James Lindsay writes about how to recognize the prevalent patterns of Neo-Marxist thought and how to they promulgate in society:
“Take race, for example. If one assumes, as did Cheryl I. Harris in 1993, that “whiteness” defines a special form of property that certain people (“whites”) can treat as exclusive, a complete Marxist theory of race can drop out of the political economy machine. They call it “Critical Race Theory,” and, for reasons that are about to be perfectly clear, I call it “Race Marxism.” Here’s how it works, comparing against classical Marxism with a forward slash between the concepts.
Some people (whites/capitalists) unjustly declare themselves the exclusive possessors of a special form of private property (whiteness/capital), thereby divide society into those who have it and those who don’t, and begin to arrange society such that the power granted through that access increases for those people over time. Those excluded from the resource and thus power by this declaration (people of color/workers) are thereby exploited for their productive capacity that is then turned into surplus value (cultural property/profit) for the advantaged class. Not only are the exploited thereby robbed of what they produce (cultural property/labor value), but they are estranged from who they really are (valid representatives of a culture/producers). More specifically, the product of their work (cultural production/labor) is subsumed into the privileged class (becomes part of white culture/is turned into profit), leaving the exploited (people of color/worker) impoverished (culturally/materially) and unable to recognize himself for who he really is (say, authentically Black/a producer). All this is enabled by the privileged class structuring society at its most fundamental levels for their own benefit (structural or systemic racism/structural classism), justified by the privileged class promulgating an ideology that it’s how things are supposed to be (white supremacy/capitalism and meritocracy). People in this dynamic system can be awakened to the structural “realities” of their lives and become (race/class) conscious activists (antiracists/proletarians) who work to seize the means of production (cultural/material) of their society to make it more fair (equitable/socialist). Eventually, this will be generally understood as the right way to order a society and will, through their praxis inverting into the inversion of praxis and thus socially conditioning people to accept it, become spontaneously fair (socially just/communist).
This extends to other forms of property, construed more abstractly as not just material as in capital and land, but also as social, cultural, and even human capital. This allows for the instantaneous creation of the entire constellation of “Identity Marxist” theories of identity politics with virtually no work (which makes it funny how much work it has taken these people to devise this stuff). Again, technically none of these is a theory (they’re all anthroposophies and/or theosophies). Here’s a quick summary:
Marxism: The bourgeoisie claims access to a special form of property called capital. They create an ideology called capitalism (based on things like meritocracy) to justify this. This allows them to structure society with structural classism that advantages the bourgoisie and exploits, estranges, and disenfranchises the working class. People can be made aware of the Marxist theory of societal production and become class-conscious proletarians or a bourgeois vanguard operating in solidarity on their behalf. If they seize the means of production of society and Man, they will usher in socialism that will eventually ripen into Communism through the inversion of praxis.
Critical Race Theory: The whites (and their adjacents) claims access to a special form of property called whiteness. They create an ideology called white supremacy (based on things like meritocracy and racism) to justify this. This allows them to structure society with structural or systemic racism that advantages whites and exploits, estranges, and disenfranchises people of color. People can be made aware of the Critical Race theory of societal production and become race-conscious antiracists and/or “white allies” operating in solidarity on their behalf. If they seize the means of race-cultural production of society and Man, they will usher in racial equity that will eventually ripen into racial justice (a kind of social justice) through the inversion of praxis.
(Marxian) Feminism: Men claim access to a special form of property called maleness or masculinity. They create an ideology called male supremacy or hegemonic masculinity (based on things like meritocracy and sexism) to justify this. This allows them to structure society with patriarchy and structural or systemic sexism, enforced by misogyny, that advantages men and exploits, estranges, and disenfranchises women, as a class. People can be made aware of the (Marxian) feminist theory of societal production and become feminist-conscious feminists and/or “male allies” operating in solidarity on their behalf. If they seize the means of sex-cultural and material production of society and Man, they will usher in gender equity that will eventually ripen into feminist justice (a kind of social justice) through the inversion of praxis.
