This article is, I believe, by a Marxist or marxist sympathizer. I found the article to be well written in the sense that pros and cons are given - from the Marxist perspective - for recognizing an alliance between marxism and the lgbtq activism. Actually there are several articles.
I provide it only because it clarified the issue for me and may help others.
This one article from a related site especially helpful with the pro-con discussion, beginning with the section titled Rejecting Queer Theory as anti-Marxist or embracing Queer Marxism?
The conclusion of the author is his personal assessment after a decent pro-con discussion. It is not shared by all marxists though.
In other words, Queer Theory â regardless of its good intentions â is very much an ideological by-product of late 20th century capitalism.
My take after reading this is that on the surface - and thatâs all that matters when protests and activism is at work - Marxists and Lgbtq activists see a common enemy and are content to stand beside one another to tear down our culture and traditional society. If they succeed, they will then work out their deeper ideological and philosophical differences. My opinion is that the LGBTQ will end up as so many logs on the bonfire of a marxist revolution at that time.
Hopefully you now know that Marxists are behind EVERY behavior and movement that normal people find repulsive. Their MO is to depress, demoralize, and destroy polite societies so they can be âbuilt back betterâ in a way that suits them.
You describe very well the difference between individuals and the movement. The people I know (and most likely the people you know such as those you described) wouldnât be the ones baring their transitioned breasts on the White House lawn. They wouldnât be the ones bumping and grinding in the faces of kids at a drag show. They likely wouldnât even take their kids (if they had any) to a drag show.
And theyâre probably not cultural marxists. Theyâd say, âLet me be me, and let you be you, and this weekend come over to my barbecue.â
I have no doubt you already know the difference. You donât need me to point it out.
âCultural Marxismâ is a far-right conspiracy theory that arose in the past century, which accuses left-wing and liberal people of revolutionizing society for the worse with their views. This theory purports that Marxist scholars devised a clandestine agenda of progressive politics aimed at undermining Western democracies. Over time, the theory gained antisemitic tones as many who believe in it believe it to be a Jewish plot.
The Board of Deputies of British Jews expressed condemnation towards Home Secretary Suella Braverman in 2019 for her use of the term âcultural Marxism.â The organization, representing the British Jewish community, denounced her remarks due to the termâs association with antisemitic conspiracy theories.
Seems like Jewish people have a problem with the term âcultural marxismâ.
The articles in the OP prove that you are incorrect and uninformed⌠or pretend to be. There are marxists who believe there is a natural alliance and some who dont. But the old âRW conspiracy theoryâ explaination is completely and thoroughly shot down by my links in the OP⌠most of which are written by marxists⌠not your boogyman right wing conspiracy theorist.
What % of people legally owning guns create mass shootings? Itâs tiny. So⌠is your logic going to conclude that mass shootings are OK?
Your question is irrelevant. The issue isnât how many of these people are out there. Itâs what is the influence and impact and damage of the % that ARE out there.
Interesting how you think all jews think alike. Hmmmmm. Hereâs a view from a woman born into a jewish family and published in a Jewish publication that refutes your despicable assumption that all jews think with a hive mind.
Next youâll be saying that opposition to George Soros is based on antisemitism.
Another old canard.
You tried first to say that cultural marxism was a Right wing conspiracy theory. You apparently choose to not read the OP articles. So⌠if âthe mountain wont go to the MohammedâŚâ
This is from the opening article in the OP by a diehard marxist revolutionary.
It is vitally important for the victory of the LGBT movement that it adopt a class approach, uniting the struggle against homophobic oppression and for full civil rights with the general struggle for a decent life, free from economic and social oppression. It is equally important that the labour movement take up the LGBT struggle, overcoming the divide that has existed historically, in particular due to the reformist and Stalinist leaderships of the Left.
As revolutionaries, this objective is a vital part of our political activity, and this article is offered as a basis for further theoretical debate on this question.
Seems like the progressive liberal peanut gallery is scared â â â â â â â â to discuss what the Marxists say about their relationship to lgbtq activism.
Hoping the topic will go away, they prefer to divert the discussion to their own personal opinions on the sanctity and benignity of LGBTQ individuals.
Why would it be discussed from the perspective of the Marxists and not from the perspective of the LGBTQ movement?
Weird.
If a movement sees commonality with the cause of a national political figure or another popular movement should we impugn the goals of the first movement onto the national political figure or that other political movement?
I posted what Marxists think of the role that each plays to support or not support the other.
Iâm fine on this road⌠which is a discussion road, drawing opinions from Marxists via their writings and from LGBTQ activists via their ardent defenders and gaslighters here in the forum.
You see, Marxists are not afraid to discuss it via their writings. Funny thing⌠you people, the rainbow knights of LGBTQ seem to be afraid of it though. Is it that LGBTQ gives more support to the Marxists than they receive?
