of the socio-political problems in the Western world.
Before we delve deeper, we must acknowledge a significant hurdle obstructing a clear understanding of its true nature – the opposition it faces from the far-right. This often takes an extreme form because most of the main characters in this story are Jewish. This has led to claims of a Jewish conspiracy. It isn’t, but you can almost excuse others for thinking it. While it is true that Karl Marx and key members of the Frankfurt School were of Jewish descent, this does not substantiate the claims. The individuals who continue to promote these ideas today, whether activists or theoreticians, may have Jewish backgrounds, but this in no way validates the notion of a coordinated Jewish conspiracy.
Leaving that aside, let’s go on to discover how this neo-Marxism influenced Western culture.
Reconfiguring the Lie
You're likely familiar with the birth of Marxism and the communist ideology in the mid-1800s. Karl Marx, the progenitor of these ideas, primarily focused on economic theories. He advocated for the working classes to rise up and establish a fairer society through wealth redistribution, often promoting the necessity of a revolution. He passionately wrote and lectured, hoping to see his vision realised. It eventually materialised in Russia in 1917, though Marx himself didn't live to witness it. His ideas, rooted in atheism and humanism, resonated with others who believed in their potential. They used his writings as a foundation, expanding and modifying them to call for revolutions across the Western world.
When the First World War erupted, these communists saw it as a pivotal moment. They envisioned the working classes of different nations coming together in an international brotherhood, choosing not to engage in war but instead to revolt against the ruling classes. However, this intention clashed with remnants of Christian values and patriotism within the population. Instead of rebelling, the working classes enlisted to fight for their respective countries, deeply disappointing the Marxists.
This turn of events raises questions about the true motives of the Marxists. Did they genuinely seek the best for the working classes? Or was it ideology for the sake of ideology? When combined with an atheistic and humanistic foundation, the answer appears clear: Rebellion.
Rebellion forms the core and purpose of Marxism.
Following the failure of several revolutions, a group of German Marxist intellectuals and academics based at the Institute for Marxism in Frankfurt, later renamed the Institute for Social Research (ISR), felt compelled to address the shortcomings of 19th-century classical Marxism. They believed it couldn't adequately address the social issues of the 20th century.
The scholars at the Institute, commonly referred to as the Frankfurt School, embarked on redefining Marxism. They shifted its focus from economics to the culture that enveloped society as a whole. In 1923, Felix Weil, a wealthy Jewish entrepreneur, established, funded, and staffed the school. Their primary objective was to reorganise Classical Marxism to address culture, achieved through the creation and development of a social theory for change, which they termed Critical Theory
Critical Theory
Critical Theory, often seen as complex and mysterious, has a core philosophy: a set of neo-Marxist techniques designed to dismantle established structures. It lacks positivity, identifying valid concerns in Western society but offering no solutions, only urging rebellion.
Essentially, Critical Theory embodies destructive criticism of key facets of Western culture, including Christianity, capitalism, authority, the family, patriarchy, hierarchy, morality, tradition, sexual restraint, loyalty, patriotism, nationalism, convention, and conservatism.
In his insightful book on the subject, Melvin Tinker explains the raison d'être:
In 1930 Max Horkheimer became the director of the ISR which is when neo-Marxism was launched in earnest. Horkheimer was convinced that the major obstacle to the spread of Marxism was traditional Western culture with its Judeo-Christian heritage. Here there developed a revisionist neo-Marxist interpretation of Western culture under the rubric, Critical Theory, the goal of which according to William S. Lind 'was not truth but praxis, or revolutionary action: bringing the current society and culture down through unremitting, destructive criticism’. (3)
The main aim of the neo-Marxists and Critical Theory is enshrined in this idea:
To Reject the Notion of Objectivity in Knowledge.
This concept posits that knowledge is subjective, influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. In this theory there is no such thing as absolute truth. The relativism evident in our society today – what’s true for you is not true for me – has its seeds in the 1920s with Critical Theory. It rejected, and still does reject, absolute truth in general and Biblical truth in particular.
To develop these ideas and move beyond purely economic and political solutions, Marxists needed input from other disciplines. They delved into sociology and psychology and integrated these fields to fortify their plan.
Maltz further elaborates:
Under this new leadership, the Frankfurt School was to move away from academic concerns to a wider remit, critical social research, which involved an integration of the social sciences, a significant development. Key academics brought in to follow this path were Eric Fromm, the psychoanalyst, Theodor Adorno, the sociologist, and Herbert Marcuse, who we met a little earlier. Things were now going to get a little tasty. Fromm worked with Horkheimer on finding connections between the theories of Marx and Sigmund Freud. The area of attack here was social change and, in particular, the role of the family in society. These men were arrogantly going to interfere with a system that has worked perfectly well since God gave it to mankind as a gift (4)
Newspeak
Marcuse worked on ways to bring about change breaking established meanings and weaponising language for coercion and oppression.
