#Marxism James Lindsay

[wherelibertydwells]

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

What is the Woke Right? - James Lindsay

Konstantin Kisin: James, you mentioned the term "woke right." It's a term you and I have both used, but it'd be interesting to talk about it for a number of reasons. But first of all, what do you mean by that term? Because a lot of people are very confused about it.

James Lindsay: It's not necessarily the best term. It's more accurate to-- I don't use the word "woke" to-- I use it a little too casually still, generally speaking. But I've tried to be very specific when it comes to it, to use the phrase "Woke Marxism," as in that it's a species of Marxist thought, yada, yada, yada.

So, we can very easily place that on the Marxist left, right. Well, "woke right," another term that might work for that is "Woke Fascism." And just like "Woke Marxism" is technically "Woke Neo-Marxism," this could be called "Woke Neo-Fascism."

Kisin: Why is it woke?

Lindsay: Well, that's what I wanted to get to. So, there are kind of two ways to look at why it's woke. And one is kind of philosophical and one is practical.

Practical side is, look at how they behave. They behave exactly like the woke. There's the targeted influence campaigns, there's the manufacturing of-- what the postmodernists called Legitimation by Paralogy or whatever. They create the illusion that there's massive support for this and massive distaste for that, using social media manipulations like we just talked about. They are highly invested in identity politics, the answer for them to leftist Identity politics is a reaction identity politics, or reactionary identity politics, equal and opposite, or in biblical terms, answering evil with evil, which the Bible says not to do, by the way, very specifically. And so, there's this, you know, grievance identity, everything's bad for white Christian men, straight white Christian men, we're the oppressed minority under this.

There's an ideology, and this kind of bleeds into the philosophical idea, but we'll get more specific with that in a second. There's this kind of belief that there's this ruling class that's erected an ideology to marginalize people like them that sounds very much like woke. Except, instead of saying that it's like the white people-- the white ruling class created white supremacy to marginalize people of color, especially black and Indigenous and their ways of knowing from getting inside, the woke right or the Woke Fascist side says instead that following World War II, on the back of Hitler and the idea of "Never Again," there was erected a post-war liberal consensus, starting in the 1940s immediately-- starting in 1945, the creation of the United Nations was part of this, the signing on to the United Nations was part of this, they assigned William Buckley to-- Bill Buckley to having done a rout to drive the true conservatives to the margins so that a false post-war liberal consensus conservative movement could rise up, the Neocons, and hold them out, so the Neocons become this kind of hegemonic force within the conservative faction that edges out so-called "true conservatism," and these more dangerous, so to speak, ideas like fascist ideas, like Carl Schmidt's ideas about Unbound Executives and Friend-Enemy politics and so on, that these ideas all had to be pushed to the side on the pretext that World War II or a Adolf Hitler can never rise again.

And so, therefore, the true conservatives who represented conservative politics and kept at bay the beast of the left, which they say is that the right's true function is to keep at bay the left, in other words, to have a war, right versus left, with everybody in the middle, I guess, taking fire, in the crossfire. But they believe that this postwar liberal consensus in the Neoconservative movement literally was designed to marginalize their perspectives and to keep these other more radical right-wing ideas out of out of play.

So this is a very woke way of thinking about the world, that there was a structural-- construction of the social and political and cultural environment designed to exclude people like them, in order to be able to achieve certain political agendas. And now they believe that they've woken up to these ideas. Woke. They've found them again. They've read the forbidden philosophers, Carl Schmidt, Julius Evola, James Burnham, and so on. They've read these things and they're bringing back a true conservatism that was excluded from politics roughly since the end of World War II on the bogus pretence of preventing the rise of another fascist like Hitler or Franco or Pinochet.

And so, there's a very practical explanation for why they're woke, but especially their behavior. Lots of lying, lots of character attacks, lots of saying no enemies to the right, but they don't actually even attack the left that's their enemy, so to speak, at all, they only attack other conservatives. Lots of power plays, lots of manipulative speech.

