Re: Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[Örsan Şenalp]

Dear Brian, dear all,

Quinn's interview is great, and boo is greater! I do join the
recommenders of it. It is extremely helpful for the sake of
de-toxication.

Yet, there is something else that must be recognized about the nature
of all this ‘toxication’ going on. Which is a fatal historical mistake
of the Left, first with the silence about the oppression of an
original paradigm at the time of its rise. An emancipatory vision of
cultural change as a constructive revolutionary force; which was/is
needed to be grown, as a better world building praxis, by generating a
new culture, the culture of the future, through figurative and
self-changing praxis today; it rised very near to Lenin, and supressed
by his conscious and decisive efforts. Then secondly this
has-reproduced along the 20th century. As Bifo would call it, it was
encapulsated.

Next to Gramsci, amongst the pioneers of ‘cultural Marxism’, the names
of Early Frankfurt School thinkers like Adorno and Horkheimer, as well
as independent authors like Korsch, Bloch, Lukacs, Benjamin, Brecht,
Weil, so on are counted often. While the major source for the ideas on
the cultural question has always been the key debate which took place
between Lenin and Bogdanov between 1907-08 to Lenin’s death in 1924,
so the participants of this debate, not only intellectuals but artists
and workers alike.

All the names counted above were witness to Lenin’s wrath but
subscribed to it to oppose its worsened manifestation in Stalin. These
include Trotsky, Bukharin, Zinoviev, Kamenev and other ‘leaders’ or
nomenclature; so-called leaders of the left and right opposition to
the center (which was held by Lenin first and occupied by Stalin after
him). They all obeyed and benefited from Lenin’s authoritarianism,
which suppressed the cultural question, together with Bogdanov’s
person; only a bright alternative. Lenin promoted Plekhanov’s crude
Materialism even over his own views in his Hegel study in 1914-15,
where he admitted neither Plekhanov nor him was a real Marxist. Of
course, he never published his notes, in opposite after Plekhanov died
he reclaims him as the father of the Russian Marxism (as father-son
and holy spirit). Gramsci was in Moscow between 1922 and 1924; from
the days when the proletarian culture debate made a comeback;
ProletKult suppressed by Lenin’s orders, and Bogdanov was arrested in
August 1923 for his ‘counter-revolutionary’ activities!

If  Icould i would attaching some excerpts from Noemi Ghetti's 2016
book: The Postcard of Gramsci which presents a major discovery. For
those who can read Italian, I strongly suggest reading this
beautifully written book. What Noemi's book puts forward is the proof
and expanding argument of Gramsci's, together with Iulca Schucht (his
wife and mother of his two sons), secretly starting to translate
Bogdanov's science fiction novel Red Star into Italian, in the Summer
of 1922 (pp. 30-31). The book proofs that Gramsci actually did proceed
and finalized the translation, together with Iulca. Since both Gramsci
and Iulca were lacking proficiency in the languages required (Gramsci
in Russian, and Iulca in Italian. The proof of the completion of the
translation is given in another letter exchange that took place in
January 1923, some telegrams between January and November 1923 when
Gramsci left to Vienne (pp. 99-102), and Gramsci asks Iulca if the
translation is finished or not; Iulca answers that she had it when
they met; and then Gramsci replies asking why didn't she gave it to
him when they met he could have taken with him to Italy and publish
it. In these letters, though there are no more mentioning of any
names, neither of the book nor Bogdanov; yet Gramsci calls himself a
'counter-Revolutionary' sarcastically -probably referring to
Bogdanov's arrest that took place several months before. Bogdanov
released in later October 1923. The rest of Noemi's story is
beautifully built around these delicate relationships between Gramsci
and his love in Moscow between 1922-24, under the shadow of Bogdanov
and Lenin rivalry around the status of the ProletKult, the
organization and movement, and in general with regard to the creation
of new proletarian culture in the aftermath of the revolution.