The Frankfurt School also incorporated the ideas of Wilhelm Reich who contributed by writing about sexual repression. The term ‘The Sexual Revolution’ used in the 1960s comes from the title of one of his books published 1936.
In 1933, due to the rise of Nazism and many at the School being Jewish, the founders decided to move out of Germany. They went first to Geneva and then, in 1935, to the US. Their plan to influence the Western world subtly took shape, spurred by concerns of fascism resurfacing in the US post-WWII.
Their American friends, particularly Jewish groups, funded the publication of their books from the mid-1950s onward. Adorno and Marcuse, two intelligent German Jews, emerged as trusted figures, teaching how to detect early signs of fascism and prevent its resurgence.
The neo-Marxists targeted three areas: academia, mainstream media, and Hollywood, shaping Western culture for decades. You may be thinking that this report is a conspiracy theory. You may have been advised that when you hear this kind of thing you should regard it as such. The forms of media telling you those things are telling you because they are the real conspiracy. They are the avenues through which these ideas were going to be propagated – and still are.
While there's debate on whether neo-Marxists had a written manifesto, their strategy to subvert Western society is evident in their books and lectures. Like Alice Bailey (see section on the New Age movement), they focused on influencing younger generations, emphasising the long-term nature of their revolution. Lenin once said: “Give me just one generation of youth, and I will change the world.”
‘The long march through the institutions’ is a quote you often encounter in studies of this subject. It is a reference to Mao Zedong’s Long March to eventual victory in the Chinese Civil War.
The neo-Marxists began their march in the 1950s firstly through Theodor Adorno’s book, The Authoritarian Personality. (5) . In it, Adorno proposes The Fascism Scale or the F-Scale. By interviewing various groups of people, he created a list of signs to look for that would be used to determine whether someone is going to become a Fascist. He posited that the person who grows up with a traditional Judaeo-Christian background would be the one most likely to show signs of fascism as they age. By using Freudian theory, he placed the suggestion into people’s heads, into their subconscious, and therefore into the culture, that Christianity is a big part of the problems in society.
Then Herbert Marcuse comes into the picture. In 1955 he wrote Eros and Civilisation. (6) In it he also pushes the same ideas about fascism but in this case, it’s set within the subject of sexuality. He postulates that if you are a monogamist, with a traditional family background you are highly likely to become Fascist. And he goes further by saying that the only way to make sure that you are free of any Fascistic tendencies is to give up any sexual restraints. He promoted polyamory (have as many lovers as you want) and get into as many perversions as you want. That will free you, he said, and make sure you neutralise any Fascistic tendencies.
The next few years were perfect for the propagation of Marcuse’s ideas. He was the architect of the alternative society of the 1960s. ‘Make Love Not War’ was his slogan and not that of some anonymous bearded hippy.
He became an influential manipulator. Aiming his ideology at the young people of a prosperous US he told them to revolt against their unimaginative families and turn their backs on the traditional structures. His writings proposed having sex with as many people as you like. This would free individuals and make them better people.
He had some unexpected and powerful associates helping the campaign: the free use and popularity of hallucinogenic drugs, and The Pill.
In 1964 Marcuse wrote One-Dimensional Man, (7) a marathon rant against the Consumer Society. He announced that we in the West we are ‘one-dimensional’ because we are being manipulated by the capitalists. This struck a chord at the time, not just with the hippie types where you might expect to find consensus, but in the wider society and even among Christians. This is what was so clever about the methods of the Frankfurt School. They would identify a problem – and we would agree that rampant consumerism is not beneficial for society – but their answer was not in moderating it. His solution was: revolt against it!
The Italian neo-Marxist, Antonio Gramsci, gave more impetus to these ideas by the proposed use of ‘hegemony’. This is the process whereby a dominant class could exert and maintain its influence over people through non-coercive means. He, like the earlier neo-Marxists, suggested that schools, the media, and marketing should be targeted.
Tinker again:
The aim was to get people to think and especially feel for themselves that certain values and practices, such as same-sex marriage, are ‘obvious’, ‘common sense’, ‘fair’ or even ‘natural’. Gramsci’s vision was to undermine and eventually take over the ‘commanding heights of culture’. (8)
As I learned about these things I was taken back to my own youth and recalled how things changed during that time. I began to see what was behind all the rebellion and the promiscuity that I had been involved in during the 1960s and 70s. It happened very slowly and incrementally over decades.