And then there's the philosophical deeper aspect. Why woke? What does woke mean? Woke up to a structural politics that marginalizes people like me, and we need to band together in solidarity -- no enemies to the right -- in order to be able to create a powerful enough oppressed coalition to flip over the power structure by putting ourselves at the center and claiming power for ourselves. This is explicitly woke. Having a Critical Consciousness about the way the world is organized. Tucker Carlson, for example, if you listen to Tucker, a lot of people really like Tucker. Tucker is pretty critical of America. He's not doing a Howard Zinn critical America Theory. Howard Zinn being the one who wrote The People's History, so the Marxist history of the United States-- propaganda. He's writing a different critical history of the United States. Well, the Constitution was not really adequate to prevent all of this. There is a post-World War II liberal consensus or world order that we're all being made subject to. Well, look at how America was involved in all of these things. America bad. America bad. America bad. Also, the UK was pretty bad too. And America bad, America bad.

There's this kind of constant critical negativity. Tou see some of these characters, I mentioned Tucker Carlson but you see some of these characters like Steven Wolf, who wrote the book "The Case for Christian Nationalism," has put multiple times on social media-- and I don't know what he said in public talks, I've only heard one of his public talks-- but you see him on social media saying more than once that he has adopted Critical Theory specifically for his own purposes and to his own ends. He has adopted-- he was recently saying on social media-- somebody sent it to me, so I have to, I guess confirm this-- but he was saying that in fact the Critical Theory he uses is not the perverted version of Critical Theory that the left has used. It's its own more correct version of critique that goes back before the left, yada, yada.

And so how do you not call the attempt to awaken a Critical Consciousness of the power structure that you believe has delegitimized your movement, how do you not call that woke, when woke means having awoken to a Critical Consciousness that there's a structural force that has delegitimized people in your political positionality. It's the exact same thing unfortunately, it's just pushing a "people in place" kind of driven fascism as opposed to a "we're going to end all oppression by becoming the oppressors" Communism.

Kisin: It's very well explained, and that's kind of why I have been calling, even though I'm not sure it is the best term, but the behavior is the same, right. It's quite obviously the same. Victimhood, cancel culture, lying about history all of this.

Lindsay: Yeah, rewriting history, lying about people, digging up people's pasts to cancel them. It's unbelievable.

Kisin: The one complaint that people have made about that I do think is valid is that they're not comparable in terms of influence and power. The woke left control-- for a period of time controlled-- what felt like everything. The woke right isn't anywhere near that level of influence at all. And frankly, you know, I wonder whether, having talked about it as much as you and I have, we've maybe drawn too much attention to a very small fringe. Because when we-- like I said, when we went to the Trump rally, I didn't see-- I didn't-- I talked to a lot of people there, I listened to all the people on stage I didn't hear in either of the statements or the response to what people were saying, the type of conversation that you see online. So, it seems to me like it's a tiny fringe that's being amplified by bot-farms and foreign meddling and whatever. I think increasingly-- I don't think of it as real, even though as you say, there are one or two people who are very influential in American politics who have flirted with some of these ideas.

==

Just fricking great. We finally start to get the woke freaks on the left under control and up pop woke freaks on the right.

Can't the normies in the middle -- the centrists, the "leans-left" moderates and the "leans-right" moderates -- get five damn minutes without more of this crap?

[irreplaceable-spark]

You Might Already Be A Member | James Lindsay | EP 367

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson and Dr. James Lindsay break down how Marxism evolved from a singular ideology into a genus, spawning many oppressor/oppressed dogmas across modern culture such as equity, critical race theory, and queer theory. They trace these sub-Marxist doctrines back past fundamental narrative into the theological realm, and detail their utility in the acquisition of power. Dr. Peterson and Dr. Lindsay also discuss the Grievance Studies Affair, of which Dr. Lindsay was a co-author and which casts a spotlight on the Marxist capture of our academic and scientific institutions. An author, mathematician, and political commentator, Dr. James Lindsay has written eight books spanning a range of subjects including education, postmodern theory, and critical race theory. Dr. Lindsay is the founder of New Discourses, an organization dedicated to shining the light of objective truth in subjective darkness. Dr. Lindsay is the co-author of “Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody” and the author of “Race Marxism,” as well as, “The Marxification of Education.” Dr. Lindsay has been a featured guest on Fox News, Glenn Beck, Joe Rogan, and NPR, and he has spoken at the Oxford Union and the EU Parliament.

