| Join us on Twitter |  |
|
Marxist Critical Theory: Why The Traditional Family Is Disintegrating
October 6th, 2013
Critical Theory, like Political Correctness, is a polite term for multiculturalism, which is a euphemism for Marxism that is used to conceal its true ideology. Ergo, Critical Theory is Marxism. It is a concept developed by a group of Marxist German intellectuals at the Frankfurt School in Frankfurt Germany where they created Cultural Marxism to replace economic Marxism. It was integral to their goal of completely destroying the values, morals, social structure, and culture of Western Civilization and replacing them with Marxist ideology that was considered as utopian. They envisioned this as being achieved through a peaceful cultural revolution that used academia, the media, and communications to propagate their message to pave the way towards egalitarianism and ultimately a totalitarian state. Notwithstanding what the term Critical Theory connotes, the only theory in Critical Theory was to viciously criticize. Cultural Marxists used it as the means to relentlessly criticize and destroy the main elements of Western culture, including the family, Christianity, capitalism, authority, patriarchy, hierarchy, morality, tradition, sexual restraint, loyalty, nationalism, heredity, convention, conservatism, and the truth. Simultaneously with their efforts of attacking and destroying these elements the Cultural Marxist were subtly replacing them with their own ideology that they deemed to be incontrovertible. The contemporary patriarchal family and its inherent values were despised by the Frankfurt School’s Cultural Marxists and was a primary target to be destroyed for two reasons: * It represented the fundamental fabric of a civilized society * It was an evil system that oppressed women and children Accordingly, its destruction became a priority. It was felt that even partially breaking down parental authority would increase the willingness of a future generation to accept a social change that would transform American culture into Marxist ideology. Lenin provided the solution to destroying the family, and ergo, Western Civilization, in his statement: “Destroy the family and you destroy society”. Critical Theory represented the means for accomplishing both and thus viciously criticizing the family began. The primary methods of attacking it in order to weaken the structure of civilized society consisted of the following: * Feminize the traditional patriarchal family with scores of single and homosexual mothers and fathers * Introduce radical sex education into schools because it was the most effective way to destroy traditional sexual morality by teaching children:
o Middle class family morals and monogamy were archaic and should be replaced with the pleasures of unrestrained love and sexual intercourse
o Organized religion was irrelevant because it served to deprive man of pleasure * Urge children to ridicule and ignore parental authority and traditionally accepted morality The mold was now set with the goal and means in place. This did not bode well for the contemporary family to maintain status quo in the future. America in the ‘60s Turn On, Tune In, Drop Out – Timothy Leary, 1967 * University and college students began rebelling en masse against the draft, the Vietnam War, and “the establishment” that supported the war efforts
* Changes in traditional family social mores significantly increased which resulted in a “Generation Gap" between young people and their parents
* Parents were considered as being “the establishment” – i.e., rapacious capitalists out of sync with the younger generation
Herbert Marcuse was one of the most influential members of the Frankfurt School who remained in American academia. He was well respected by college and university students and knew they represented the most effective means of diffusing Cultural Marxist ideology throughout their environment. Accordingly, he passionately evangelized its resounding call for social revolution, cultural transformation, rejection of morality and authority, particularly among those considered as elite idealists. The student rebels were in accord as to their targets of protest: the draft, the war, and the establishment. However, they lacked the following essential elements: * A theoretical explanation behind the protests * Clarification of the results they sought * The most effective means of achieving them Marcuse, already well entrenched in the bowls of elite academia and well respected by students and faculty, saw the rebellion as a golden opportunity: he would make the Frankfurt School’s Cultural Marxism the theory of America’s New Left and indoctrinate them with it as dogma. This would enable the revolutionaries to clearly identify and achieve the results they sought, i.e., replacing the traditional values, morals, social structure, and culture of Western Civilization with Marxist utopia. Likewise it would provide them with the means of achieving that end by using Critical Theory and the other destructive tools of Cultural Marxism. Marcuse immersed himself with the rebellious student protesters while providing counsel and encouragement for their activities. He broadened the group to include angry radical outcasts that considered themselves as oppressed victims of America, e.g., feminists, black militants, homosexuals, third world revolutionaries, and the like. The protests rapidly morphed into a full-blown movement known as “counter culture” that was comprised of radical, political, and social revolutionaries. As the movement grew it identified itself with the antithesis of what was deemed “the establishment’s” moralistic Capitalist consumerism. More succinctly, they were revolting against and viciously criticizing every element of traditional America culture. Their rallying cry was Marx, Marcuse, and Mao. In the academic world Marcuse incessantly indoctrinated students with the tenets of Cultural Marxism under the euphemism of multiculturalism and fostered the total destruction of American culture. He made the subject matter easy for the revolutionists to understand and absorb thereby facilitating acceptance and propagation without knowing its true ideology. Marcuse also taught the concept of “liberating tolerance”, which was intolerance for anything coming from the Right and tolerance for anything coming from the Left. Intolerance was always to be displayed through harsh, relentless criticism. Marcuse was a prolific writer. His book, “Eros and Civilization”, was intentionally made easy to read and follow became the bible for radicals and student revolutionaries of the ‘60s. In it he states that the essence of capitalism is repression, which creates multiple hang-ups and neuroses in people because it represses their sexual instincts. He concludes that the only way for the future of the counter culture movement to succeed is to destroy the oppressive nature of capitalism by first liberating all traditional sexual taboos and restraints. The result would be a world of free love and polymorphous perversity where all moral and cultural order is rejected and one is free to do as they please without working. This was the perfect message for the Boomer students and other radicals of the ‘60s to hear and strive to attain through aggressive protests and harsh, relentless criticism of traditional American culture. Marcuse coined the most notable chant of the time, “Make Love Not War”, that resonated loudly throughout college campuses and streets in America. The toxic Marxist seeds of destruction created by the founding members of the Frankfurt School in 1923 and deviously sown throughout America by their elite intellectual acolytes were firmly in place. They had been well fertilized with a steady dose of cultural Marxism and were beginning to bear the desired fruits: a young generation that was eager to accept and create social change. This was made abundantly clear by the momentum and effects of the Boomer’s Counter Culture Revolution of the ‘60s that endeavored to destroy and transform every element of American culture by using Critical Theory as their means. Multiculturalism has definitely affected the structure of families in America. From the generation gap of the ‘60s to the classrooms of today, its virulent anti-American ideology has been a significant factor in transforming the traditional relationship between family members.
|