Below are some of the free access key sources on this connection of
Lenin-Bogdanov-Gramsci, which I believe is the ‘encapsulated’ (as Bifo
Berardi use the term) anti-toxin of contemporary toxicity of the term
Cultural Marxism. I think such encapsulation, by Lenin, Stalin and
others, and the continuation of such encapsulation by Marxian
orthodoxy, as well as the preservation of that encapsulated paradigm
by structural and post-structural heirs of this line has been one of
the main sources that allowed the ruling classes to benefit from the
post-modern and identity-based versions of “classless-cultural
analysis”; which was found of CIA, ford and Rockefeller Foundations,
Soros, USAID and European Commission...  this was class base of
continutaiton 

Re: Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[Brian Holmes]

On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 3:32 PM  wrote:

> 'Cultural Marxism' is a conspiracy theory propagated by the extreme right.
> The article posted by Ico above is good and I think it's fair game to
> bundle anyone who openly promotes or subscribes to it with the likes of
> Breivik. The European New Right have been reading Gramsci since the 70's
> afaik.
>

Certainly the term is to be avoided like the plague. However, Flick's
memory of his radical professor is a perfect account of a widespread
strategy in the 70s. In the 80s, British cultural studies provided a
Gramscian theory for demands that had come straight out of experience. I
don't think right-wing Gramscianism began in North America until the 90s,
when conservatives finally realized what a powerful strategy this had been.

Anyway, it's a pleasure to read and listen to Quinn Slobodian. He makes the
point that for neoliberal theorists like Hayek or Buchanan, there is no
fixed doctrine, rather a constantly shifting field of challenges and
opportunities in which they deploy changing ideas to meet core goals. He
also shows that as the harms of financially driven globalization became
obvious after 2008, the critique of neoliberalism was adopted and
transformed by the new populists. The panorama is now much more complicated
than right vs left. There are still neoliberals moving to replace all
politics with their version of free-market economics. There are neofascists
recoiling in horror from a globalism that they blame on the left. There are
Keynesian social democrats who think they can revive the post-WWII boom.
There are identitarians who blame everything on white males. There are old
leftists who see the future in one big union. There are environmentalists
with their increasingly inconvenient truth. There are anarchists convinced
that civilization is about to end, good riddance. And that's just in the
so-called West, which no longer controls a world increasingly dominated by
the rise of Asia.

We are smack in the middle of the great crisis that technopolitical theory
accurately predicted. As in the Thirties, an economic crash has set off
incomparably more severe political problems. Most intellectuals are
hopelessly confused, because they can't face the complexity and also, more
understandably, because their loyalties and solidarities force them to go
on using languages inadequate to the present. But amazingly, you can turn
on Jacobin radio and listen to Quinn Slobodian. So who says Occupy
accomplished nothing? Such an interview proves that democratic socialists
can think, a rare activity these days. Theorists of the next generation,
open your eyes. You have nothing to lose but your illusions.

https://www.blubrry.com/thedig/39413662/a-history-of-neoliberalism-with-quinn-slobodian

optimistically? I guess so, Brian
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[Florian Cramer]

The extreme right is just not educated enough to properly spot its enemies.
Parts of Adorno's theory, for example, could be easily hijacked for
conservative and right-wing ends: his resistance against mass culture,
early writings against jazz music, fondness of Spengler and cultural
pessimism, even his larger issue of commodification resistance (which is a
left-wing as well as a right-wing topic), to name only a few. Much of
Adorno's philosophy was in line with the reservations and resentments of
the German "Bildungsbürgertum" (the English translation "educated middle
class" doesn't really cut it, because the German word describes a
particular social milieu that grew out of Lutheran-protestant values,
anti-materialism, academic education and fondness of canonic high culture).
Those resentments found their way into both left-wing and right-wing
thinking, including thinkers who crossed those lines (such as Peter
Sloterdijk).

