The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Lance Welton Archive
The Language Police: Suella Braverman M.P. Defies Cultural Marxists’ Ban of “Cultural Marxism” Concept
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Social Justice Warriors are obsessed with words. They instinctively understand that words aren’t just a means to communicate: they are thinking-tools—a way of expressing your individual and group identity. Political Correctness, in policing language, attempts to police people. It reduces their individuality, forces them to outwardly conform to the Multicultural Cult through speech, breaks their relationship with the speech (and thus culture) of their ancestors, and attempts to suppress heretical thinking tools. If people ignore the Left’s speech rules, this is dangerous because they might engage in wrongthink and because it implies they have lost their fear of the Multicultural Lord.

But events this week in the UK imply that the Left is increasingly frightened. They are so scared of their growing loss of power over people’s minds—as manifested in the Brexit vote, Trump’s election, and the increasing support for nationalism in Europe—that they are endeavouring to clamp down on a term that had never previously been unacceptable: “Cultural Marxism”, the process of critiquing and undermining a culture’s traditions in order to create a kind of “cultural equality.”

Suella Braverman(right) is a relatively young (38) Conservative Member of Parliament who resigned as junior minister late last year because of her opposition to what she saw as Theresa May’s “soft Brexit.” In a speech on Tuesday, she said:

We are engaging in many battles right now. As Conservatives we are engaged in a battle against cultural Marxism, where banning things is becoming de rigueur; where freedom of speech is becoming a taboo; where our universities, quintessential institutions of liberalism, are being shrouded in censorship and a culture of no-platforming.

After the speech, according to leftist Guardian.

…during a question and answer session, the MP was asked whether she stood by the term, given its far-right connections.

She said: “Yes, I do believe we are in a battle against a cultural Marxism, as I said.

“We have culture evolving from the far left which has allowed the snuffing out of freedom of speech, freedom of thought. No one can get offended any more, we are living in a culture where we are putting everyone in cotton wool, a risk-averse mentality is now taking over.

“And that instinct for freedom, for risk-taking, for making mistakes, for innovation, for creativity, is being killed. And it’s absolutely damaging for our spirit as British people, and our genius, whether it’s for innovation and science, or culture and civilisation; whether it’s for statecraft.” She added: “I’m very aware of that ongoing creep of cultural Marxism which has come from Jeremy Corbyn.”

[Tory MP criticised for using antisemitic term “cultural Marxism”, By Peter Walker, March 26, 2019]

This furore is a truly fascinating insight into how today’s Left thinks and into the fear that is gripping them, as well as their total lack of irony. Criticize their war on free speech and they attack your speech as unacceptable.

Joe Mulhall [Tweet him] senior researcher at the Leftist vigilante group Hope Not Hate, was quoted emoting

This is deeply disturbing and disappointing language to hear from a Conservative MP. In fact , it’s worrying that a mainstream politician would even have heard of such a phrase, which is usually championed by those on the extreme right. [Emphasis added].

One example Mulhall gave of a user of the phrase, thus promoting guilt by association: the Norwegian mass-murderer Anders Breivik.

Both Streeting and Mulhall also claimed that the phrase was associated with an “anti-Semitic conspiracy theory”

But Braverman has, cannily, issued no apology—the correct response to bullies, who will up the ante if they sense the slightest fear. And, indeed, the “controversy” seems to have slipped from the headlines.

Clearly, the Left’s emotional reaction was provoked by a deep-seated insecurity that Braverman triggered. Of course, she is correct that the Left has long been pursuing a program of totalitarian Cultural Marxism which involves “destroying freedom of speech, freedom of thought.” This is precisely the agenda of the terrorist-sympathiser Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn about whom MI5 was once very concerned. [Exclusive: MI5 opened file on Jeremy Corbyn amid concerns over his IRA links, by Claire Newell et al., Telegraph, May 19, 2017]

The Left’s anger at Braverman’s use of the verboten term reflects their alarm that mainstream politician would openly say this—evidence of the extent to which her social circle agree, as also manifested in relatively mainstream conservative journalists arguing in her defense that that “Cultural Marxism” has long been a accepted term and that it’s ludicrous to claim that it shouldn’t be used just because “extremists” use it [Don’t call Corbynistas “cultural Marxists”, By Brendan O’Neill, The Spectator, March 27, 2019]

