Talk:Marxist cultural analysis

The role in cultural and social topics.

The original 2014 version of this article had the following passage:

"An outgrowth of Western Marxism (especially from Antonio Gramsci and the Frankfurt School) and finding popularity in the 1960s as cultural studies, cultural Marxism argues that what appear as traditional cultural phenomena intrinsic to Western society, for instance the drive for individual acquisition associated with capitalism, nationalism, the nuclear family, gender roles, race and other forms of cultural identity;[1]

reference: ^ a b Merquior, J.G. (1986). Western Marxism, University of California Press/Paladin Books, ISBN 0586084541"

so, could we add the topic of the Marxist Cultural Analysis that it does not stop at being just anti-capitalist but also critiques traditional societal norms in culture? the source is from the university of california from 1986, before the 1990s so it's not refering to the conspiracy theory when it refers to the marxist cultural analyis as "cultural marxism" but the original 1973 definition of the term. 177.37.150.39 (talk) 17:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Can you quote the page no. where the source actually uses the term cultural Marxism? Just because the article used the terminal does not mean the source did. Also, what relevance is it if the term cultural Marxism was used? TFD (talk) 18:39, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

i mean, you could just replace "cultural marxism" with "marxist cultural analysis" and just call it a day. 177.37.150.39 (talk) 19:38, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

The article already says that. In fact, I don't know what is inherently anti-capitalist about it. They were basically criticizing the same cultura as American conservatives do. TFD (talk) 21:06, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

No, american conservatives aren't attacking them from an anti capitalist or pro socialist perspective. like the frankfurt school 177.37.150.100 (talk) 21:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

The Frankfurt school did not oppose pornography etc. because it was capitalist, but because they saw it as demeaning and exploitive. Presumably, conservatives would agree. Their difference would be about why exploitation exists. A socialist would be more likely to attribute it to social systems, while a conservative would attribute it to human nature. TFD (talk) 17:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

This article should have an entry or mention of Trent Schroyer and how he coined the term "Cultural Marxism" for better historical context

Schroyer coined the term "Cultural Marxism" in 1973, so getting to know the origin of the term would give a better historical context) 177.37.150.58 (talk) 00:38, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Schroyer wasn't discussing the subject that is presently called 'cultural marxism', so that would tend to mislead readers. MrOllie (talk) 00:45, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

In Schroyer's book, The Critique of Domination: The Origins and Development of Critical Theory (1973), he uses words cultural Marxism once (p. 172), and chapter 6 is titled, "Cultural Marxism: Contradictions of "Rationality."" But there is no discussion of what the expression means. In any case, there is no evidence that anyone copied his use of the term. Lots of writers put adjectives together with nouns. TFD (talk) 04:05, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Stop accepting extremist right-wing narrative by labeling "Cultural Marxism" as a conspiracy theory

When I use "Cultural Marxism," I can mean "Marxist cultural analysis", and I refuse to replace the former term with the latter. The fact that certain far-right extremists misappropriated it and wrongly stigmatized it does not justify accepting their distorted definition. To do so is to tacitly endorse their conspiracy narrative. The proper response is to restore the term's original meaning, not abandon it. However I see this current wikipedia page caving to far-right extremists by accepting their false narrative. Feather943 (talk) 00:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

@Feather943 you may write as you like, but Wikipedia articles follow principles such as WP:COMMONNAME and define topics according to what reliable sources do.

in this case, the argument that "Cultural Marxism" had a distinct, non-conspirscy theory meaning first has been repeatedly considered and repeatedly rejected by the English Wikipedia community. Your own opinions as an editor are strictly irrelevant in the face of this consensus. Newimpartial (talk) 00:47, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Very well, it seems then, Wikipedia will not be a community I spend time on or at least not this page. Feather943 (talk) 00:49, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

@Newimpartial

May I ask your reason of opposing using "Cultural Marxism" in meaning of "Marxist cultural analysis"? And if you support "Marxist cultural analysis"? Feather943 (talk) 00:58, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

To answer your question, the main meaning of "Cultural Marxism" over the last 35 years - almost the only meaning - is the Conspiracy theory (usually the object of the conspiracy theory). From this I conclude (1) that it is correct for "Cultural Marxism" to redirect to the conspiracy theory, and (2) that the article on Marxist theories of culture needs to have another name; Marxist cultural analysis works as well as anything else that's been proposed. Newimpartial (talk) 02:06, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

What evidence do you have for 35 years of "cultural Marxism" meaning?

A single counter-example undermines this title and definition via concensus. For example, "Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain: History, the New Left, and the Origins of Cultural Studies" was published in 1997 by Duke University. It is British, within 35 years, and an academic analysis that has nothing to do with political pundits.

More counter-examples are found for any Wikipedian with access to a University library.

Who has set the 35 year timeframe for a concensus definition? Is this Wikipedia editor guidance for naming conventions?

