Feminism and cultural Marxism

This is a translation of my 3 article series ‘Feminismus und kultureller Marxismus’ in German.

The roots of Feminism go back to the 19th century and culminated in the general right to vote for women (and also most men who couldn’t vote) in all western countries. This would be the 1st wave. Then there were requests by women to have an equal right (and pay) to work and to education, but these rights were not exercise en masse. The two wold wars slowed down these developments, but brought women increasingly into the workplace, also because millions of men died and were not available as providers. The 2nd wave of feminism came about in the 1960’s at the same time as student protests took place in the US and Europe. The main issues were then, to eliminate a few minor obstacles in the law which could obstruct equal rights, but of major importance was the “sexual liberation of women”. Divorce laws, abortion and rape laws were some of the topics that caused outrage. The promotion of the actual use of the already equal rights, the original call for ’emancipation’, faded into the background. The request for equalization/equity became dominant, which means coercive action by the state which puts women on equal/higher social positions as/than men. The latter, including an unprecedented hate campaign against men and boys, would be the 3rd wave that started in the 1980’s.

Marx and Engels also lived in the 19th century. They described their ideology as “scientific socialism”, the term Marxism was coined by their followers. This philosophy was concerned with the criticism of the social order and spoke against the prevalent capitalism of the industrialized countries. Of all things it was the mostly agrarian, very little industrialized Russia, which adopted Marxism through brutal force by Lenin and Stalin (from 1924). This was followed by the Maoist version in China (1950’s), Vietnam (1950’s), Cuba (1960’s) and North-Korea (1970’s), all of them at that time mainly agrarian states with very little industry. Marxism was not accepted in the western industrialized states. The ideology continued to ‘live’ in the philosophy departments of the universities, but it was also limited to them. The western people chose to defend their capitalism against the Commies.

The Marxist thinkers couldn’t understand this. For them „Das Kapital“ was like a bible and a scientific book in one. It contained clear forecasts of the conditions under which capitalism will be replaced by Communism. Marx predicted that capitalism has the inert tendency to shift the means of production towards ever fewer people, and when the working class recognizes this, it will revolt. The revolt would first lead to socialism and then inevitably to Communism. Many Marxists expected that the end of WWI would give the initial spark to the broad introduction of Communism. But that only happened in Russia. So the Marxist thinkers gathered in 1924 in the “Frankfurt school”, the newly founded institute for social sciences at Frankfurt(Germany) university. They wanted to find out why the population prefers and always returns to capitalism and how this could be avoided. Most of the scientists at the “Frankfurt school” were Jews who emigrated to the USA in the early 1930’s and found a place at Columbia university. The Nazis closed the Frankfurt school in 1933.

The philosophers developed something they called “critical theory”. The result of their analysis was that the people do not reject capitalism – even if they have to suffer war, hunger, misery, etc. – because:

1. their religion causes them to believe in and obey a higher authority;
2. in the traditional family, in which the father generates a surplus of which the family lives, causes the wife and kids to obey him – as he can act as an authority figure in the family, he also accepts the authority of the capital owners and anyone higher up;
3. nationalism is based on the pride of the people that they (and their elders) have achieved something, which causes them to develop a communal identity, a feeling of solidarity;
4. the mass media makes propaganda for the common religion, traditions and national identity.

In order to start a proper revolution, religion, traditional family and nationalism must be destroyed, supported by the press which continuously denounces such thinking. Critical Theory means in this context, that intellectuals persistently criticize the current social conditions based on ‘scientific evidence’. These scientific claims were important, not only because they thought of Marxism as a strictly scientific theory, but also because people believed scientists just as much as they formerly believed religious leaders.

