James Lindsay, anti-Communist Profile picture
Mar 27, 2022 19 tweets 4 min read Read on X
If you want to understand what's happening in the world today, you must understand: (1) We live in Herbert Marcuse's world, and (2) Our children almost all go to Paulo Freire's schools.
These two facts take many, many hours to unpack and understand, but they can be summarized quickly in a thread. I have produced and am producing podcasts on New Discourses covering those hours and hours as well.
First, we live in Herbert Marcuse's world. This is the world of "Repressive Tolerance," at first blush. It's a world in which movements from the Left must be extended tolerance, even if violent, and movements from the Right must not, to the point of censored *thought*.
We also live in Marcuse's aims, which include sexual liberation (his 1955 book, Eros and Civilization), liberation more broadly through Identity Marxism (Essay on Liberation, 1969), and total Critical Theory and Sustainability (One Dimensional Man, 1964).
The biggest thrusts of Marcuse's work as it applies to the world today, aside from the abusive hierarchy in Repressive Tolerance, are Identity Marxism (new proletariat) and achieving liberated Sustainability (Neo-Communism) through introjecting a "New Sensibility" for Socialism.
The Great Reset is the attempt to create conditions by which total social control can introject the "New Sensibility," including Identity Marxism (Equity and Justice) through Repressive Tolerance. The goal is a "sustainable and inclusive future" under Neo-Communism.
By controlling social media, algorithms, community standards, social credit, etc., the New Sensibility will be forced upon the population until it sticks (Marcuse's introjection). Sustainability in a circular economy will resolve Marx's fundamental contradictions of capital.
The brand name and mechanism for the New Sensibility are "ESG" (Environmental, Social, and Governance standards) and "SDG" (Sustainable Development Goals"). Like Marcuse said, these will require being content with less of everything and a reduction in the world's population.
NB: Marcuse, in the name of Sustainability (Neo-Communism), explicitly calls for a reduction in the world's future population near the end of One-Dimensional Man. That book was written in 1964, when the world population with 3.9 billion, about half of what it is now. Here it is:
Image
Image
So, we live in Herbert Marcuse's nightmare world (which he modeled after those who reject everything, thus both Heaven and Hell, in the third canto of Dante's Inferno).

Why? Mostly ESG and SDGs, but also because our children almost all go to Paulo Freire's schools.
Paulo Freire, like Herbert Marcuse, was a neo-Marxist nutjob, but rather than giving a nightmarish totalitarian vision for the whole Great Reset future, Freire merely redefined education completely in Marxist terms. Not like Dewey and Counts, who used parts of the Soviet model.
Freire actually redesigned education completely to be Marxist. His books are among the most cited in education, humanities, and social science, and all they really do is take the product of education, being educated (or "literate") and turn it into a Marxist structure.
For Freire, being "formally educated" is like having gained access to bourgeois society, so learning what society considers knowledge (or literacy, including social literacy in the existing system) is to obtain a form of bourgeois property, which, per Marx, must be abolished.
Freire retooled education to get away from learning skills that are useful in the existing society (like being able to read, as literacy) and redefined being literate, or educated, as having obtained a critical consciousness of one's conditions and context. Knowing made Marxist.
Culturally relevant teaching (the other CRT) reproduces this Freirean frame within Marcuse-derived Identity Marxism. Thus, there, context matters and educational attainment doesn't, because that would merely reproduce the existing dominant system, which is the worst thing.
Because for Freire education (and "literacy") is sociopolitical education on Marxist terms, Freire also explicitly blends the roles of educator and social worker, paving the way for the (Transformative) Social-Emotional Learning of today, which enables Identity Maoism in schools.
So now we live in this nightmare world where our kids don't just go to Soviet-style schools or Maoist schools but go to schools where the entire program of education has been retooled into a Marxist endeavor used to program Marxist thought. Total disaster!
This is all being used to set the bottom-up stage for what ESG and SDGs achieve from the top-down and inside-out: the Marcusian "Sustainable" Neo-Communism in which technology solves the production (automation) and distribution (AI) problems inherent to central planning.
If you want to understand the crazy world we live in, then, it's applied Herbert Marcuse. If you want to understand why our kids are being programmed instead of educated, it's Marcusian-adapted Freirean schools. All of this is neo-Marxism, which is really just Marxism warmed over