In the years after becoming a Christian I would often hear, in the churches, the ‘frog in the pan’ illustration. It was said that the devil was manipulating people and organisations to change society and it was like putting a frog in a pan of hot water. If you did this too suddenly the frog would immediately jump out. But if you put the frog in lukewarm water and very slowly heated it then the frog would fall asleep and eventually die by being boiled to death.
This picture was used to show how the enemy worked very subtly over a long period so that people did not notice or object to the changes taking place. As time passed this concept seems to have been forgotten or ridiculed. But here in 2018 I was finding this ploy was still ongoing just as subtly, just as intentionally and just as effectively.
I checked out the symposium event in London that I had seen on TV in the late 60s (mentioned in chapter1) and confirmed it was indeed Herbert Marcuse who had visited the Roundhouse, one of the venues that were part of the sub-culture then. His books were the ones we discussed in our pub debates at that time. He and others like him were the dominant thinkers. They had the knowledge and were those we trusted to lead society.
Everything mysteriously came together to make the 1960s happen in the way it did. I remembered how the 1967 ‘Summer of Love’ was followed by the year of student protests some of them very violent. I saw how it was a completely fake decade and discovered that Marcuse was one of the instigators. This is verifiable. You can buy books and you can watch videos of Marcuse in action to study the history of these events. I experienced them first-hand, but I did not realise, until recent years, what the driving forces were behind them.
In 1968 the student protests spread from the US to Europe. France was almost brought down by what happened in Paris that year. Nearly every capitol city across Europe had protests as Marcuse was invited to speak in them. Footage captures him giving speeches across the continent. A demonstration in Rome featured a placard reading “Marx, Mao, Marcuse” symbolising the students’ allegiance to the intellectual figures Karl Marx, Mao Tse Tung and Herbert Marcuse. This highlighted his significant influence despite his low-profile approach.
From that movement came the emergence of what we now call the New Left.
Maltz explains:
The 'Old Left' were the original political left wing in the West, such as The Labour Party in the UK. They were typified mainly by the blue-collar workers, the working class, who just wanted a fair wage and food on the table. Out of this movement came the Welfare State in the UK after the Second World War. In general terms their politics didn't travel further than a mutual concern for working people wherever they may be. This is the Labour party of Keir Hardie, Harold Wilson and Denis Healey and others. Safe, comfortable and traditionally British. (9)
But it didn’t stay safe. We witnessed how Cultural Marxism had its effect in the UK with the rise to power of Ken Livingstone dubbed ‘Red Ken’, the Labour Leader of the 1970s, and Derek Hatton, a member of a Trotskyist Militant Group who became Deputy Leader of Liverpool City Council in the 1980s.
The New Left concentrated on things like Protest, Liberation, and Identity. Following another of Marcuse’s books - An Essay on Liberation - young activists and revolutionaries spawned a profusion of protest groups. Animal Liberation, Women’s Liberation, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and the Gay Liberation movement. Where did they all come from? They all came out of Marxism.
Where did all this lead? One of the main aims of Cultural Marxism eventually became clear: to develop what we now experience as a ‘victim culture’. Society was exposed to a whole series of worthy causes that we could become a part of. Victim groups featured black people, women, gay and transgender people, those affected by colonialism and, more recently, those who might in the future be affected by climate change.
Please note that I am not suggesting we judge those caught up in this degenerate mindset. The victims are simply pawns in a global game. The victim groups are not there for the victims. Take the transgender movement for example. It’s not about helping those who are confused sexually. It is about the agenda of others who are manipulating the situation to make that issue into something that will divide and conquer. As Christians, we must speak out against the system rather than the individuals caught up in it.
This begs the question: who and where are the Cultural Marxists pushing this ideological agenda? I can’t say for sure but there may be many liberal or left-leaning university professors or social commentators who fit this bill.
I want to note that I am not being political here. I am not pro-right wing or pro-left wing or promoting any other political ideas. This is a spiritual issue. The devil is behind it, and he will use any means he can to achieve his aims.
To understand this, at a deeper level – i.e., to see where the world is going with this – we must look back, for a moment, to one historic event.
Babel.
The Ominous Tower.
After the Flood, God gave Noah certain commands and made a covenant with him and with the earth (Gen. 9:1-17). He wanted Noah and his sons to spread out, multiply and replenish the earth. But man had other plans.