After WWII many of the emigrated philosophers came back to Frankfurt and re-opened their institute at the same university in the 1950’s. They refined and expanded their theories, and made some empirical studies in order to verify their statements. Anyway, capitalism was revived in western Europe and brought prosperity to the working classes, due to rapid technological innovations. Almost everyone was glad he didn’t have to live in the brutal and poor Sowjet communism. Especially the West-Germans looked with pity on their East-German ‘brothers and sisters’. It was so obvious who had the better life and West-Germans became a bit decadent. The ‘Wessies’ looked down, not only on the East, but also on parts of their own population which became lost in these rapid innovation cycles. Capitalism has the bad habit to widen the gap between rich and poor. The wars had destroyed the German economy completely, but only 20 years after the end of WWII, it turned out that the new capitalists (which often were the kids of the old capitalists) managed to cut up and monopolize the earlier level playing field to the disadvantage of the average Joe.

This caused unrest, first among the ‘good ole’ socialists/communists and in particular among the students. The findings of the Frankfurt school had a chance to be used in real life. In the USA young men protested against the draft for the never ending Vietnam war (1955-75) and there was anger about the government wasting all that money for war after war. In addition, the world economy was on a downturn again, after it had soared for 20 years. The universities became less elitist, kids from middle class and even lower class families could go to ‘uni’. The educated kids of the Nazi-parents started to hate their parents, who would often look back in remorse upon the destruction of their 1000 year 3rd Reich. Politicians brought up the fear of a possible nuclear war against the Soviet Union. In Germany the movement of 1968 and the so called APO (extra-parliamentary opposition) gained ground. The ‘sweet smell of revolution’ was in the air.

The 1968 movement used the theories of the Frankfurt school. The pamphlet of Herbert Marcuse “Eros and Civilization” of 1955 was published in German in 1957 and 1965. It’s a synthesis of Marx and Sigmund Freud. It concluded that our sexual drives are suppressed by the capitalists and in order to free ourselves, we should prioritize the pleasure principle, which would lead to a non-repressive civilization. Consequently, fucking is more important than work; no one has to marry to enjoy a good humping; weddings are so yesterday. These are attacks on religion (marriage) and the traditional family. ‘Free love’ must be so much better than the traditional, repressive christian family. One of Marcuse’s talks was published in 1962 “Emancipation of women in the repressive society”. Adorno wrote “The authoritarian personality” in 1950. “Dialectic of Enlightenment” by Horkheimer/Adorno 1944/47. What these people wrote, originally with the reasoning that this is how a resurgence of Nazi-ism and therefore another catastrophe like WWII can be avoided in the future, was now used to kindle the long-yearned-for revolution.

The rubbery term of the “evil patriarchy” can rather be attributed to the Frankfurt school than to the feminist movement. The traditional family structure, in which the father was the head of the family (patriarch) and had final authority was denounced as evil. The reasons for this were:

1. people are used to give orders and follow orders;
2. people believe in a nation, in which the political leaders set the rules and everybody has to follow these rules;
3. people believe their morals come from a higher power, or from ‘God’;
4. people believe in a cohesive nation which follows high ideals.

All these qualities or codes of conduct were now stigmatized as ‘repressive’, undermining the ‘middle class morality’. Sex before marriage was normalized; to marry first and then have kids was seen as a social repression for women. All authority, father, teacher, public official, officer, any kind of leader should be dismissed or at least treated with utmost suspicion. The ‘new man’ (and woman) should uphold personal freedom and radical individualism, so that we’d never fall back into the clutches of the Nazi paroles. So called national interests are to be rejected, since they are always against the interests of the individual person.

The leaders of the Frankfurt school became aware that this ideology can only be introduced if you can re-educate the people over a few generations. Based on Mao’s long march, they planned the long march through the institutions. First there had to be teachers in the schools and universities, who used methods like during the de-Nazification in order to undermine the patriarchal role model. Teachers could most easily form the thinking of the youth. The proposition that personal freedom and individualism was to be regarded as a higher value than behavior that was criminalized before (like abortion) got introduced into the justice system.

