Woke is Cultural Marxism By James Reed

Before the European parliament James Lindsay gave a speech, “Woke, A Cultural War Against Europe.” In it he said that woke is a form of socialism, with only differences at present being in the type of property and shares that are distributed. While conventional Marxism, as was known through the work of Marx and Lenin, was concerned primarily with the alleged oppressive economics of capitalism mainly by what Marx saw as the unjust extraction of surplus value in the labour process by the capitalist class, in the 20^th century, the failure of communist revolutions to develop in the West led to various schools of cultural and neo-Marxism taking the cultural root, and  utilising the mass migration that was occurring, in the need to create a new revolutionary class.

Thus, the concepts of class and economic surplus value used by Karl Marx came to be replaced by cultural concepts, such as gender fluidity and the deconstruction of whiteness. Whiteness itself became the new evil, that previous generations of Marxists had not addressed.

For cultural Marxism, we see the same essential theology being played out, with the overcoming of whiteness, nothing short of the destruction of the West, and Great Replacement of whites taking the place of old-style revolutions. It is just as dangerous, and poses the same existential threat, especially given the long march through institutions such as the universities is now complete. Thus, things such as the Voice, which would never have got up pre-1945, become pushed by the establishment, indicating the depth of cultural Marxist penetration.

https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/woke-is-marxism-designed-to-attack

“In March this year, James Lindsay made a really interesting speech to the European Parliament. He called it “Woke, a culture war against Europe” and presented it to the Identity and Democracy Foundation and Tom Vandendriessche MEP.

In the speech, James addresses the concept of "Woke" as it's applied in Europe, likening it to a form of socialism. He refers to the definition of equity by George Frederickson - an administered political economy where shares are adjusted to make citizens equal - and argues that the only difference between equity and socialism lies in the types of property and shares that are redistributed.

Drawing upon the taxonomy of biology, he suggests thinking of various contemporary social theories (like radical feminism, critical race theory, queer theory, and postcolonial theory) as different species within the genus of Marxist thought, bound together by intersectionality.

James explains Marx's thesis as a deeper inquiry into the human nature, beyond mere economics. Marx postulated that man's true nature is social, but it is obscured due to economic conditions that define not just economy but man, society, and history. Thus, Marx's call to seize the means of production is an appeal to construct who we are as humans to realise our complete potential.

Lindsay asserts that Marx's communism is about transcending private property for it represents human self-estrangement. He also suggests that Marx was not merely an economist but a theologian who aimed to create a religion that would supersede all existing ones and bring humanity back to its social nature.

He summarises Marx's theory on how capitalism allows the bourgeois class to monopolise a certain type of property, leading to exploitation and oppression. According to Marx, the proletariat needs to recognise their role as historical agents of change to bring about a revolution that leads to equity or socialism.

The concept of 'Woke', seen through the lens of different social theories like Critical Race Theory, Queer Theory, and Postcolonial Theory, is merely different iterations of Marxist thought applied to various aspects of society.

He gives the example of Critical Race Theory, using the 1993 article "Whiteness as Property" by Cheryl Harris. The article postulates that whiteness or white privilege acts like cultural private property, and should be abolished for racial justice. This is compared to Karl Marx's call for the abolition of private property in his Communist Manifesto. James equates the call to abolish whiteness to the call to abolish private property, as they both represent a form of privilege and control in society.

In the case of Queer Theory, James states that it attacks the normative sexual behaviours set by the majority, drawing parallels to the class struggle in Marxist thought. The 'normals' hold the cultural property of defining what is acceptable and what is not. The theory aims to challenge and dismantle this control.

Postcolonial Theory is another example. James references Franz Fanon and Jean-Paul Sartre, stating that Western cultures, seen as oppressors, have access to the world's material and cultural wealth. The goal of the oppressed, according to the theory, is decolonisation - the removal of every aspect of Western culture, akin to the proletariat seizing control from the bourgeoisie in Marxist thought.

These different theories - different species in the genus of Marxist thought - aim to seize control of the production of man, history, and society, albeit through socio-cultural means rather than Marx's original economic means.

James then traces the evolution of Marxism into what he calls "Western Marxism" or "Cultural Marxism" through the works of Antonio Gramsci and George Lucas in the 1920s, following the Russian Revolution. They concluded that Western culture was resistant to socialism and needed to be infiltrated and changed from within.

This idea further evolved into Critical Marxism through the Frankfurt School in the mid-20th century, with thinkers such as Max Horkheimer developing what's called Critical Theory. Horkheimer and others recognised that capitalism was not necessarily impoverishing workers, contrary to Marx's beliefs. Therefore, they aimed to criticise the entire existing society using Marxist conflict analysis.

James suggests that the shift of the base for potential revolution from the working class to racial minorities, sexual minorities, and feminists by Marxist thinkers allowed for a new alliance between Marxists and corporations. This shift was based on the realisation that capitalism provided a comfortable life for many workers, making them less likely to instigate revolution.

These thinkers seized the "culture industry," creating concepts like cultural appropriation and cultural relevance and selling identity-based propaganda as genuine culture.

The end result is the emergence of 'Woke' - a form of identity-based Marxism that divides various groups (referred to as 'folk') such as the LGBTQ+ community and the black community. This division aligns with W.E.B. Du Bois' vision, which James claims laid the foundations for Critical Race Theory. These 'folk' communities claim their identity like nations, complete with their own flags, symbolising their 'colonisation' of society.

Lindsay presents the idea that various identity groups see themselves as oppressed nations seeking liberation from Western civilisation. He suggests that these groups employ Maoist techniques, adapting Marxism to exploit Western tolerance, acceptance, and generosity.

He discusses Mao Zedong's use of identity politics, creating ten identities in China and categorising them as either red (communist) or black (fascist). This division was used to encourage societal pressure and create revolutionaries, particularly among the youth.

Drawing parallels between Mao's tactics and contemporary Western education, James argues that children are being taught that being white is inherently oppressive, but identifying as queer or as part of a gender minority can be celebrated. He suggests this is a way of creating a radical army of young people and references the controversial use of puberty blockers and medical transitions in children, hinting at Big Pharma's profit from such practices.

According to Lindsay, this is an American variant of Mao's cultural revolution that is being exported to Europe. He refers to the adoption of critical race theory and the toppling of statues following George Floyd's death as evidence of this trend, despite these events seeming irrelevant to Europe.

He quotes Mao's 1942 strategy of "unity, criticism, unity," implying that a similar method is being employed to destabilise Western civilization from within.

James contends that contemporary socio-political movements like inclusion and sustainability are forms of Maoist cultural revolution adapted to attack Western civilization. He criticises these movements for promoting self-criticism and attempting to create a uniform societal standard under the guise of inclusion.

He further warns that these movements have a global reach, facilitated by organisations like the World Economic Forum and the United Nations. He asserts that woke culture is essentially Marxism reimagined to exploit the weaknesses of Western societies, with Europe particularly at risk.

Drawing on Marxist strategy, he outlines two potential responses to this perceived threat: capitulation or overreaction. He warns that both paths lead to a loss of cultural identity, either through surrender or through a backlash that is subsequently weaponised against the reacting party.

Instead, he advises a firm, principled stance that understands and outsmarts the provocations. To do this, he insists on recognising the enemy – woke culture as evolved Marxism.

He scoffs at the term "global citizen," arguing it is code for someone who supports the United Nations' 17 Sustainable Development Goals without being granted corresponding rights. Lindsay asserts that the ultimate model of this movement is China's social credit system and oppression, warning that Western societies will resemble this model if they do not combat "woke" ideologies.

James closes by restating his argument that woke culture is a form of Marxism adapted to challenge Western civilisation and that it has been successful due to the West's inability to recognise and name the enemy.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE4MmscK44k