but, "cultural marxism" is not a conspiracy theory. it is the same thing as "neo-conservatism"; remember - these people were all trostykists. were. and, that is the error that the right makes - they get the whole thing backwards. and, don't they always?

these are the same types of people that think that removing the state will lead to a spontaneous mass respect towards property rights, because they don't understand that the state doesn't just happen to uphold those rights but exists for that exact purpose.

it's no secret that the people that build the world we live in today were, in fact, marxists in the past. the blueprint is in the pnac. and, they've been open about their utilization of marxist theory to advance their imperialist agenda.

nor is this without historical precedent, as was documented by the likes of quigley and sutton - both of whom had access to deep resources in order to understand what was happening around them. nor has it escaped the understanding of prominent leftist historians, like zinn and chomsky, both of whom have written extensively on the topic, but who understand the idea as a vulgar marxism rather than as cultural marxism.

zizek in a lot of ways is a good example of "cultural marxism" in the actual sense, as he is a leftist academic that has moved hard to the right, albeit for financial gain. a more disappointing example was christopher hitchens.

nor is the confusion around the situation new, either, as this is the same thesis put forward by the john birch society in the middle of the last century, which is the ideological origins of the koch brothers.

and, who came up with the idea that the illuminati is a satanic group, or that freethinkers and masons were in league with the devil? it was the catholic church, who were seeking to fight back against a movement that it saw as a threat to it's own power - and rightly so, as the liberalism expounded by these groups eventually did the church in, didn't it?

it is a measurable phenomenon over what is now the last several decades, more than the last century, that powerful capitalists have found insights within marx that they've understood are ways to better help them win the class war. we used to call this vulgar. today, we call it cultural.

read sutton and move forwards; he understood this quite well. so, for example, he understood that when the rockefellers and the morgan interests generously funded the bolsheviks, it was not out of any affinity with marxism, but because they wanted to capture the russian market, which was newly opening up out of czarist backwardsness. by putting a one party dictatorship in power, they could avoid the waste and bureaucracy associated with free markets, and jump directly to an efficient domination over russian consumption. and, that is, in fact broadly what happened - and what defines our understanding of this concept of "state capitalism".

likewise, any good conservative capitalist standing in 2018 should be well aware of the necessity of religion in upholding a system that is fraying at the seams. i have repeatedly posted a fragment from socialism: utopian and scientific that goes over the differences in the british and german bourgeoisie, in relation to the maintenance of a religious middle class. it was, after all, the socialists that argued that if religion is allowed to collapse then capitalism will collapse with it - this was not initially a hegelian warning from nietszche, but a socialist tactic. and, so, should we be surprised that capital seeks to replace the dying culture of christianity with a model that appears to be so much more successful? and, might these useful idiots on the left ought to be more in opposition than the reactionary christians, about it?

was marx himself not a capitalist? and did he not utilize his own tools in this manner, as well? was marx himself not the first vulgar marxist?

see, it's one thing to redirect these people towards better sources of information, but it's another to shut them down altogether. what's happening is that they're being effectively co-opted, and in that sense peterson is no less ignorant than his followers are. there's a worthwhile observation in there. indeed, the conspiracy theory is intended to obscure this worthwhile observation - as all good conspiracy theories are.