In the course of this re-education, a very special method was devised, called „political correctness“(PC). Since especially in Germany (and some other parts of Europe) the Jews and Gypsies, among others, had been marginalized and demonized, which lead to the horrible excesses of the concentration camps, it was easy to point out that they suffer from discrimination (in the USA it was the black slaves argument) and shun such discrimination as Nazi-philosophy. Political correctness has a sword and a shield. The sword is to point out the alleged suffering of these marginalized groups and minorities. So blacks, Jews, gays, brown people who don’t fit into the culture, women, all kinds of invented genders, they all have a reason to complain and rail about any kind of real or imaginary disadvantage and they are always allowed to call for equalization/equity. The shield is that anyone who argues against that or raises concerns will be called a racist, anti-Semite, Nazi, homophobe, misogynist, sexist, etc.

The shield of PC enables to stifle any debate about the real circumstances or about the inappropriateness of the requests. If you refute the claims, you’re automatically a giant asshole who can be dragged through the mire by the press without a chance to be heard. You commit a thought crime (1984, George Orwell). With the sword, all the ‘special snowflake’ requests of the so called marginalized groups can be used to enact new laws, to set up new institutions (like the equal opportunities officers) and altogether enormously inflate the bureaucracy of a country. In consequence new taxes must be raised and there’s not enough money to repair streets or rotten school buildings.

It’s not only your average citizen who is affected by PC (although mainly men and boys), but also the employers. Because of anti-discrimination laws, companies must build up an internal bureaucracy for compliance and can’t freely decide anymore whom they hire or with which “evil” company they can do business. This has major financial implications and most companies will shy away from any conflicts and will try to smooth over and steer away from any allegation; they fire even a Nobel price winner if the Feminazi mob demands it.

Western societies as of yet seem to be quite resistant against any revolution. The major economic crisis of 2008 was probably a wet dream for some Neo-Marxists, but each crisis is a reason for hope. Debt crisis, economic crisis, immigration crisis, climate crisis, energy crisis, etc. there are more than enough opportunities ahead of us. But of course, a real revolution is no guarantee that communism is coming. It’s much more likely that – like ever so often in history – a totalitarian police state will emerge, followed by war(s). After 9/11 the USA has decided to start two wars and strengthen police and surveillance. The mini-revolution of Occupy Wall street was defeated with tear gas and riot sticks. The fear in people is always stronger than their hope.

I tried to present the history above without too much bias. There are certainly other ways to do that, but I don’t know what to make of speculations about Jewish world conspiracies, or new world order fantasies or Illuminati hullabaloo. Some things just happen and you can try to explain after the fact how and why this and that happened, but without proof such conspiracy explanations have no value (besides some entertainment value).

You can find info’s about the Frankfurt school also on Wikipedia, or just google it.

The largest part of the KGB was not their spy agency, but an organization for brain-washing people. The goal was the subversion of the capitalist west. The most important and subtle method to control people is to subvert their shared identity – then they will fight against each other, not against the external enemy. It changes their basic attitude towards life and religion, it destroys their community of shared values, their family relationships and marriages; their acceptance of leaders and institution dwindles, they don’t look alike and don’t speak the same language anymore. The destruction of the traditional family had the deepest, long lasting effect. We observe this process since the 1960’s.

The western governments and intelligence agencies were aware of what the KGB and their helpers did and some vehemently tried to brace against the onslaught (McCarthy, USA). But their efforts were futile. Our bureaucracies and many others who don’t appreciate hard work saw how this subversion could work to their own advantage. It leads to a huge increase of simple and useless office jobs :

– The destruction of the family enabled the creation of a new support-economy. Divorce attorneys and family court judges, child protective services, bureaucrats who control families and their finances, all kind of voodoo priests from family studies to family therapy and equal opportunities officers were happy to fill forms and write papers for no good/sane reason at all.

– The undermining of the authority of formerly respected public authorities (like e.g. the police) or of leading public officials or of chief executives was used to set up bloated control committees and audit companies.

– If everybody has the same skin color and speaks the same language, there’s no need for special cultural programs or an integration task force or a special language training for immigrants.

– The inequality debate (I call it envy debate) creates more and more jobs in government and research. Since mothers flushed into the labor markets, tens of thousands of kindergarten places had to be built.