Queer Theory: Straight people whose “gender identity” and sex match (and those who pass as such) claim access to a special form of property called normalcy (by declaring themselves the normal ones and defining normalcy to mean like themselves). They create an ideology called normativity (e.g., heteronormativity and cisnormativity) to justify this. This allows them to structure society with structural or systemic homophobia and/or transphobia (or, generally, queer-phobia) that advantages the “normal” and exploits, estranges, and disenfranchises “queers” (anyone different, especially gays, lesbians, bisexuals, the gender non-conforming, transgenders, and the mentally ill). People can be made aware of the Queer Theory theory of societal production and become queer-conscious (“proud”) allies operating in solidarity on their behalf. If they seize the means of normative cultural production of society and Man, they will usher in gender, sexual, and sex equity that will eventually ripen into gender, sexual, and sex justice (a kind of social justice) through the inversion of praxis.
Disability Studies: The able-bodied claim access to a special form of property called “ability.” They create an ideology described from the outside as dis/ableism (based on a belief that it is generally better to be fully able-bodied than not, and further based in ideas like “medicalism”) to justify this. This allows them to structure society with structural or systemic dis/ableism that advantages able-bodied and exploits, estranges, disenfranchises, and disables the disabled or “differently abled.” People can be made aware of the Disability Studies theory of societal production and become disability activists conscious allies operating in solidarity on their behalf. If they seize the means of ability-relevant cultural and material production of society and Man, they will usher in ability-based equity that will eventually ripen into ability-based justice (a kind of social justice) through the inversion of praxis.
Fat Studies: The “thin” (those who are not “fat”) claim access to a special form of property called “normal weight” or even “health.” They create an ideology described from the outside as thinnormativity (based on a belief that it is generally better to be at a healthy weight than not, and further based in ideas like “healthism” and “medicalism”) to justify this. This allows them to structure society with structural or systemic fatphobia that advantages “thin” people and exploits, estranges, and disenfranchises the “fat” (they cannot be called “obese” because that “medicalizes” them or “overweight” because that “unjustly” implies a normal or acceptable weight). People can be made aware of the Fat Studies theory of societal production and become fat activists fat-conscious allies (or fat) operating in solidarity on their behalf. If they seize the means of weight/health-relevant cultural and material production of society and Man, they will usher in fat-based equity that will eventually ripen into fat-based justice (a kind of social justice) through the inversion of praxis.
It’s extremely important to understand Marxism on this general level so that what we’re dealing with around us in the world can be properly understood, called out for what it is, and prevented from achieving its ultimately destructive goal of seizing the means of production of anything, especially Man and History. Understanding these “theories” for what they really are not only allows us to call them out accurately and understand why they must be stopped, but it also allows us to be strategic in our fight against them because it enables us to easily predict their next moves and to delegitimize their manipulations as quickly as they arise. Failure to understand them this way means continually being taken off-guard, losing, and being manipulated, or—more accurately and through the inversion of their praxis—being exploited, estranged, and disenfranchised from our own societies.”
2 comments
December 7, 2022 at 10:12 am
Cynthia Wolff
Then(?), why does the majority of this socio/cultural nihilism tend-to be rubber-stamped as the biggest export of American *CONSUMER CAPITALISM*?
Calling it “Marxism” is, to me, an intellectual cop-out by those believing the countering Right represents some automatic form of political calvalry-or-savior. They don’t. When one sees the seemingly never-ending level of rank stupidity in practice happening across the entire West now, you come to one of two (logical) conclusions; that, either: 1. “the Right” is, collectively, the most politically impotent group of people there are and have no spine —- or, 2: the ENTIRE SYSTEM is, really, just a perpetually-rigged hamster wheel of corruption *BETWEEN ALL PARTIES* because -especially the U.S. framework- precisely NEEDS IT like that to sustain itself against the laws of Nature. I absolutely believe the latter is at the heart of the problem concerning *EVERYTHING* going on today.
