The Frankfurt School employed a technique called Critical Theory – a social theory oriented toward critiquing and changing society as a whole.
The point of the theory is to criticize every traditional social institution – and to specifically avoid offering any alternatives – as a means to breaking down Western Culture.
Theodor Adorno wrote the influential book The Authoritarian Personality which argued that anyone who defended traditional culture was a Fascist.
Sound familiar?
Antonio Gramsci was a Marxist theorist and a founding member of the Communist Party of Italy who created the Theory of Cultural Hegemony. And Counter Hegemony.
Gramsci felt that in order to change society, the entire value systems of Societal Institutions must be overturned.
Change the way institutions work – change the family, church, school – change social norms and beliefs.
This would require the introduction of an entirely new set of values and beliefs – a new morality.
It would also be slow. Gramsci embraced gradualism.
Gramsci advocated evolution over revolution
He targeted several specific societal areas as a means to promote his quiet revolution.
One primary target was schools. Gramsci was opposed to the vocational schools springing up in Italy.
Another was the family.
Gramsci looked to the US and noted that a true Marxist “uprising of the workers” would never be successful there.
It would first require an undermining of culture, morality and norms.
Gramsci also felt it would require community organizers.
Gramsci’s ideas came to the US not through his own person – Gramsci died in confinement after being jailed by Mussolini – but through the Frankfurt School.
A simplistic take of a complex topic but it is Twitter.
Always worth seeing the history that lies behind these "hot takes"
Quick side note.
The phrase “A long march through the institutions” sums up Gramsci's approach, but was actually coined in 1967 by Rudi Dutschke, a German student leader, in reference to Gramsci’s philosophy of Cultural Hegemony - or Cultural Marxism.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2) Barr’s most significant achievement was perhaps his role in the final stages of Mueller's investigation, leading to his conclusion that evidence compiled by Mueller failed to establish that the president had obstructed justice.
But a series of curious missteps then followed.
3) The investigation being conducted by U.S. Attorney John Huber disappeared entirely, although a portion of that investigation may have been folded into U.S. Attorney John Durham’s still ongoing investigation.
1) For those looking for more information re: alternate GOP electors and possible implications from today's events, here are a few threads and articles that might prove helpful.
2) Chad Pergram put out a lengthy thread that came from his article contained in this later tweet:
"Georgia’s use of the new Dominion machines created a particular problem regarding the performance of a successful RLA, precisely because the system “by its nature, erases all direct evidence of voter intent.”" theepochtimes.com/georgia-years-…
Judge Totenberg: “There is no way to tell from a BMD printout what the voter actually saw on the screen, what the voter did with the device, or what the voter heard through the audio interface.”
Totenberg stated in her ruling that a BMD printout “is not trustworthy” and the application of an RLA to an election that used BMD printouts “does not yield a true risk-limiting audit.”
"...This will ensure that all of our legal remedies remain open. That means that if we mean these cases in the courts that we can direct that the ultimate slate of electors be certified."
"The State legislatures in Georgia, Wisconsin & Pennsylvania can do the same."
"If you just cured 3 simple Constitutional defects, Donald Trump's the winner of this election. Whether it's the signature matching in Georgia, that was illegally changed as a result of the consent decree w/out the legislature's approval..."
2) IG Horowitz: “Although we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence of intentional misconduct, we also did not receive satisfactory explanations for any of the errors or omissions we identified."
3) Horowitz: “There is such a range of conduct here that is inexplicable and the answers we got were not satisfactory, that we’re left trying to understand how could all these errors have occurred over a nine-month period or so."