Thank you for supplying a definition which is commensurate with your own. I appreciate that honesty, and the video elucidated some interesting points.
As Ms. Stephen mentioned, I am a sociologist. I’m familiar with critical theory and its applications. Critical theory is not, however, the offshoot of the Frankfurt School. The Frankfurt School instrumentalized critical theory to achieve a different kind of Marxist class consciousness, but it didn’t originate there. Critical theory originated in epistemological philosophy. Some researchers, like Noam Chomsky, do not accept critical theory as philosophically robust. Indeed, it is not inherently so. Each epistemological lens offers differing viewpoints which may or may not satisfy certain philosophical conditions of validity, reliability, or falsifiability. But it is a philosophical concern.
As a sociologist, I am concerned with one system more specific than (yet borne from) philosophy: that of social science. The scientific method is the same fundamental fruit of philosophical enquiry: observation, hypothesis, and experimentation. “This is happening. I think it’s happening because of this. Let’s find out if it is happening for that reason. Is it?” At its core, this bonds sociology, psychology, anthropology, and linguistics just as much as it bonds physics, astronomy, chemistry, and medicine. Cause and effect, repeated over and over, until something reveals itself. Every step forward leads to something else. New questions. New areas. Possibilities. Theories.
However — and this is the big “however” — the conclusions gained from these processes should (and I think you’ll agree with me here) be used ethically and with concern for the historical context in which they occur. Nothing occurs inside a vacuum. Everything has a story. Every culture; every person; every structure; every symbol.
The video openly states that Cultural Marxism seeks to undermine “white, European culture.” That phrase does not meet the scientific prerequisites of what constitutes a culture. To say “white culture” is disingenuous. What is “white culture?” There are white people, certainly, but that is not culturally significant. A white man born in Madrid, a white woman born in Paris, a white woman in Romania, and a white man born in Germany do not share any significant cultural identity. The man from Madrid will have a Spanish cultural identity. He will grow up with Spanish customs, Spanish education, and the concept of life as a Spaniard. The woman from Paris will do the same as a French woman, learning French history, and following French cultural norms.
This doesn’t even take into account that they may leave their place of birth. A man may find himself born in France, educated in Germany, married in Switzerland, doing research in Austria, and immigrating to the United States. He becomes a naturalized citizen. He is now, theoretically, a homogenous “American,” but he clearly is not. He was not raised within the confines of American culture and may not accept or adopt American cultural norms. That disregards the fact that many different states in the United States have different populations with other immigrant populations who may have cultural influence upon what it means for that man to be an American.
So — if we do take the final sentence of the video as the telos of the tenets of Cultural Marxism as it exists — what, then, is “white culture?”