More perilous still for the Left, Sue-Ellen Braverman, formerly Fernandes, is a herself member of their new inverted aristocracy. As a result of the Left’s success in indoctrinating the British people, she may well have particular influence precisely because she ticks the key “identity” boxes: relatively young (for a politician), female, childless female at that, ethnic minority (her parents’ are from Goa via Kenya and Mauritius), modest socioeconomic background, and multicultural (her husband is Jewish). These impeccably PC credentials—along with being relatively good-looking—mean that she’ll be listened to: “It’s okay to think such things if Suella thinks them.”

And even putting that aside, we have the comment of the Hope Not Hate “researcher” Joe Mulhall— who holidays in such overwhelmingly white places as Cumbria in England’s northwest and “never leave[s] London”.

That for Mulhall it is “worrying” that Braverman has even heard of the phrase speaks of the Left’s hysterical state of mind. Anybody remotely educated or politically aware has heard of Cultural Marxism. What Mulhall is effectively saying is that it’s worrying that Braverman has heard of crime-think. If she’s heard of it, then crime-think is becoming mainstream; people with power who nobody thinks are “extremists” are engaging in crime-think.

George Orwell posited in his novel 1984 that, if you could regulate speech, you could literally stop things being thought. Mark Zuckerberg may well agree: Facebook has now banned “White Nationalism” from updates, along with phrases about “immigration” and “separatism”.

And it is true that words are “thinking tools”, meaning that if your vocabulary is limited you think in a less complex way, which can even reduce your IQ. [At Our Wits’ End, By Edward Dutton and Michael Woodley of Menie, 2018, pp.131-132]

But there is nothing particularly complex about feeling an affinity for your ethnic kin. It is one of the most basic and widely felt instincts that there is. [Ethnic nationalism, evolutionary psychology and Genetic Similarity Theory, By. J. Philippe Rushton, Nations and Nationalism, 2005] Ban the term “white nationalism” and people will just innovate a new term.

This regularly happens when SJWs play for virtue status by arbitrarily outlawing as “insensitive” words which they have previously innovated: If the object of description is negatively perceived, the new word will always become insult.

Thus in the UK, the Spastics Society changed its name to “SCOPE” because “spastic” had become a playground insult. But “SCOPEY” quickly replaced this insult.

There is also nothing special about “Cultural Marxism.” Outlaw the term and it will just be articulated in different language. “Eugenics,” for example, is now “Genetic Screening.”

My optimistic view: The Left are gradually falling into a bunker mentality as more and more thinking people are finally beginning to see the poisoned harvest the it has sown. That Suella Braverman would publicly refer to the British Opposition as the Cultural Marxists that they are, and refuse to back down, is a very good sign.

The attack on Suella Braverman hasn’t worked. And it is delicious evidence that the Left may be beginning to lose the Culture War.

Lance Welton [Email him] is the pen name of a freelance journalist living in New York.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 8 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Although I do not believe “cultural marxism” is an accurate descriptor I do believe it identifies a current cultural movement. I prefer the term
    “political correctness”.
    Whatever terms are used, PC is a dangerous, insidious form of divisiveness & thought control.
    PC is employed by the pseudo-left to stifle free debate by delegitimising ideas so that they become beyond debate, their opposites then become axiomatic. (The holocaust is beyond debate; it’s essential points (6 million etc) are axiomatic).
    PC is a pseudo left phenomenon because it is about maintaining the status quo. If it seeks change it is of the deck chairs on the Titanic type of change.
    PC is an upper middle class, urban, academic, bureacratic phenomenon. It is not only no threat to Elites (ie the 0.01%), it is a defence of Elites. PC divides people. Gender, race, sexuality etc are fissures to be widened. It’s fetish with language is deliberate — constant, interminable babble renders action inconsequential. (language is action to these people).
    The last thing PC’ers want is a unified working class (my god – radical social change … I might not get tenure ! etc).
    Note how the PC have not exactly been supportive of the Yellow Vests, & how quickly they have attacked at the mere suggestion of “antisemitism”).