Now the whole earth had one language and the same words. And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. And they said to one another, 'Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly.' And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar. Then they said, 'Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth.' (Genesis 11: 1-4)
Understand the global nature of this. Tinker again:
God's cultural mandate to 'fill the earth and subdue it' is given to human beings in Genesis 1:28 and reiterated to Noah in Genesis 9:7. This is roundly repudiated by the peoples of the earth in Genesis II:4 as they decide to settle on the plain of Shinar to build a tower so that they would not be scattered over the globe. In other words, this is an exercise of collective rebellion. (10)
Rebellion was at the heart of Babel: Let’s all work together to form a global system to throw off God’s restraints. And that is what Cultural Marxism is all about – it’s the same spirit. The eventual aim of Cultural Marxism, as was (classical) Marxism, is totalitarianism. The state controlling all the people. The reason I say that I’m not being political is because whatever political persuasion you might be will not make any difference in the future scenario.
When rebellion results in chaos a small number will come to the fore and provide a solution to the world’s problems. A small group – and ultimately one man – controlling a globalist society. It's about control and diminishing freedoms.
In the west, ‘marginalised’ groups are turning the tables on anyone who disagrees with their supposed plight.
But it is clear, in the neo-Marxist view, with the ever-expanding number of victim groups, no Christian can ever be regarded as a victim.
Examples of Critical Theory
Tinker describes Bulverism, a term coined by C. S. Lewis:
… whereby an objector’s belief is assumed to be wrong because of bias and can then therefore be discounted. The reasons for one’s objections do not then need to be considered.
And as he points out:
In fact it is to neo-Marxism’s advantage that one does not draw people’s attention to reasons, for then their own position might be examined and found wanting while the alternative position is found strong and compelling. (11)
So, what is being said here is: If you don’t agree it is because you are a fascist and there can be no free speech for fascists. This is a sign of the collapsing culture of the West. Let us look at some evidence of it.
In November 2020, Richard Page, a magistrate and NHS Trust non-executive director, was removed from his positions for expressing his belief, during an adoption case discussion, in the importance of placing children with a mother and a father whenever possible. (12)
In the same year, Kirstie Higgs, a mother of two, lost her job as a secondary school pastoral assistant for sharing concerns about age-inappropriate themes in Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) lessons. (13)
Mary Douglas, a Conservative councillor in Salisbury for nearly 15 years, was ousted in November 2019 for opposing the use of public funds for a Pride event. (14)
In February 2018, I purchased a ticket for the premiere screening of the film 'Voices of the Silenced' at Vue Cinema, Piccadilly, London. The documentary features 15 individuals' stories about moving away from or successfully overcoming same-sex attraction and related behaviours. LGBTQ+ activists pressured the cinema to cancel the screening, despite a prior agreement. Instead of watching the film, I joined a group outside the cinema protesting about the suppression of free speech. The cinema, fearing hostile actions by LGBTQ+ groups, stood firm in its decision. The film challenges the notion that people are prisoners of their sexuality. It highlights the voices of those who've moved away from same-sex desires but are silenced by mainstream media, marginalised, and targeted by LGBTQ+ activists and legislation. The organisation that produced the documentary had its bank accounts closed following campaigns initiated by LGBTQ+ activists. (15)
In November 2018, young mother Izzy Montague faced victimisation after raising concerns about her son's primary school promoting LGBTQ+ issues to young children. Her 4-year-old was compelled to participate in a 'Gay Pride' event with no opt-outs allowed.
When Izzy met with the school's executive headteacher to discuss her complaint, she faced hostility. She was warned that expressing views perceived as racist, homophobic, or transphobic would lead to the meeting's termination.
The Hate Police
The Scottish Government and the Scottish Police, under the banner 'One Scotland,' ran a hate crime awareness campaign that primarily featured posters addressing 'Bigots,' 'homophobes,' 'transphobes,' and others, signed 'Yours, Scotland.'
While the goal of reducing hate in Scotland is admirable, there are serious concerns with the campaign. What exactly constitutes a 'hate crime,' and is there a significant difference between a 'crime' and a 'hate crime'? Aren't all crimes crimes?
One of the most controversial posters read: "Dear Bigots, you can't spread your religious hate here. End of sermon. Yours, Scotland." But what exactly is a 'bigot'?
The dictionary definition is “a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions”. This is a good definition, provided we agree on what intolerance means. The problem is that if someone is very convinced of their own opinion and of the wrongness of other opinions, this can be perceived as intolerance of those holding other opinions …
The implication is that all religious people are bigots. This is insulting, but it is hard to believe that the insult is not intentional in this. (16)
These are all clear examples of Bulverism.
Where is it All Leading?