[thearbourist]

A Thirty Minute Explanation of Marxism - James Lindsay

Potentially illuminating. Worth a watch IMHO.

[liberty1776]

The Best 30-Minute Explanation of Marxism I Have Ever Heard

The religion of Marxism    “Woke is Identity Marxism, a marxism evolved to attack the West” 

[aurevoirmonty]

Contre culture - «L'agenda 2030 n'a pas sa place ici» : le Salvador purge son ministère de la Culture et veut promouvoir «les valeurs patriotiques et familiales».

«Le peuple a choisi une voie et nous la suivrons», a annoncé (https://x.com/nayibbukele/status/1806419161389694981) le président Nayib Bukele.

Adepte de la méthode forte, l'ennemi déclaré (https://t.me/kompromatmedia_2/135) de l'Etat profond US a licencié 300 employés du ministère qui mettaient en oeuvre «des programmes incompatibles avec la vision de ce gouvernement».

Nous économiserons des fonds publics au cours de ce processus

«Le Salvador est pro-vie, pro-famille traditionnelle et l'agenda 2030 n'a pas sa place ici. […] C'est la voie que les fonctionnaires doivent suivre», résume la député Alexia Rivas.

Outre son volet escrologique (https://t.me/kompromatmedia/4878), l'Agenda 2030 des Nations unies a pour but de créer des «citoyens du monde sans droits: des esclaves», souligne (https://t.me/kompromatmedia/3445) l'auteur James Lindsay.

«Le “wokisme” c'est le marxisme qui a évolué pour attaquer l'Occident. Nous aurons un avenir durable et inclusif, sans aucune liberté.»

[hybridmindthoughtsreloaded]

Is Marxism Gnostic? Responding To Jordan Peterson with Miguel Conner

Aeon Byte Gnostic Radio's Miguel Conner returns to the show this week for an in-depth unpacking of claims made by Jordan Peterson, James Lindsay and others in the Online Right that Marxism is actually Gnosticism.

We look at

👉 The origins of these claims.

👉 Exactly WHERE and HOW they are wrong.

👉 The origins of Gnosticism.

👉 The 'true' origins of 'woke' thought.

We also explore some possible points of consent with the analysis Jordan Peterson presents regarding Lucifer and the archetypal significance of clowns, jesters and evil.

[awesomecooperlove]

This is perhaps the most important video you can watch.

To truly understand the the various species of Marxism, and why western nations, culture, politics and religion is under attack.

Woke is Marxism and it’s designed to attack and infiltrate the west.

James Lindsay spells out the problems we face today brilliantly.

He calls out the WEF and the UN for pushing this attack on us.

💣💣💣

Absolutely brilliant.

[darkmaga-returns]

By Doug MacGregor

In 1968, author Shelby Steele was working in East St. Louis, as a “proud warrior” in President Johnson’s War on Poverty. The 1964 Civil Rights Act and Johnson’s Great Society unleashed a wave of optimism for black Americans that justice was coming. “The government that oppressed us only yesterday would now engineer our uplift” Steele said, but it didn’t take him long to discover the hard truth. “Black development was not the focus of justice. Taking advantage of White Guilt was the focus.”

Steele, who had studied race his entire life, would write about “White Guilt” over the next five decades, because Democrats have been cultivating it ever since. If you’re scoring at home, the White Guilt scorecard includes, among other things, the devastating effects of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), responsible for robbing generations of children the love and stability fathers deliver in the home—incentivizing the “baby mama” culture of government dependency ensnared millions of blacks into lives of chaos, violence, and generational poverty—as well as the shift toward union-run public schools that favor the demands of teachers’ unions over the education of children. White guilt drives the engine of systemic racism the Democrat party has produced since 1965.