  2. I agree with animalogic’s take and find political correctness, cultural marxism, or whatever you call it a stalking horse for Orwellian thought control. The tern political correctness, I believe, was associated with the Stalinist era, thus perhaps the basis of and link to the term “cultural marxism”. I encountered the term “politisch Korrekt” extensively when I combed through 1950s and 1960s East German propaganda archives in doing a doctoral dissertation in the early ’90s. That helped educate me to the odious influence of political correctness, and I’ve always detested those trying to limit the scope of free speech. As the lead article indicates, it only partially works anyway. Thus, a spazz becomes a scopey.

  3. Braverman’s claim that ‘Conservatives are engaged in a battle against cultural Marxism’ is right up there with War is Peace and Ignorance is Strength. You define Cultural Marxism as ‘undermining a culture’s traditions’. The Conservative Party, every bit as much as the Labour Party, has been undermining the British way of life for decades via, for example, mass immigration, attacks on the traditional family and ever greater restrictions on free speech.

    the Left may be beginning to lose the Culture War

    I’m not so sure. The indigenous British are predicted to become a minority by the 2060s and, as the Telegraph reported in 2013, ‘almost one in 10 under 25s in Britain is now a Muslim.’

  4. Criticize their war on free speech and they attack your speech as unacceptable.

    Our speech is violence. Their violence is speech.

    • LOL: Digital Samizdat
  5. You know, whenever somebody gives me crap about using the phrase ‘cultural Marxism’ now, my stock reply is: “OK. Would you be happier if I called it cultural Bolshevism instead? I’m trying to be as accommodating as I can.”

    • Replies: @Gunnar
  6. Priss Factor [AKA "Asagirian"] says: • Website

    I don’t know what is worse.
    Jews trying to control speech in the UK or British Conservatism being represented by an invasive Woman of Dot.

  7. Ricki says:

    Different sides of the same coin controlled by one Tribe.

    Party A claims the problem is “Cultural Marxism” as in Karl Marx, Ted Grant/Isaac Blank, Sigmund Freud, Eric Hobsbawm, Ralph Miliband, Leo Abse (Homosexual Law Reform Bill and easy divorce), Frank Soskice (Race Relations Act 1965), Harry Cohen (Racial Harassment Bill/Public Order Act 1986), Baron Skidelsky, Barbara Roche, Jon Lansman (Corbyn’s Momentum Kapos), Simon Schama, Nick Cohen (High Priest of Multiculturalism), Gideon Falter (Campaign Against Anti-Semitism), Rachel Shabi (Britain is a Nation of Immigrants), Hirsch (mixed race spawn), Ali G/ Sacha Baron Cohen, Amy Winehouse and Jordan/Katie Price.

    Party B alleges it is the “Crazed Capitalists” as in Nathan Mayer von Rothschild (moneychanger), Sir Albert/Abdullah Sassoon (drug dealer), Sir Francis Goldsmid (moneychanger), Sir David Salomons (moneychanger), Samuel Montagu/1st Baron Swaythling (moneychanger), Robert Maxwell/Ján Ludvík Hyman Binyamin Hoch (pension plunderer), Sir Philip Green (pension fund looter), Sir Martin Sorrell (adman), Lord Brown (oilman), Lord Levy (moneybags), David Abrahams (property king), Dame Margaret Hodge (heiress) and Richard “Dirty” Desmond (smutware).

  8. Gunnar says:
    @Digital Samizdat

    no, “cultural Bolshevism” is bullshit too. The term “cultural Marxism” tells readers of Marx that they talk with people who want to criticize Marxism without knowing anything substantial about Marxism. Marxism is a materialistic philosophy that states that cultural phenomenons are always caused by underlying material reasons, like the economic structure, especially the distribution of wealth, production facilities and influence in political power structures. I won’t elaborate on that any further, the term “Cultural Marxism” is just too stupid. But I can say that Marxism will rise again the very moment it gets rid of political correctness, which is in my opinion an invention to destroy real leftist politics. As long all people talk hysterically about gender equality, no one talks about distribution of wealth – which would be a much more dangerous discussion for capitalism.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Lance Welton Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?