If the political right and its protagonists would be better educated and
not argue on the level of college freshmen when it comes to cultural
theory, they would know that they shouldn't blame Adorno, Foucault and
Derrida, with the latter being even more easily interpretable as
revisionists and anti-progressives than Adorno. (Which is what parts of
so-called "German media theory" actually did in the 1980s and 1990s.) The
right-wingers should better refocus their attention to British Cultural
Studies which actually happen to be "Cultural Marxism" with no strings
attached. I'm almost afraid to drop the names of Stuart Hall and the
Birmingham School here (not to even mention Marxist post-colonialists such
as Gayatri Spivak), since they could be the "Alt-Right"'s perfect enemy and
scapegoat; much more so than Adorno and the Frankfurt School...

-F


-- 
blog: *https://pod.thing.org/people/13a6057015b90136f896525400cd8561
*
bio:  http://floriancramer.nl


On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 10:47 PM Flick Harrison 
wrote:

> I always thought Cultural Marxism was a fine term and it doesn't hit me as
> a right-biased word in itself, though it gets used since its origin that
> way.  I mean the first law teacher I had in University was a
> Marxist-Feminist, who completely believed this radical notion that righties
> hate: there's a superstructure that constructs the social narrative, and
> the social narrative is the source for all concepts of right, wrong, law,
> etc, which are not absolutes but socially determined; and that as we live
> in a patriarchy, the narrative is all about what men need, want, love and
> desire.  Thus the patriarchal power structure and the narrative reinforce
> and reproduce one another.
>
> The objective of the Marxist-Feminist is seizing the means of production
> of this narrative (culturally, in the workplace, in the control of capital
> whether for industry or communications, in politics, in the home etc).
>
> Now if you extrapolate to include intersectional politics, you get
> Cultural Marxism, or maybe Identity Marxism.  What's not to like about this
> term?  What's incompatible with our ideals?
>
> By using the word Marxist you're already implying socialism and
> internationalism, it would be hard to be a Marxist-Feminist who isn't a
> radical socialist too.
>
> So for all the awfulness of Anders Breivik, this nomenclature dispute
> isn't the angle from which I'd critique him.  The problem is his (perhaps
> mental-health or socially-conditioned) fear of the other, leading to
> violent outburst.  The problem is his fear of dialogue and engagement.  The
> problem is the amplifying echo-chamber of violent, unhinged narcissists
> with nothing but contempt for any difference of opinion, where bad-faith
> actors team up with honest ignoramuses and budding lunatics.
>
> Now a term I really suspect is the bogeyman term "Anarcho-Capitalism:"
> this seems to be almost an alt-right Trojan Horse, meant to lure beginner
> Left thinkers of the "Bernie-or-Trump" variety. To me Libertarian
> Capitalism seems like a term that more readily describes people like Trump,
> Paul Ryan, Margaret Thatcher, Andrew Scheer, Sarkozy etc.  "Capital is born
> free, yet everywhere it is in chains!" Oh crap, there's Rousseau again, but
> I swear I know nothing about him.
>
> By using "Anarcho-" that way, it sounds to me like an attempt to muddy our
> image of the villains:  "Anarchism" evokes the left, whereas the most
> radical white supremacist kleptocrats are more likely Libertarian.  Why try
> to make Anarchism sound bad by tying it to Capitalism??  Because the
> alt-right talking points assert that "globalism" and "identity politics"
> and "socialism" are something that "elites" do, i.e. the big bad
> "oligarchs."  Lump these elites (Hillary! Oprah! Michelle Obama!) together
> with capitalists ((Soros!)) and you get "Anarcho-Capitalists??"
>
> Libertarian Capitalism, on the other hand, gets away scot-free because
> Crypto nerds think 

Re: Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[Flick Harrison]

I always thought Cultural Marxism was a fine term and it doesn't hit me as
a right-biased word in itself, though it gets used since its origin that
way.  I mean the first law teacher I had in University was a
Marxist-Feminist, who completely believed this radical notion that righties
hate: there's a superstructure that constructs the social narrative, and
the social narrative is the source for all concepts of right, wrong, law,
etc, which are not absolutes but socially determined; and that as we live
in a patriarchy, the narrative is all about what men need, want, love and
desire.  Thus the patriarchal power structure and the narrative reinforce
and reproduce one another.