Everyone who got such an often easy, but really unnecessary job clings to it. Not only will people fight tooth and nail to keep it, but they are interested in making their job more important. More people must be hired, the tasks must be expanded, the most Machiavellian of the do-nothing’s will become group leaders of the other do-nothing’s. When the ball starts rolling it keeps rolling, avalanche-like, self perpetuating.

A large part of the jobs created in the last decades are either directly or indirectly paid by the state. They might fight among each other about who gets the bigger budget, but you won’t see them fighting to reduce all budgets; none of them will shoot himself in the foot. Everyone gets a nice salary, has a quiet office job and goes relaxed into the evening; it’s just wonderful. All the government officials, administration chiefs, heads of departments have tears of joy in their eyes when their budget increases and they need to hire more bureaucrats and can slip into the next higher pay grade. But, stupid question, who actually pays their salaries? Yeah, it’s the ‘idiots’ who do productive work, the men who build the roads and houses, who build cars and repair them, you get my drift.

The little seeds of cultural Marxism have spread through the institutions. Former KGB officer Putin watches and laughs about how we wear ourselves out. As long as Russia is quiet – and they have a long standing history of how to brutally defeat insurrections – he can calmly watch our chaos on his TV set. At some point in time such a systems must collapse. One of my friends always called it a Siemens-eight-man-skull; seven drummers, one rower 🙂 , because the corporations are strangled by bureaucracy as well.

How does Feminism play into this?

Well, after the destruction of the families, more women have to get a job, whether they like it or not, particularly if they don’t have a rich ex-husband. Sewer cleaning or masonry are not their favorite jobs, neither is sitting at the till in a supermarket. How fortunate then, that there are so many office jobs available for which they don’t have to have much of an education. Once they were in, they were able to recommend their friends in the gender warrior sect for new/free positions. After a couple of years the office fills up with other feminists, but the boss is still a man. Something must be done about that – see empty stovepipe hat, flash, here’s a rabbit – gender quota for leadership positions, taraaa!!!

And it’s no wonder that the feminists are hailing and welcome refugees and immigration. Fuck the white man, multikulti is great. We need new refugee hostels, integration training, language courses (and even do-not-rape education), which brings joy to their hearts. Again, tens of thousands of essentially unnecessary jobs are created. But, stupid question (again), who actually pays their salaries? Yeah, it’s again the ‘idiots’ who do productive work, the men who build the roads and houses, who build cars and repair them. You see the pattern now?

Your garden variety feminist or their white knights usually have no idea about the game they are involved in. They only see their own advantage and the alleged benefits for ‘all women’.

What will happen if the ‘idiots’ run out of steam working harder and longer hours and giving all their proceeds to the state? Who knows, but I’ve been told there was a similar mood in Germany in the 1930’s. After the next financial meltdown, a crisis like 2008 or even bigger, Europe and maybe even the USA could be at the verge of collapse. What will happen then is everyone’s guess. As I said before, history shows us that a totalitarian police state and war were a very common reaction.

Looking further back into history, in medieval times the ecclesiastical tithe wasn’t so bad. If everyone pays 10% taxes and the state can never spend more than it collects, such insane excesses in bureaucracy are simply impossible.


2 thoughts on “Feminism and cultural Marxism

  1. It was Goethe University of Frankfurt, not “Frankfurt(Germany) university”. Other than that you seem to be arguing for a return to medieval times, whilst vying for the attentions of “the ‘idiots’ who do productive work, the men who build the roads and houses, who build cars and repair them” – notably the same group Marx sort to defend against elites.

    …but I think it’s laughable to say that those working men need protection against women, sex outside of marriage or modernity… and I doubt many people on earth want to go back to “medieval times” or “ecclesiastical tithe”. The world would have to become quite a twisted place for quite some time before anyone will give people like you any credit.


    1. The “idiots” are important as long as they provide the work for Maslow’s basic level of human needs. If they are replaced by machines, they also cannot be taxed anymore. I’m going to write an article about that soon.

      As for your 2nd paragraph, I never said what you stated. But if you wanted to build a strawman and bash it, you’ve done a “fine job”. I referred to the ecclesiastical tithe exactly for the reason I stated in the last sentence of the article.


Comments are closed.