In the 2021 documentary, “What Killed Michael Brown?”, made with his son, Eli, Steele calls out, “liberalism’s faithlessness in blacks, its unacknowledged bigotry towards them, a vote of no confidence in their own agency to engineer their own uplift.”

Steele concludes, “One overriding truth: We never use race, except as a means to power. Race is never an end. It is always a means. It has no role in human affairs, except as a corruption.”

The latest “corruption” is Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. DEI is an incarnation of Critical Race Theory, the controversial 1970’s theory from legal scholars Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Richard Delgado, and others. What is that? CRT critic James Lindsay informs us that CRT is cultural Marxism that subjugates whites as oppressors and blacks as perpetual victims. The goal? Find racism in literally everything. And so it does.

[acosmicotaku]

Unique worldbuilding scheduled for DIVINE WILL.

The historical worldbuilding of DIVINE WILL heavily draws on the work of James Lindsay & Eric Voeglin. For a detailed rundown of the material I'm working with, here's a series of lengthy lectures, in what I believe to be the most reasonable order for anyone new to the subject.

N.B. I am using the terms in a more narrow and precise manner than Lindsay or Voeglin did, so what they call "Gnosticism" is, in verse, called either "Dialecticism" or "Esotericism", and Gnosticism and Hermeticism are branches of that religious tradition.

The Negation of the Real

The Gnostic Parasite

The REAL Religion behind National Socialism

Further evidence that Hitler’s religion was Gnosticism

From Plato to Hitler: The Ideological Origins of National Socialism

The Theology of Marxism

Marx’s Ontology of Man and the Telos of History

Gnosticism in the Modern West

Breadtubers Are Crypto-Tankies

The Crime Of Being

Feminism is Feminist Gnosticism

Critical Race Theory is Race Marxism

The Queer Gnostic Cult

Queer Theory is Gender Marxism, Et Cetera

Why Communism is a Failed Religion [important for its section on Managerialism]

WTF is Christian Nationalism?

Two Wolves of Christian Nationalism

The Dawn of Medical Lysenkoism

Medical Lysenkoism in the American Medical Association

Fascism: Idolatry of the State

The Corruption of Stakeholder Capitalism

The Reflexive Alchemy of George Soros

The Occult Theosophy of the United Nations

Introduction to Eric Voeglin Playlist: Marx, Nietzsche, Golem, and Ideologies as Ersatz Religions

I picked this because it makes for unique worldbuilding distinct from other historical fiction. It lays out an ancient and dangerous force of manipulation, but unlike other fictions where the threat may be an ancient organization unchanging through the ages, the manipulative force is a rogue memetic religion which parasites other religions. It's a conspiracy with no mastermind, a virus of the mind which mutates to avoid detection and propagate itself.

The world of DIVINE WILL will also operate under the assumption of Andrew Lang's Urmonotheism hypothesis. So the history of religion within the setting of DIVINE WILL is that the primordial religion of mankind is a primitive Monotheism, and that polytheism and animism were later religious innovations. This would pose certain implications to monotheistic religions of all stripes, be they Christian, Jewish, Dvaitin, Tenrikyōists, &c.

The science fiction aspect will HEAVILY draw from the work of people like Michael Behe, Noam Chomsky, Carl Jung, Edwin May, Ludwig von Mises, &c.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: James Lindsay

Published: May 14, 2024

There's a right name for the "Woke" ideology, and it's critical constructivism. Critical constructivist ideology is what you "wake up" to when you go Woke. Reading this book, which originally codified it in 2005, is like reading a confession of Woke ideology. Let's talk about it.

The guy whose name is on the cover of that book is credited with codifying critical constructivism, or as it would be better to call it, critical constructivist ideology (or ideologies). His name is Joe Kincheloe, he was at Magill University, and he was a critical pedagogue. 

