At the risk of sounding like a broken record: They've been on the offense so long, they've forgotten what it's like to need to go on the defence.
US MSM/DNC is having its Cathy Newman moment.
It's something that happens to celebrities, apparently. They get so used to getting confirmation for every last thing that they do that their brain's evaluation of their own decisions for flaws just shuts down and they start thinking that they can do whatever they please without consequence. Charlie Sheen is probably a good practical example of that in action.
One common response to this kind of rhetoric is to laugh it off as uninformed shadow-grasping by figures who don’t understand that critical race theory is a college-level academic subject that isn’t taught, per se, in public K–12 schools. The Republican Party’s institutional embrace of CRT panic, this line of reasoning implies, is thus an only slightly more reality-based version of its efforts to leverage the QAnon conspiracy and COVID denialism—getting people worked up about a problem that doesn’t actually exist.
This is true, as far as it goes. Pete Ricketts doesn’t appear to have a detailed understanding of what critical race theory is. He, Chris Pringle, and many other party figures seem to have formed their opinions of the concept via the far-right media hyperbole chamber, in which second- and thirdhand anecdotes about corporate sensitivity training sessions and middle school history lessons become proof of a nationwide effort to make white children believe that their country is fundamentally evil.
Accordingly, voters outside of the Republican base seem to be treating critical race theory like they’ve treated other MAGA-media efforts to create wedge issues out of subjects like transgender bathroom access and the “migrant caravan”: by dismissing or ignoring them. A recent Economist/YouGov poll found that only 35 percent of Americans say they’ve heard of critical race theory and understand what it is; only 20 percent of respondents said they know what it is and don’t like it. A Morning Consult poll found that 31 percent of independent voters have negative views of the concept, which means that almost 70 percent of them either don’t see it as a problem or haven’t heard of it at all. While there have been high-profile cases of anti-CRT panic at the local level, those poll results are not numbers that should concern elected Democrats as a matter of politics right now.
What is more concerning is that as a matter of substance, some Republicans do understand what critical race theory is and have noticed some of its ideas have trickled down from higher education to become fairly mainstream interpretations of history. Those Republicans are pursuing laws that target the kind of teaching that could actually exist, or already does, which is troubling news both for the quality of American education and the more general cause of being allowed to say things that are true.
CRT originated in the mid-1970s in the writings of several American legal scholars, including Derrick Bell, Alan Freeman, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Richard Delgado, Cheryl Harris, Charles R. Lawrence III, Mari Matsuda, and Patricia J. Williams. It emerged as a movement by the 1980s, reworking theories of critical legal studies (CLS) with more focus on race. CRT is grounded in critical theory and draws from thinkers such as Antonio Gramsci,
Everyone who tried to claim that CRT just teaches history is a defacto cultural Marxist, whether they know it or not. So that's Greg, AlmightyBender, Buka, cerebus, Unhappy, OD...It's funny how every political movement has adherents who will vocally support that movement. Marxists, Socialists, Anarchists, White Nationalists; every part of the political spectrum. They all loudly and publically support their chosen ideology.
Every one - except this one.
Because "cultural Marxism" is a bogus, made up term to demonise the left, even though the concept doesn't actually exist outside right wing minds. A strawman.
I stand to be corrected. Is there any cultural Marxist who will argue his case? Just a single cultural Marxist who will stand up and claim the name.
Marxist cultural analysis is a form of cultural analysis and anti-capitalist cultural critique, which assumes the theory of cultural hegemony and from this specifically targets those aspects of culture which are profit driven and mass-produced under capitalism.
The original theory behind this form of analysis is commonly associated with Georg Lukacs, the Frankfurt School and Antonio Gramsci, representing an important tendency within Western Marxism. The Marxist cultural analysis, taken as an area of discourse, has commonly considered the industrialization and mass-production of culture by "the Culture Industry" as having an overall negative effect on society, an effect which reifies the audience away from developing a more authentic sense of human values.
Since the 1930s, the tradition of Marxist cultural analysis has occasionally also been referred to as "cultural Marxism", in reference to Marxist ideas about culture. However since the 1990s, this term has largely referred to the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory, a highly influential discourse on the far right without any clear relationship to Marxist cultural analysis.
In principle, yes. In practice, I don't know if it would do much good.Maybe debate should be steered in the direction of job creation and fixing our crime crisis (corrupt government officials included)
Which is a pitty because industrial expansion is what we need. Policies geared to stimulate the industrial sector specifically manufacturing should be looked at. Imports are being favoured at the moment by government when local business/industries should be protected. ...#fuckchinaIn principle, yes. In practice, I don't know if it would do much good.
SA is busy de-industrialising, the infrastructure needed to maintain the industrial aspects of the economy like rail etc. is disintegrating, and we don't really have a cushy service sector to make up for the loss. So we seem to be in a vicious circle that's destroying our productivity, which is destroying our competitiveness compared to countries like China.
If there was a viable opposition party that could take on the ANC at the polls, we might have stood a chance. But we don't, so imo SA is fucked. You're not going to accomplish anything if your mindset is such that you actually think that the hardest part of getting something implemented is making it a law, a la e-tolls and NHI, and so we're just going to keep spinning our wheels aimlessly in the mud, sinking further into the morass in the process.
Which is a pitty because industrial expansion is what we need. Policies geared to stimulate the industrial sector specifically manufacturing should be looked at. Imports are being favoured at the moment by government when local business/industries should be protected. ...#fuckchina
I remember that story. Is it still the case?