The objective of the Marxist-Feminist is seizing the means of production of
this narrative (culturally, in the workplace, in the control of capital
whether for industry or communications, in politics, in the home etc).

Now if you extrapolate to include intersectional politics, you get Cultural
Marxism, or maybe Identity Marxism.  What's not to like about this term?
What's incompatible with our ideals?

By using the word Marxist you're already implying socialism and
internationalism, it would be hard to be a Marxist-Feminist who isn't a
radical socialist too.

So for all the awfulness of Anders Breivik, this nomenclature dispute isn't
the angle from which I'd critique him.  The problem is his (perhaps
mental-health or socially-conditioned) fear of the other, leading to
violent outburst.  The problem is his fear of dialogue and engagement.  The
problem is the amplifying echo-chamber of violent, unhinged narcissists
with nothing but contempt for any difference of opinion, where bad-faith
actors team up with honest ignoramuses and budding lunatics.

Now a term I really suspect is the bogeyman term "Anarcho-Capitalism:" this
seems to be almost an alt-right Trojan Horse, meant to lure beginner Left
thinkers of the "Bernie-or-Trump" variety. To me Libertarian Capitalism
seems like a term that more readily describes people like Trump, Paul Ryan,
Margaret Thatcher, Andrew Scheer, Sarkozy etc.  "Capital is born free, yet
everywhere it is in chains!" Oh crap, there's Rousseau again, but I swear I
know nothing about him.

By using "Anarcho-" that way, it sounds to me like an attempt to muddy our
image of the villains:  "Anarchism" evokes the left, whereas the most
radical white supremacist kleptocrats are more likely Libertarian.  Why try
to make Anarchism sound bad by tying it to Capitalism??  Because the
alt-right talking points assert that "globalism" and "identity politics"
and "socialism" are something that "elites" do, i.e. the big bad
"oligarchs."  Lump these elites (Hillary! Oprah! Michelle Obama!) together
with capitalists ((Soros!)) and you get "Anarcho-Capitalists??"

Libertarian Capitalism, on the other hand, gets away scot-free because
Crypto nerds think libertarianism is cool and they want Undermine the
Elites!!  They get to avoid Paying Taxes for the Globalist Wars!
Libertarian Capitalism is for rebels and futurists and you just want to
suck up to the Government!!

Maybe I'm stretching it.  But the more I dive in, this decision - whether
to villainize "Anarcho-Capitalism" or "Libertarian Capitalism" seems more
and more important.
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[Örsan Şenalp]

Hi Analoguehorizon, sounds like a good book, and I will definitely
listen to the podcast.

But just for the good sake of the self-criticism, I think, as a Marx
inspired revolutionary who sees all the others who claim to be so as
comrades, including comrade Marx himself, comrade Engels, Plekhanov,
especially comrade Lenin, not less than him, comrade Trotsky, worse of
all comrade Stalin, yet still comrade Bukharin; and all other Russian
comrades did contribute to the failure of the Marx' ideas, before, at
the time of, and after the Russian revolution took place. Following
the chain of events in the West indeed those comrades starting with
Korch, Bloch, Lukács, Horkheimer, Adorno, Brecht, and Benjamin
comrades; who followed dead of comrade Lenin, against comrade Stalin,
their heirs, all other neo-Hegelian comrades, worse then all Althusser
comrade, and comrades following him and breaking with him like comrade
Foucault, up to comrade Laclau and comrade Mouffe; and to comrades
Hardt and Negriwe all contributed to the failure of Marx' spirit,
and contributed to the rising of the post-modern nihilism; we got
co-opted with the hope to teach capitalist systems-engineers... and
accepting Soros, US Aid, and EC fundings...  we all failed humanity..
let alone Marx. One comrade warned as but not so many listened to him.
He was the original developer of Cultural Marxism, in Russia. And
these days he is coming back his real rehabilitation... guess who is
he?  :)