I mean (to cite an example of trying to tie-it back to the mindset proliferation of all the gender cult idiocy, for instance): why should we have even gotten to the point of having to explain 20,000,000 ‘EFFING *YEARS* OF HUMAN BIOLOGICAL *REALITY* as if people wouldn’t understand “water is wet”( ??? ) ! When a society abandons all sense of reason to such a disgustingly irredeemable level sooo beyond repair (IMO), I think one ultimately has to implicate the “leaders” and very power structure of that society for being complicit in it.
No matter whom is fronting the White House: there is *nothing* politically “Left” about the way the U.S. economy/military world view/”healthcare” industry/religious culture/etc. are marketed to the planet. The onslaught of unchecked vulture capitalism would not be allowed to continue (even at this late stage) if there *was* an old-school “Left” still demanding accountability from it.
LikeLike
December 7, 2022 at 11:21 am
The Arbourist
@Cynthia Wolff
Hi CW, there are a many things going on in your post, let’s talk about them.
I’m not sure what you mean by this? Capitalism or the use of private property to create capital is not Marxist. Capitalism is described by Marx as one of the historical stages that leads toward a proletarian revolution.
This post is about examining how the dialectic in Marxism works. The dialectic has been the operating system of the Left for centuries. Understanding how it works is critically important to be able to evaluate claims from the left and what their goals happen to be. How the dialectic progresses (and it always progresses leftward) is key to being able to take the good parts of what the left advocates and combine them with the features that currently work in society.
Definitional clarity is very important here. The “Right” depending on which faction you speak to can mean a myriad of possibilities. On on this very blog I’ve been accused of being a ‘right-wing fascist’ for defending female rights, female boundaries, and child safeguarding.
Is it reactionary to want to protect female boundaries in society?
Is it reactionary to keep children protected from concepts and identities that are inherently destabilizing?
The answer from some part of the left is an unabashed “YES”. Why? Because anyone even slightly to the right of them gets rolled up into the alt-right, jebus deluded MAGA loving bogyman that can be castigated and ignored in social and political discourse.
One gets this treatment for defending classically Liberal principles of society – freedom of speech, association, and thought. These are the principles that many on the left seek to pull down and restructure in society. That restructuring is called Marxism and it has been a nightmare every time they manage to pull off a revolution. Casting down the whole of society down opens the door for an authoritarian takeover (Left or Right) that does not care about the rights and/or liberties of the individual.
Do you think that trans-rights is a thing over in China? Or LGBTQA+? Or Racism and ‘Structural Racism’? They absolutely are not. The Chinese Communist Party has no time (and gives zero fucks) for the useful idiots that exist to destabilize society – did you see that BLM/Pride March in Beijing? Me either.
What the Activist Left is doing here (the West) is creating cadres of people who know nothing except that the system – said societal system/structure that against all odds has created a society that values and protects the individual and their rights – is discriminatory, evil, and must be destroyed.
The activist groups that bring down the current societies in the West are, by design, destabilizing forces are among the first to get the wall once the revolution happens. Authoritarian regimes brook no dissent whether they happen to be Right or Left flavoured.
The relevant question becomes then – do you want to see the whole system burn, or do you believe that incremental change and reform is the answer?
Some of our leaders are complicit in the nonsense that is being spouted. It is part of Marxist activism to blur boundaries and create confusion in society. The travesty that is going on in terms of definitional clarity is something to behold. Most people don’t understand that many words now have more than one meaning – for instance Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion. Those words have very specific meaning for the activist class – while at the same time being opaque and assumed to be their traditional meanings for the rest of society.
Thus, speaking out against “diversity” carries a manufactured risk of social sanction – while in reality activist”diverse spaces/institutions” promote the opposite of what the traditional meaning of diversity is.
I’ll respond to your last paragraph later, as events have come up. :)
LikeLike