Many consider these changes as progress, much like I did in the 1970s when I opposed those I saw as hindering improvements in society. However, today's progressives are unforgiving. Western culture – built on Judaeo-Christian principles – is becoming subordinate to political correctness while most of the population, apparently unaware of what is happening, remain unperturbed.
In Luke 17, when questioned about the arrival of the kingdom of God, Jesus didn't attribute its coming to the achievements of believers but stated it would follow his return. He detailed the spiritual and social conditions preceding this event. Concerning spiritual aspects, he cautioned about the rise of false prophets and messiahs.
In addressing social aspects, he referenced the times of Noah and Lot. Despite living in unrighteous eras, Noah and Lot, righteous men, faced widespread wickedness. In Noah's time, God said he regretted creating humanity (see Genesis 6:5-8), and in Lot's day, God was distressed by the sin and sexual perversion (see Genesis 18:16 – 19:38).
Jesus predicted a similar cultural backdrop just before his return – a proliferation of evil, wickedness, and immorality. Despite this, life will continue seemingly unaffected, with people tolerating and even celebrating the prevailing decadence. They will engage in everyday activities like dining out, forming relationships, marrying, building, and making future plans, displaying a desensitisation to the surrounding culture of evil.
The concept of 'sin' is rarely used today, both in society and the church. The Christian view of sin and how we deal with it is a crucial part of our relationship with God. We have fallen nature and are sinful beings. What sin we commit is ultimately against our creator God. But redefined by Cultural Marxists, the only sin in our culture is opposing victim groups or individuals within them. This is the path society has taken and yet no one knows who is controlling it! It seems that everyone is bowing down to the new god of tolerance and inclusion.
According to Lenin, founder of the Russian Communist Party, leader of the 1917 Revolution, architect, builder, and first head of the Soviet state, destruction requires two elements: a small group of vanguard thinkers who are convinced they know better than everyone else, and a much larger group of fellow travellers who don’t really understand the vanguard’s endgame. The people Lenin termed “useful idiots”.
The Church is seriously affected by this path that society is on but remains mostly silent. Church leaders may not be speaking out for fear they appear politically biased and potentially losing congregants. However, these are spiritual, not political issues. The lack of awareness and understanding among church leaders is evident in their silence.
A Summary of this Report.
In summary, we've explored how Classical Marxism was repackaged in the West, consistently urging rebellion against the status quo without proposing solutions. This has given rise to postmodernism and the resultant Political Correctness, which increasingly oppresses our faith and Judaeo-Christian foundations.
Our discussion also delved into the deeper issue of humanity's belief that it can achieve things without God, as seen in the story of Babel, with another possible driver: bringing God down to earth and reshaping Him.
We saw how society – and to some extent, the church – has become desensitised to sin and has not recognised this as a sign of impending judgement.
Lastly, we've highlighted the apparent ignorance or lack of understanding within churches regarding the detrimental effects of neo-Marxism on society. The accompanying silence may be attributed to a fear of political bias, but also shows a lack of recognition of its spiritual roots.
Anthony Whelan 2020
1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School
2 Maltz, S. (2018), Noise: A Search for Sense, Ilford, Saffron Planet Publishing, p11.
3 Tinker, M. (2018), That Hideous Strength: How the West was Lost, Welwyn Garden City, EP Books, p 51.
4 Maltz, S. (2018), Into the Lion’s Den: Reaching a World gone Mad, Ilford, Saffron Planet Publishing, p22.
5 Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D., Sanford, R. (1969), The Authoritarian Personality, New York, Norton & Company.
6 Marcuse, H. (1969), Eros and Civilisation, London, Sphere Books.
7 Marcuse, H. (1964), One-dimensional Man, London, Routledge.
8 Tinker, M. (2019), Wet, Woke archbishop completes the march through the institutions, in The Conservative Woman online magazine at:https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk
9 Maltz, S. (2018), Noise: A Search for Sense, Ilford, Saffron Planet Publishing, p19.
10 Tinker, M. (2018), That Hideous Strength: How the West was Lost, Welwyn Garden City, EP Books, p37 - p38.
11 Ibid, p56
12 See: https://christianconcern.com/cccases/richard-page/ last accessed 12.11.20.
13 The story in The Telegraph: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/09/21/school-employee-sacked-sharing-petition-lgbt-lessons-says-parents/
14 See: https://christianconcern.com/cccases/mary-douglas/
15 See: https://christianconcern.com/news/christian-ministry-harassed-and-facing-bank-account-closure/ Last accessed 12.11.20.
16 See: https://christianconcern.com/comment/scotlands-alarming-hate-posters/ Last accessed 09.02.21.