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with James Lindsay, anti-Communist

James Lindsay, anti-Communist Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ConceptualJames

Apr 26
Wtf is going on with the Woke Right and "Christian Nationalism." This particular manifesto is crazy-pants.
newdiscourses.com/2023/08/wtf-is…
I don't think people were ready for that podcast in August 2023, but a lot more people are now. It goes through some details of their weird organizational structure, secret society network, and ultimately this very weird "manifesto" from "Maximum Leader."
theworthyhouse.com/2021/06/17/the…
No matter how you look at this thing, it's weird. Really weird. Also weirdly Romantic and Gnostic. "The politics of future past." "I am here to give you back your future." "Like Yeats's golden bird, I will tell you of what is past, and passing, and to come." It's a wild ride. Image
Read 40 tweets
Apr 23
Woke Right is mostly a radical movement against Middle MAGA, who they view as a bourgeois element (so, opposed to their plans) made up of classical liberals, Americanists, and mainline conservatives. It agitates Normie MAGA against the middle just like any Marxist movement would.
So what you have is Woke Right waging a power struggle dialectic against Middle MAGA, classical liberalism, America, and mainstream conservatism while also erecting a new Marxian conflict theory of society overall: Managerial Class versus the right-wing populist "people."
If you wondered why a Woke Right publication would accept a rewrite of the Communist Manifesto extoling the "New Christian Right" and against "classical liberalism," this is why. They're doing exactly what the Communist Manifesto is designed to do.
newdiscourses.com/2024/12/a-comm…
Read 23 tweets
Apr 21
Not sure who needs to hear this (apparently a lot of you), but Antonio Gramsci didn't fashion Cultural Marxist weapons. He fashioned tactics dependent upon a worldview. How you think you'll onboard his tactics without at least some of his worldview is a mystery because you won't.
Some of you might have seen Doug Wilson's stupid defense of Chris Rufo's adoption of Gramscian tactics for the "New Right," wherein Wilson, exhibiting his typical lack of discipline, calls Gramscian tactics "weapons." That's a complete failure of comprehension.
The entire tactical program of the Cultural Marxists requires class-based thinking. Gramsci's primary objective was to create counterhegemonic circumstances (wedges) inside institutions through infiltration and class awakening and solidarity carried into the institution.
Read 19 tweets
Apr 16
People struggle to place Fascism as "Left" or "Right" because it's a Left-wing (Progressive) movement using regressive (coded Right-wing) means as the basis for power consolidation so that it can achieve Progress. Similar is true for Communism but in reverse.
It's not just because the Communists labeled the Fascists the real "Right," somewhat disingenuously. It's deeper than that. Communists always marry a truth to a lie, and the truth is that Fascists are Progressives by Regressive Means.
Whether you read Mussolini about Fascism directly or read Hitler's takes and goals with National Socialism, that these were unambiguously (failed) Progressive state projects is overwhelmingly clear. Their whole point was to galvanize the people for the correct glorious future.
Read 11 tweets
Apr 9
Woke Right claiming victory in struggling Elon Musk into this position.

A country is its constitution and its willingness and capacity to defend it, though. Countries are legal entities constituted by their constitutions. It's literally in the word!
There's some space for debate about if we want to consider a "nation" a people instead of using it as a synonym for "country," which is obviously somehow connotative of the land, but these are the same kinds of semantic games the Left plays with "gender" so it can deconstruct sex
"Nation" referring to a people is an definition with little or no defense against the slide into ethnonationalism, if that's pushed, on hardline takes on what constitutes "a people." That's why the Woke Right wants so many people to adopt that view.
Read 11 tweets
Mar 31
Like it or not, this is correct. It's not a matter of being tolerant or not. Islam, or at least Islamism if there's any daylight between them, is fundamentally a militant ideology. Free societies cannot tolerate militant ideologies except in small fringes.
Karl Popper laid out the so-called Paradox of Tolerance in 1945 in his not-so-great book The Open Society and Its Enemies, and free societies will live or die based on the practical solution they come up with to this paradox. This paradox is the rub of liberty and freedom.
The Paradox of Tolerance is simply enough stated: must a tolerant society tolerate intolerance that will eventually end its tolerance?

The answer is that there has to be a line drawn somewhere, and the problem is that it's hard to draw a clear line anywhere.
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(