Just to remind you, critical pedagogy is a form of brainwashing posing as education that is the application of critical theory to educational theory and praxis as well as teaching and practice of critical theories in schools. It comes from Paulo Freire.

It's not the right thread to outline Paulo Freire or critical pedagogy, but the short summary is that critical pedagogy was developed from Freire's method of "education," which is to use educational materials as a "mediator to political knowledge," i.e., excuse to brainwash. 

The point of critical pedagogy is to use education as a means not to educated but to raise a critical consciousness in students instead. That is, its purpose is to make them "Woke." What does that entail, though? It means becoming a critical constructivist, as Kincheloe details. 

Note what we've already said, though. Yes, Marcuse. Yes, intersectionality. Yes, CRT and Queer Theory et cetera. Yes, yes, yes. That's Woke, BUT Woke was born and bred in education schools. I first recognized this right after we published Cynical Theories in 2020. 

Critical pedagogy, following people like Henry Giroux and Joe Kincheloe, forged together the religious liberationist Marxism of Freire, literally a Liberation Theologian, with the "European theorists," including both Critical Marxists like Marcuse and postmodernists like Foucault 

In other words, when @jordanbpeterson identified what we now call "Woke" as "postmodern neo-Marxism," he was exactly right. It was neo-Marxist critique that had taken a postmodern turn away from realism and reality. The right name for that is "critical constructivism." 

Critical constructivism contains (or synthesizes) two disparate parts: "critical," which refers to Critical Theory (that is, neo-Marxism or Critical Marxism), and "constructivism," which refers to the constructivist thinking at the heart of postmodernism and poststructuralism. 

Critical Theory we all already generally understand at this point. The idea is pretty simple: ruthless criticism of everything that exists; calling everything you want to control "oppression" until you control it; finding a new proletariat in "ghetto populations"; blah blah blah. 

More accurately, Critical Theory means believing the world and the people in it are contoured by systems of social, cultural, and economic power that are effectively inescapable and all serve to reproduce the "existing society" (status quo) and its capitalist engine. 

Critical Theory is not concerned with the operation of the world, "epistemic adequacy" (knowing what you're talking about), or anything else. They're interested in how systemic power shapes and contours all things and how they're experienced and gives (neo)-Marxist critique. 

Constructivism is a bit less familiar for two reasons: 1) We've done a lot of explaining and criticizing Critical Theory already, so people are catching on, and 2) It's a downright alien intellectual landscape that is almost impossible to believe anyone actually believes. 

You're already very familiar with the language of constructivism: "X is a social construct." Constructivism fundamentally believes that *the world* is socially constructed. That's a profound claim. So are *people* as part of the world. That's another profound claim. So is power. 

I need you to stop thinking you get it and listen now because you're probably already rejecting the idea that anyone can be a constructivist who believes the world is itself socially constructed. That's because you're fundamentally a realist, but they are not realists at all. 

Constructivists believe, as Kincheloe says explicitly, that *nothing exists before perception*. That means some objective, shared reality doesn't exist to constructivists. There is no reality except the perception of reality, and the perception of reality is constructed by power. 

I need you to stop again because you probably reject getting it again. They really believe this. There is no reality except perceived reality. Reality is perceived according to one's social and political position with respect to prevailing dominant power. Do you understand? 

Constructivism rejects the idea of an objective shared reality that we can observe and draw consistent conclusions about. Conclusions are the result of perceptions and interpretations, which are colored and shaped by dominant power, mostly in getting people to accept that power. 

In place of an objective shared reality we can draw conclusions about, we all inhabit our own "lived realities" that are shaped by power dynamics that primarily play out on the group level, hence the need for "social justice" to make power equitable among and across groups. 

Because (critical) constructivist ideologies believe themselves the only way to truly study the effects of systemic dominant power, they have a monopoly on knowing how it works, who benefits, and who suffers oppression because of it. Their interpretation is the only game in town. 

All interpretations that disagree with critical constructivism do so for one or more bad reasons: not knowing the value of critical constructivism, being motivated to protect one's power on one or more levels, prejudice and hate, having bought the dominant ideology's terms, etc. 