Best,
Orsan

On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 at 17:40,  wrote:
>
> Hi Orsan,
>
> I recently listened to this interview with Quinn Slobodian in the second half 
> he talks about the developments from Mises to Rothbards Anarcho Capitalism 
> and it's links to the American Paleocon movement and subsequently the 
> development of the Alt-Right.
>
> https://www.blubrry.com/thedig/39413662/a-history-of-neoliberalism-with-quinn-slobodian/
>
> I found his new book useful too 
> http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674979529
>
> Best
>
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 3:34 PM Örsan Şenalp  wrote:
>>
>> Dear Ico,
>>
>> Thanks a lot, this is a very good reply to those at the extreme right and 
>> conservative side. I wonder how would you make of and counter the 
>> confirmation of such a crazy position by someone who is a fellow at Mises 
>> Institute, anarcho-capitalist someone?
>>
>> Best,
>> Orsan
>> #  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
>> #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
>> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
>> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
>> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
>> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[Ryan Griffis]

Ayn Rand devotees arguing that “Cultural Marxists” have a skewed view of the 
world… LOL
If The Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) wasn’t part of a very real and 
influential network of Koch-funded think tanks, they would almost be funny.
So would Meuller's book (*of course* he’s a German economist based in Brazil!), 
titled "Beyond the State and Politics. Capitalism for the New Millennium” (hey, 
it’s FREE--as in beer--as a Kindle unlimited book!). In the promotional copy: 
"When the functions of government are privatized, the financial burden of taxes 
and contributions falls from the shoulders of the population.”
I guess the invisible hand of the market is better with a gun.
Ah, that’s why they love the acronym FEE so much!

Octavia Butler imagined this world "without a state” too. Wonder why her vision 
of such a world doesn't sound like theirs?
https://fee.org/about/board-of-trustees

Ryan

Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018 12:58:45 +0100
> From: ?rsan ?enalp 
> To: Nettime 
> Subject:  Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the
>   new world order
> Message-ID:
>   
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Dear list members,
> 
> I really wonder what would you make of this article by Antony Meuller of
> Mises Institute? Is he implying the role really played by, at least, the
> certain liberal post-Marxist Left in building up Neoliberlism, or is it
> just a reaction against the growing power of the left?
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/cultural-marxism-is-the-main-source-of-modern-confusion-and-its-spreading/?utm_content=79412082_medium=social_source=facebook=IwAR0PonQZ5UQP4iGvZfSFJE3p8jecBefhyHwupA4ZTa-__n01010J9X305Q8
> 

#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[analoguehorizon]

Hi Orsan,

I recently listened to this interview with Quinn Slobodian in the second
half he talks about the developments from Mises to Rothbards Anarcho
Capitalism and it's links to the American Paleocon movement and
subsequently the development of the Alt-Right.

https://www.blubrry.com/thedig/39413662/a-history-of-neoliberalism-with-quinn-slobodian/

I found his new book useful too
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674979529

Best

On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 3:34 PM Örsan Şenalp  wrote:

> Dear Ico,
>
> Thanks a lot, this is a very good reply to those at the extreme right and
> conservative side. I wonder how would you make of and counter the
> confirmation of such a crazy position by someone who is a fellow at Mises
> Institute, anarcho-capitalist someone?
>
> Best,
> Orsan
> #  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
> #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[Örsan Şenalp]

Dear Ico,

Thanks a lot, this is a very good reply to those at the extreme right and
conservative side. I wonder how would you make of and counter the
confirmation of such a crazy position by someone who is a fellow at Mises
Institute, anarcho-capitalist someone?

