The Cultural Marxist Hebert Marcuse, in his 1965 paper, “Repressive Tolerance,” proposed setting up a victim coalition of people who could be convinced that they were oppressed. This coalition would comprise those who were previously rightly considered the derelicts and outcasts of society. They were the detritus that always is part of any civilization. These included members of the burgeoning feminist movement, the various sexually perverted and the general criminal class. An additional part of this coalition included the minority community, as the minority community were convinced that they were an aggrieved people who needed to overthrow their oppressors.
This cadre of people would become the new proletariat to accomplish the long march through the Institutions. The previous proletariat (the worker class) had failed in the original vision of Marxism to overthrow the Bourgeois but the Frankfurt School, of which Marcuse was a card carrying member, envisioned a new proletariat (the oppressed) who would overthrow their oppressors.
These new oppressed would be brainwashed into thinking that their oppressors were European Biblical Christians. This strategy included casting White European Christians as narrow-minded bigots who were by nature racists, xenophobes, homophobes, Islamaphobes, misogynists and greedy. All this would be definitional of what it meant to have “White privilege.” This new proletariat was taught the wonders of tolerance for everyone except Christians, against whom, intolerance must be practiced at every turn.
In his 1965 paper Marcuse gave the justification for this new intolerance,
“Liberating tolerance then would mean intolerance against movements from the right and toleration for movements from the left. As to the scope of this tolerance and intolerance, it would extend to the stage of action, as well as discussion and propaganda of deed as well as word.”
With this statement, Marcuse provided the methodology by which the new proletariat would march through the Western Institutions changing them so that those Institutions would no longer reflect the worldview of the alleged oppressor but rather would reflect and serve the worldview of the oppressed who hated Christianity and the ethos that characterizes the Christian faith. The new methodology included the ability to criminalize Christian thinking, morality, and behavior. It was Christian thinking, morality, and behavior which would be allowed no tolerance. We are seeing this methodology being played out today in the constant refrain of “White privilege,” and “Systemic Racism.” No tolerance will be allowed for “White privilege,” or “Systemic Racism,” and when one bores down on what these are one discovers that they are simply expressions of Biblical Christianity. It is Biblical Christianity — most commonly embraced by descendants of White-Europeans — that must not be tolerated. Marcuse’s Methodology explains the pulling down of statuary, the changing of names, and the elimination of all things Western Civilization.
When you combine the above with the prevailing Worldview that has been hegemonic since the 1960’s or so one begins to understand why we are at this place in time. The Ascendant worldview in the West today is some form of Existentialism, whether of the postmodern variety, the Nihilism variety or the Deconstructionists variety. All find their roots going back to Existentialism.
In the world of existentialism, a person’s individual freedom is the North Star of the philosophy. As such in that world contradiction is meaningless. The existentialist cares little about being contradictory because the pursuit of non-contradiction would mean a lack of absolute freedom. The existentialist not caring about contradiction therefore must insist that there is no such thing as order, design, or logic to the Universe. As personal freedom is the North Star all is randomness and chance and any determinacy that exists, exists only at the consent of the freedom of the existentialist and only exists as long as they like.
All of this is what Sartre meant when he said “Existence precedes essence.” For the existentialist man’s existence precedes his essence — man exists without any prior essence (nature) or fixed meaning. As such man creates and recreates at his whimsy his own meaning within his essence-less world.
When this worldview of existentialism with its insistence on absolute freedom with no boundaries is combined with Marcuse’s Cultural Marxism and its methodology of no tolerance (then sprinkled with Marx’s Hegelian dialectic) for the descendants of the White European Biblical Christians the end of result is the burning down of the West — a civilizations entity grown in the soil of Biblical Christianity.
We are being coerced into ‘freedom’ through revolution, freedom from God.
Marx’s religion was revolution, where the state would wither away and autonomy would rule. Sounds like survival of the most dominant/cruel to me.
“…by necessity, in modern philosophy the idea of freedom has to be negative. This is why beginning with the four freedoms, Roosevelt and Churchill, the idea of freedom has been negative”
“The hippy movement (1960’s) caught the spirit of modern philosophy; do your own thing. That sums up in one expression the conclusion of all of modern philosophy. Every man his own God, and his own universe.”
“For Dewey there could be no law, no standard beyond man. In his A Common Faith, his Yale lectures of 1934, He spoke out sharply against Biblical faith and said that it was totally incompatible with Democracy.”
“What we find in Hegel is that the language is so used, that a traditionalist, someone who is for God and country can find everything he wants and feels very content with it. But when its content is properly understood it is the most revolutionary of doctrines.”
“Because what existentialism says is, that man must live without any influence from history, from state, church, school, parents, but purely out of the biology of his own being. Then only is he free, only then does he realize himself existentially.
He does not allow anyone to force a nature and a pattern on him. Thus the aseity of man replaces the aseity(self-existence)of God”
Hegel to Marx to Dewey-The Creation of a New World
https://pocketcollege.com/transcript/RR261B3.html