Critical constructivism is particularly hostile to "Western" science, favoring what it calls "subjugated knowledges." This should all feel very familiar right now, and it's worth noting that Kincheloe is largely credited with starting the idea of "decolonizing" knowledge. 

Kincheloe, in his own words, explains that critical constructivism is a weltanshuuang, that is, a worldview, based on a "critical hermeneutical" understanding of experienced reality. This means it intends to interpret *everything* through critical constructivism. 

In other words, critical constructivism is a hermetically sealed ideological worldview (a cult worldview) that claims a monopoly on interpretation of the world by virtue of its capacity to call anything that challenges it an unjust application of self-serving dominant power. 

When you are "Woke," you are a critical constructivist, or at least suffer ideological contamination by critical constructivism, whether you know it or not. You believe important aspects of the world are socially (politically) constructed, that power is the main variable, etc. 

More importantly, you believe that perception (of unjust power) combined with (that) interpretation of reality is a more faithful description of reality than empirical fact or logical consistency, which are "reductionist" to critical constructivists. 

This wackadoodle (anti-realist) belief is a consequence of the good-ol' Hegelian/Marxist dialectic that critical constructivism imports wholesale. As Kincheloe explains, his worldview is better because it knows knowledge is both subjective and objective at the same time. 

He phrases it that all knowledge requires interpretation, and that means knowledge is constructed from the known (objective) and the knower (subjective) who knows it. It isn't "knowledge" at all until interpretation is added, and critical constructivist interpretation is best. 

Why is critical constructivist interpretation best? Here comes another standard Marxist trick: because it's the only one (self)-aware of the fact that "positionality" with respect to power matters, so it's allegedly the only one accounting for dominant power systems at all. 

We could go on and on about this, but you hopefully get the idea. Critical constructivism is the real name for "Woke." It's a cult-ideological view of the world that cannot be challenged from the outside, only concentrated from within, and it's what you "wake up" to when Woked. 

Critical constructivism is an insane, self-serving, hermetically sealed cult-ideological worldview and belief system, including a demand to put it into praxis (activism) to recreate the world for the possibility of a "liberation" it cannot describe, by definition. A disaster. 

There is a long, detailed academic history and pedigree to "Woke," though, so don't let people gaslight you into believing it's some right-wing boogeyman no one can even define. It's easily comprehensible despite being almost impossible to grok like an insider. 

People who become "Woke" (critical constructivists) are in a cult that is necessarily destructive. Why is it necessarily destructive? Because it rejects reality and attempts to understand reality that aren't based in the subjective interpretations of power it is built upon. 

Furthermore, its objective is to destroy the only thing it regards as being "real," which are the power dynamics it identifies so it can hate them and destroy them. Those are "socially real" because they are imposed by those with dominant power, who must be disempowered. Simple. 

To conclude, Woke is a real thing. It can be explained in great detail as exactly what its critics have been saying about it for years, and those details are all available in straightforward black and white from its creators, if you can just read them and believe them. 

[deblala]

James Lindsay: Cultural Marxism, Wokeness, and Leninism 4.0. Impact of Antonio Gramsci

https://rumble.com/v4ndqmu-james-lindsay-cultural-marxism-wokeness-and-leninism-4.0.-impact-of-antonio.html

[epitome-the-burnkid-viii]

If videos like this interest you, please look for my show #youtuberecommendedchronicles🔮 #SupplementalBroadcast 🎱 #ApocalypticNewsFlash on YouTube! New episodes posted regularly!!! #473x4ndr14 #OKCopernicus 🧩🙏🎟️

[liberty1776]

You Might Already Be A Member | James Lindsay | EP 367

Marxisism as an evolution from the Christian Heresy of Gnosticism.

[listeningto]

Schau dir "Marxism, Religion & Everything In Between | Dr. James Lindsay | EP 367" auf YouTube an

[seekerslearnings]

Schau dir "Marxism, Religion & Everything In Between | Dr. James Lindsay | EP 367" auf YouTube an