Best,
Orsan
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[newmedia]

Nettimers:


"Cultural Marxism" is, of course, a canard -- primarily because it never really 
had any impact.  Adorno did manage to write "The Authoritarian Personality" (a 
favorite of Breivik) but he was tossed out of the Rockefeller Radio Research 
Project and few (at that level) ever paid much attention to him.  The 
"Frankfurt School" (and Marcuse in particular) were considered "passe" by the 
New Left, typically viewed as "CIA types," leaving it to Paul Piccione and his 
TELOS to try to get some attention for them (without much success.)


"Globalism" is closer to the real story and, indeed, it is now dead.  However, 
the impetus for such institutions as the UN, World Bank/IMF, WTO  -- all of 
which have largely been rendered irrelevant by China (and the BRICs more 
widely) -- didn't come from "cultural marxism" at all.  Margaret Mead and Larry 
K. Frank, yes.  "Critical" anything, no.

In "power" terms -- taken using Michael Mann's "Sources of Social Power" 
framework -- globalism had ideological, economic, political and military 
sources that all aligned post-WW II around the theme of preventing WW III 
(while substituting psychological warfare for "kinetics") and generating a "new 
world order" that would force "nation states" to join in a common effort.  This 
is the framework that has now collapsed and will never be revived.  Humpty 
Dumpty has actually fallen off the wall . . . 

Henry Kissinger was at the center of all this, so tracing his career tells much 
of the story.  From his unpublished 380+ page undergraduate Harvard thesis, 
"The Meaning of History," to his crucial role in the very important Special 
Studies Project, Henry was a Rockefeller protege -- in particular of Nelson, 
who was slated to become President in 1964.  Instead, his girlfriend "Happy" 
got pregnant, refused an abortion, forcing "Rocky" to divorce and Goldwater 
became the candidate. By the 1970s much of this was already unraveling and now 
we are finally noticing it.

Henry's the last chapter of his last book, "World Order," and his subsequent 
interviews all reflect the same conclusion: digital technology has irrevocably 
ended the old "new world order."  And, as a result, Henry no longer knows what 
to do.  Given that his advisers include those like Eric Schmidt, this 
intellectual cul-de-sac should come as no surprise.  In fact, no one from 
Henry's (or Eric's) world know's what to do.

We are heading into a political-economy completely unimagined by "cultural 
marxism" or any other ideological construct from the 20th (or previous) 
century.  "Libertarian Marxism" is just a reflection of how confused we have 
become.  My attendance at the "2nd World Congress on Marxism" in Beijing (last 
May) points to a vibrant effort on the part of the Chinese to sort all this -- 
to the utter confusion of the Western "Marxists" invited to speak.  Yes, China 
is way ahead of the West in thinking all this through (and few in the West 
understand this.)

Toto, I don't believe we are in Kansas anymore . . . -- Dorothy (1939, speaking 
about the *radio* world, then being studied by the Rockefellers)

Mark (Jersey City Heights)


-Original Message-
From: I M 
To: orsan1234 
Cc: nettime-l 
Sent: Fri, Nov 16, 2018 7:43 am
Subject: Re:  Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new 
world order



Dear Orsan (and all)


We recently, published this article on Cultural Marxism, it can probably help: 
why-has-cultural-marxism-become-enemy


kind regards





Op vr 16 nov. 2018 om 13:38 schreef Örsan Şenalp :


Dear list members,  



I really wonder what would you make of this article by Antony Meuller of Mises 
Institute? Is he implying the role really played by, at least, the certain 
liberal post-Marxist Left in building up Neoliberlism, or is it just a reaction 
against the growing power of the left? 



https://fee.org/articles/cultural-marxism-is-the-main-source-of-modern-confusion-and-its-spreading/?utm_content=79412082_medium=social_source=facebook=IwAR0PonQZ5UQP4iGvZfSFJE3p8jecBefhyHwupA4ZTa-__n01010J9X305Q8


best, 

Orsan
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:




-- 







Ico Maly
Tilburg University
Editor-in-chief diggit magazine
diggitmagazine.com
facebook.com/diggitmagazine/

twitter.com/diggitmagazine





Nieuw

Maly, I. (2018). De Hedendaagse antiverlichting (Berchem, Epo)
Maly, I. (2018). Algorithmic populism and algorithmic activism. Diggit Magazine.
Maly, I. (20

Re: Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[I M]

Dear Orsan (and all)

We recently, published this article on Cultural Marxism, it can probably
help: why-has-cultural-marxism-become-enemy


kind regards


Op vr 16 nov. 2018 om 13:38 schreef Örsan Şenalp :

> Dear list members,
>
> I really wonder what would you make of this article by Antony Meuller of
> Mises Institute? Is he implying the role really played by, at least, the
> certain liberal post-Marxist Left in building up Neoliberlism, or is it
> just a reaction against the growing power of the left?
>
>
> https://fee.org/articles/cultural-marxism-is-the-main-source-of-modern-confusion-and-its-spreading/?utm_content=79412082_medium=social_source=facebook=IwAR0PonQZ5UQP4iGvZfSFJE3p8jecBefhyHwupA4ZTa-__n01010J9X305Q8
>
> best,
> Orsan
> #  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
> #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:



-- 
Ico Maly
Tilburg University
Editor-in-chief diggit magazine
diggitmagazine.com 
facebook.com/diggitmagazine/ 
twitter.com/diggitmagazine 


*Nieuw*

   - Maly, I. (2018). De Hedendaagse antiverlichting (Berchem, Epo)
   

   - Maly, I. (2018). Algorithmic populism and algorithmic activism.
   
   Diggit Magazine.
   - Maly, I. (2018). Populism as a mediatized communicative relation: The
   birth of algorithmic populism.
   
TPCS
   working paper 213
   - Maly, I. (2018). Welkom in het tijdperk van het globale nationalisme.
   

   Sampol.
   - Maly, I. (2018). Nieuw Rechts. Berchem: EPO.
   
   - Maly, I. (2017). New media, new resistance and mass media : A digital
   ethnographic analysis of the Hart – Boven – Hard movement in Belgium
   
.
   in Papaioannou, T. & Gupta, S. Media representations of ant-austerity
   protests in the EU. Routledge.



| Disclaimer |
Dit e-mailbestand, en de eventuele bijlagen, is bestemd voor de
geadresseerde(n) en kan vertrouwelijke of persoonlijke informatie bevatten.
Als u deze boodschap per vergissing hebt ontvangen, is elke publicatie,
reproductie, kopie, distributie of andere verspreiding of gebruik ervan ten
strengste verboden. Gelieve de afzender onmiddellijk te verwittigen en de
e-mail te vernietigen.Ondergetekende kan op geen enkele manier
aansprakelijk worden gesteld voor mogelijke fouten of onnauwkeurigheden in
dit bericht, noch voor schade als gevolg van onjuistheden of van problemen
veroorzaakt door of inherent aan het verspreiden van informatie via e-mail,
evenals voor technische storingen en virussen.
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Was cultural Marxism the leading force behind the new world order

[Örsan Şenalp]

 Dear list members,

I really wonder what would you make of this article by Antony Meuller of
Mises Institute? Is he implying the role really played by, at least, the
certain liberal post-Marxist Left in building up Neoliberlism, or is it
just a reaction against the growing power of the left?

https://fee.org/articles/cultural-marxism-is-the-main-source-of-modern-confusion-and-its-spreading/?utm_content=79412082_medium=social_source=facebook=IwAR0PonQZ5UQP4iGvZfSFJE3p8jecBefhyHwupA4ZTa-__n01010J9X305Q8

best,
Orsan
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: