How did the academia and media become so left-wing?

The main rule of this board is that anything discussed should be at least 25 years ago, else it is not considered history (and in most cases belongs on /pol/).

It's less left wing than it used to be, because there are many fewer radical Marxists in academy chairs than there were in the 70s and 80s willing to hire other radicals.

But universities are still packed with hardcore liberals and even some socialists because so much of our academic research is geared toward analyzing society and, potentially, the problems and inequalities therein. It's also one of the best fields in which you can make a living writing about your views on society.

Do you think the "Victim Studies" researchers are super intelligent people and that Roger Scruton is not as smart as they are?

You're gonna need to be more specific. Academia where and when? And left-wing relative to what set of ideals?

That wasn't the Frankfurt School, it was Gramsci. His love for the academy and belief that professors could lead the revolution is pretty antiproletarian and not accepted by most other Marxists.

Frankfurt scholars like Benjamin and Adorno were well aware that their own writing wasn't revolutionary, but just provided a little more understanding of the world.

>liberals are leftists
>free markets are leftist
I think our United Statian friends have more to worry about their education systems then the big bad left-leaning professors.

>It's less left wing than it used to be, because there are many fewer radical Marxists in academy chairs than there were in the 70s and 80s willing to hire other radicals

What the FUCK are you talking about? In the 70's and 80's there were five or six lefty professors for every righty, now it's closer to 100 to 1. Academia has never been so totallly dominated by Marxists as it is now.

Thats arbitrary as fuck

Academia where?

Academics are intelligent and well educated.

Those are some solid numbers. Must be why Marxist practice is further today then it was thirty years ago, up to the point where kids like you don't even know what it is.

Corporate and government sponsored purges of conservatives in academia via the use of threatening to withold grants and other funding to the schools who were "too right wing", you had the Long March Through the Institutions which ended up subverting mainstream academia and giving liberals a Marxist tinge to them , but mostly it was the former vs the latter.

Most rules are arbitrary. It could be 20 years it could be 40 years, the point is we need some cut-off to avoid Veeky Forums and /pol/ becoming the same thing.

No, you're wrong. If Marxists are so prominent in our universities, why don't you please name ten Marxist professors at major universities?

Like always, academia has been more left-wing than the general population, but the overton window has shifted so far to the right since Reagan and Bill Clinton that far fewer academics are willing to actually challenge capitalism or imperialism.

>Like always, academia has been more left-wing than the general population

I wouldn't know how common marxism is in academia, but this isn't true.

>Must be why Marxist practice is further today then it was thirty years ago,
False. Critical Theory is now a mainstream concept taught by liberal professors who have melded cultural Marxism with their specific brand of faux cosmopolitan liberalism.

Most liberal professors also give nods to Marx as being an important stepping stone for dialectic as a whole, even if he was incorrect about a lot. Basically
>His diagnosis was a success, but his remedy was not

Fuck you cunt origami is the most patrician of all paper related activities.

>We need to ban right wing opinions
>We can't just let the board become more conservative
Every time

>Cultural Marxism
I thought we were talking about real political trends

We are.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School
Was a real political trend. Dialectic of Enlightenment is a mainstream text on most campuses

Academia and media are mostly pretty centrist, I don't know what you are talking about. The fact that a lot of people oppose hateful and extremist rhetoric on college campuses doesn't mean that academia is leftist, nor does the fact that so many articles about how bad Trump is are being published mean that media is leftist. Do you actually think that American liberals are left-wing?

Let's see how the intelligent and well educated work

nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/05/transracialism-article-controversy.html

Very impressive, I guess.

>this is actually an intersting historical topic.

"No"

there's a difference between holding right wing beliefs and being a /pol/tard

So would you say that Academia is inherently Pythagorean because Pythagorean theorem is ''now'' a mainstream concept thought by these same liberal professors as well? But Marx is an important stepping stone for dialectic as a whole. He's hardly the main stepping stone, but certainly a major one. Are you certain you aren't just parroting Jordan Peterson's opinions about this?

No, you're free to discuss the French Revolution from your right-wing point of view, just as someone else is free to discuss it from their left-wing point of view.
That rule is there to avoid threads about current political issues that don't belong on Veeky Forums. You already have your echochamber to discuss how much you hate degenerates, there's no need to do that here.

Tell me what you know about Adorno user

user... have you even gone to college? I've had politcal philosophy professors with boners for Nietzsche and Rousseau, not Marx.

WTF

Let's say I write a book arguing against abortion. It sells well and I get reasonably famous. And that the College Republicans at Berkeley ask me to give a speech about my book. What would be the reaction?

What would be a centrist to you?

Don't be an idiot, the distinction he was drawing wasn't an ideological one, /pol/ is for discussing modern politics and Veeky Forums is for discussing history. It's not that fucking complicated.

No, you don't know what Marxism is. Outspoken feminists who vote for Hillary Clinton and buy rainbow flag t shirts aren't Marxists.

30 years ago Marxists were not only in charge of many of the world's governments, but much more well organized in first world democracies. This is why most of the heroes of today's resurgent left (Corbyn, Sanders, Melenchon) are old men. They're veterans of our more socialist past.

cringe

So two other leftists then >.>

Are you fucking retarded mate? I'm /pol/ myself but I understand that we need a cut-off to separate Veeky Forumstory from modern /pol/itics.

Not EVERYTHING is a anti-/pol/ witchhunt.

But user, that was the point I was alluding too.

There is no cultural Marxism. The people you're talking about are just very angry liberals and few of them given any consideration to the works of Marx at all.

>it doesn't interest me so we shouldn't discuss it

You must have been one annoying kid in school

>my anecdotal experience dictates everybody else's reality.

cultural marxism

>b-but it doesnt exist!

please take the time to watch through these whenever you get the chance
youtube.com/watch?v=vnZ8WaiXnBY

youtube.com/watch?v=vm3euZS5nLo

>Consumerism is a culture of death
Yea
>Mass media is the tool of liberals to eradicate the will of the people and turn people into bland consumers
Hell yeah
>National Socialism is a spook
Wut

It's after Authoritarian Personality that cultural marxism loses me
>Muh f scale
Is the intellectual Prometheus of liberals who don't actually confront right wing thought but instead try to psychoanalyze it in order to distance themselves from it

presumably it would depend on your argument

Oh c'mon even Corbyn isn't a Marxist. Sanders isn't even close to being a Marxist.

At some term Marx' authority to terms related to his name ceases to count. The frankfurt school called it cultural marxism, and it exists regardless of how well they conformed to Marx' theories.

I agree.
If anything, identity politics is a cancer for socialists. My impression is that identity politics is a way to defang the left-wing against class issues. Much more so when you see Hollywood celebrities as the champions of the left and the utter contempt that the modern left has against the working class.

Not really, most "right wingers" of today were the liberals of 20 years. Trump is essentially just an old school democrat who doesn't like neo-liberalism , and even though he is saying exactly what Bill Clinton uses to say he is somehow literally Hitler

This
/pol/ is so obsessed with seeing marxists everywhere and all I see are tired old socialdemocrats

You know it wouldn't.

term=point*

This

>So would you say that Academia is inherently Pythagorean because Pythagorean theorem is ''now'' a mainstream concept thought by these same liberal professors as well?
Sure, except unlike the Pythagorean Theorem we are talking about Marxist critiques on capitalism and dialectic being used by liberals

Does this looks like centrism for you

wsj.com/amp/articles/higher-eds-latest-taboo-is-bourgeois-norms-1505774818

Soo you're telling me that if you presented an argument against abortion that everyone was on-board with it would make no difference to how people reacted to you being invited to give a speech?

youtube.com/watch?v=xXFQjZd2hr4

express.co.uk/news/politics/801777/general-election-2017-jeremy-corbyn-john-mcdonnell-communism-karl-marx

Why do you guys feel the need to pull this shit where you pretend you dont exist WHILE you shill? I've noticed stormfags do the same thing

Herbert Marcuse, ah, such a huge Marxist that he deliberately distanced himself from Marxist historical theory (you know, the one about class struggle, the basic tenant of Marxism) for a divergent Freudian reading. Reminder: if you believe in cultural marxism, you are a literal retard. At least believe in something real, like the Jewish cabal.

>Academia and media are mostly pretty centrist, I don't know what you are talking about

Ignored forever

>Implying socdem isn't just as bad as hardcore Marxists
They have the same goals, they just have different means of getting there.

Also, CRAAAAAAAWLIIIIING IIIIIN MY SKIIIIIIIN

Yes. Because not everyone would be on-board with it. Some people would shut off their brains at the mere mention of "argument against abortion". SJWs are fanatics, they are not people who deal with logical arguments.

>Academia and the media is pretty centrist

I'm not the one you arguing with, but Marcuse is absolute cancer.

>Mr Corbyn defended Mr McDonnell, saying "all great economists influence all of our thinking", before citing highly influential free market thinkers David Ricardo and Smith.

Well that really backed you. And no I'm not a Marxist, retard.

But liberals don't use Marx's critique of capitalism. Liberals, by definition, are capitalists not communists. There haven't been very many communists in academia since the Cold War.

>he slightly disagreed with marx on this issue so hes completely different!

It truly is amazing how you pretend this shit doesnt exist while the rotten fruits of it plague the west in the form of antifa riots and islamic apologist and the whole "white left" phenomenon. suicidal self loathing

>The frankfurt school called it cultural marxism
When have they done so? Not denying it, just asking.

how to measure a brainlet (or american):
>liberalism = leftist

You're retarded and know nothing about neither social democracy nor marxism.
Social democrats seek to reform capitalism to improve the conditions of the working class without destroying the system and without a violent revolution
Marxists seek to completely destroy the system and replace them with a different one.

Why would you post the image of the very woman whose life represents the very thing you're trying to deny?

>making a general statment about Adam Smith being prolific means he isnt a marxist, despite doing nothing other than shilling marxist crap

Again, truely amazing. You faggots are literally no different from stormfags in the irrational and retarded way you shill

>>/po/

everytime

>Yes. Because not everyone would be on-board with it.
I'm pretty sure I said:
>that everyone was on-board with
in fact I know I did because I copied and pasted that section

you can't just change the question to fit your answer, well you can but o do so is intellectually dishonest

>without destroying the system and without a violent revolution

>express
>"posh Tory twat"

>Academia and media are mostly pretty centrist

>Except liberals aren't leftists
Correct, but they still use marxian critiques of capitalism and dialectic , they just don't take said critiques at face value :/
>Liberalism = leftism
When did I say this? Also, more Americans are aware about the differences between liberalism, leftism, and rightism than europoors. Europoors thinks that neo-liberals are right wing ffs

I'd love to see the left/right divide difference between a japanese educated man and a western educated man. Education isnt far away from indoctrination.

Agreed.
>plague the west
>antifa riots
>islamic apologist
>"white left"
That's a lot of buzzwords for an underage boy user, unfortunately all of them betray you have a shallow and don't go beyond the contemporary understanding of topics at hand. Do you have parental permission to be posting on an adult Vietnamese basket weaving agora?

>Without destroying the system and without violence
Except ultimately socdems want the workers to become their own owners and take control of the means of production through democratic means rather than via revolution and subsequent dictatorship of the prols

You are the one that is being intellectually dishonest by proposing a scenario that would never happen in order to change the direction of the discussion and avoid dealing with my point that academia is not centrist. Even if I have written the best, most high quality argument ever against abortion, there would still be people that would not accept it, since they would shut off their brains. That's the point.

Do you even know what that poster's about

>weird greentext strawman combined with accusations of being a shill.

You are beyond ridiculous, that source was supposed to be showing he's a Marxist, and I pointed out it said no such thing. I'm not even a Corbyn supporter by the way but I'm not stupid enough to believe he's a communist anymore than I am stupid enough to believe Trump is literally Hitler.

Stop being so fucking retarded.

Those are democratic socialists. I know it's confusing.

Naming specific things like Antifa isnt the use of buzzwords user. Try forming an actual argument since your transparent attempt at shilling failed so horribly. Its so pathetic when you guys claim one of /yourguys/ isnt a marxist because he slightly disagrees on issue x or whatever. Are you literally trying to pretend Corbyn is some Libertarian capitalist?

Not him
>I see you think that antifa are mostly liberals LARP'ing as communist revolutionaries and are complaining about their ethno-masochistic mannerisms
>Are you a child?
Wew lad

Intelligence begets "left-wing" ideology.

Where as not-intelligence, aka ignorance, begets "right-wing" ideoloigy.

>become

academia is an ivory tower full of theories and ideas

'the world as it should be' is the basis of liberalism, whereas 'the world as it truly is' forms the basis of conservatism

institutions where people fantasize about how to create perfect/better societies wind up liberal, just like how colleges and universities tended to be hotbeds of nationalist sentiment back in the 19th century

>getting this upset over Marxism, BUT IM TOTALLY NOT A MARXIST!

Seriously, why do you feel the need to do this instead of just arguing from the open point that you believe marxist is good? It shows how insecure you are in your beliefs that you have to do this stupid shit as if its going to trick anyone. Again, Corbyn saying Smith is a prolific economist in no way makes him not a marxist.

See here
nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/05/transracialism-article-controversy.html

Explain

Fuck, I always get socdem and demsoc confused for some reason.

You're right. Radical leftism is so weak in America that this thread is all the more meaningless.

/pol/ types have such a poor understanding of political theory that they think everybody to the left of John Kasich is a Marxist and can't understand why actual socialists hate Obama and Hillary.

>gets called out for being a retard
>accuse the opponent of shilling
this is the buzzword argument if I ever saw one.
if your whole understanding of politics is primarily contextualized through a very narrow and strictly contemporary view on issue, wouldn't you say that is usually a trait shared by those too young to remember otherwise?

>Corbyn saying Smith is a prolific economist in no way makes him not a marxist.

How does Corbyn saying he is influenced by Adam Smith prove he is a Marxist?

>WE DONT EXIST STOP TALKING ABOUT US!

You guys really are fucking dumb and suck at this stuff. You lack any actual authority here to shut down conversation that make you scared, so instead you pull this juvenile "only LOSERS talk about that topic!" shit.

>Be me
>Be /pol/tard
>Everyone on /pol/ knows the difference between neo-liberals and socialists

Except for maybe a few spergy lolbertarians , everyone understands the divide in the Democratic party of liberals vs leftists, they have since the election