It helps to understand how this "incoherent blind fear and paranoia about
'cultural marxism'" was manufactured and disseminated and what parallels it
bears to other American instances of right-wing agitation. I posted today at
Ecological Headstand on the relevance of the 1947 American Jewish Committee
commissioned report, "Prophets of Deceit" to the contemporary political
correctness/cultural marxism fable.  Today's post is at
http://ecologicalheadstand.blogspot.com/2011/08/cultural-conservatives-prophets-of.htmlbut
see also "Confessions of a Cultural Marxist", "Martin Jay Spills Some
Beans!" and "What is Cultural Conservatism?"


On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 1:16 PM, John Glastonbury <[email protected]>wrote:

> I believe this is my first post to pen-l, though I've been poking my head
> up and down every now and again on lbo and marxmail.
>
> The parallel with Weimar has limitations, as do all comparisons between
> time periods.
>
> But, for a variety of reasons, I think that the Weimar analogy is more
> suitable than some people give it credit for.
>
> Today, we do not have a militant organized 'left' to get into street
> battles with the Tea Party, but that in itself doesn't deflect concerns
> about the rise of fascism. The right wing in Germany at the time was fixated
> on an extremely exaggerated and incoherent set of beliefs and fears about
> the Jews, which sometimes included a world communist conspiracy, or a world
> capitalist conspiracy. Both Trotsky and the Rothschilds served this blurred
> scape-goat purpose. Today we see the same type of incoherent blind fear and
> paranoia, about 'cultural marxism,' the UN and its coming Global
> Government/New World Order, and also capitalistic groups of people like the
> Bilderberg group and George Soros.
>
> Plus, in some sense, the latino, black, and gay constituencies are
> stand-ins for the lack of a unionized left wing. The office-holding right
> wing has already enacted a sizable 'concentration camp' policy with regard
> to these groups, through the drug war, and through the imprisonment of
> illegal immigrants.
>
> I'd also add that the post-WW1 split in the SPD, between reformism and
> revolution, lead to a centre-left party that was deeply fixated on seeming
> 'legitimate,' and was just as eager to crack down on the left as any other
> party. Now, the Democratic Party never did have a revolutionary element
> inside of it, but the effect of 'third way' policies, Clintonism, Obamaism
> has been similar to this effect in that it has split the centre-left from
> the left, and the far-left. And the choice between democratic and republican
> is not unlike the bland range of 'centrism' that germans living under Weimar
> would have had to choose from if they were loyal or committed to a
> parliamentary bourgeoise republic.
>
> There is also the fact that the Weimar analogy is also much more readily
> understood by more people than, say, the Gilded Age, or even the run-up to
> WW1. It has a strong emotional appeal, and re;atively broad familiarity.
>
> Now, we can quibble over whether or not
> totalitarianism/authoritarianism/fascism are the right terms to use, but, in
> my short life as a politically conscious being, I've never seen 'democracy'
> in America do anything remotely progressive, beneficial for me, or my age
> cohort. I've also met many right wing people who, frankly, scare me with
> their anger and vitriol and endless rage against liberals and blacks and
> 'faggots' and pacifists. I cannot express my real political beliefs in
> almost any public place or forum. Reactionary sentiment is deepening,
> broadening, and becoming the de-facto consensus in many places in America.
>
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>
>


-- 
Sandwichman
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to