The title and definition given in this article violates Wikipedia's Neutrality stance. The current title and definition are driven by non-neutral, political and nation-specific contexts. This version of the article should renamed for its political and US-specific context.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_titles#Neutrality_in_article_titles Justin (talk) 14:08, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

@Vap0rtranz I'm afraid this editor may not understand how Wikipedia determines the application of its policies and guidelines through consensus. The prior determination, that the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the phrase "Cultural Marxism" is the conspiracy theory using that trope, was established through one of the most widely participated-in discussions in enwiki's history - closed by a panel of three uninvolved administrators - and has been re-iterated in a series of more recent formal discussions as well. One editor's opinion doesn't carry much weight in that context.

Also, Dworkin's book doesn't say what this editor seems to think it does, nor does it carry much weight anyway in the overall context of sources on Marxism and culture. The book has been extensively discussed on-wiki; please see the Talk page archives at Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory. Relying on this one source to say that the real name for Marxist approaches to culture is "Cultural Marxism" - which appears to be this editor's position - depends on out of context cherry-picking and motivated reading, IMO. Newimpartial (talk) 15:27, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Editors were able to find a handful of sources that used the term cultural Marxism to refer to anything other than a conspiracy theory and none of these were written during the heyday of the Frankfurt school. The extremists did not appropriate the term because they were not aware of these sources, which are fairly obscure. It was only after they adopted the term, that they scoured tens of thousands of books and articles to find five or six times the term was used. TFD (talk) 04:17, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Who coined the term "Marxist cultural analysis" to describe Marxist Culture Hegemony theory?

Did Wikipedia editors coin "Marxist cultural analysis" or contemporary scholars did? If it's the ladder, can someone provide the sources when the term "Marxist cultural analysis" was first established to be used to encompass the concepts of Marxist Cultural Hegemony theory, Frankfurt School, and Critical Theory? Feather943 (talk) 02:28, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

It gets used in Raymond Williams' Base and Superstructure in Marxist Cultural Theory (1973). To 'do' Marxist cultural analysis is to analyze how the economic base determines the cultural superstructures, and hence the cultural messages mass media puts out. For example; a Capitalist economy, will automatically be biased towards creating pro-Capitalists cultural messages ("propaganda"), as it's Capitalists themselves who control the resources and large scale means of production and dissemination of media. Then on the other end of the scale (somewhat in opposition to the traditional Marxist cultural analysis) there's someone like Stuart Hall (with his encoding/decoding model), who partially disagrees with this - or at least believes the media landscape can be more complex than that, as viewers can become aware of the inherent biases of Capitalist media companies. Likewise in say a Socialist Market Economy (such as in China) we'd expect their media to push a CCP or Socialist set of messages ("propaganda"). As their base also defines their superstructure.

So it's a mode of analysis, mostly focused on the Marxist assumption that a culture's Economic Base, ends up defining the biases of its media production. As the economic base (and the people who prosper from the economy) - usually end up with influence or ownership over the "mainstream media" - and so they'll automatically want to defend their grasp of both the economy and media. So a society's economics, defines the biases of its cultural messages. We hence all live in a kind of propaganda bubble (defined by the economic model the cultural industry inhabits). As Adorno puts it:

"In our age the objective social tendency is incarnate in the hidden subjective purposes of company directors, the foremost among whom are in the most powerful sectors of industry – steel, petroleum, electricity, and chemicals. Culture monopolies are weak and dependent in comparison. They cannot afford to neglect their appeasement of the real holders of power if their sphere of activity in mass society (a sphere producing a specific type of commodity which anyhow is still too closely bound up with easy-going liberalism and Jewish intellectuals) is not to undergo a series of purges. The dependence of the most powerful broadcasting company on the electrical industry, or of the motion picture industry on the banks, is characteristic of the whole sphere, whose individual branches are themselves economically interwoven. All are in such close contact that the extreme concentration of mental forces allows demarcation lines between different firms and technical branches to be ignored." -Theodore Adorno

[Editors Note] Adorno (who was Jewish himself) mentions "Jewish intellectuals" in the quote, because in the time period he was writing, Hollywood had an influx of film specialists from Germany's film industry. Which prior to Hitler, was one of the largest film industries in the world. So with the rise of Nazism in 1930s Germany, came a diaspora (or purging) of Jewish Intellectuals from Germany and into American culture. So he's referencing the history of Jewish intellectuals in American culture, rather than saying something antisemitic by singling them out. 117.102.157.154 (talk) 14:24, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Of course, Marxist cultural analysis somewhat overlooks the concept of "Democracy at the shop front" - where for a piece of media or culture to be popular (or profitable), it has to win the audience over. Bad or shallow propaganda will always be unliked, unless it hits a certain level of irony. Media/popularity is hence subject to a kind of democratic process. But I digress. 117.102.157.154 (talk) 14:31, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Is this concept actually separate from Cultural_materialism_(cultural_studies)

....and might that page have a lot to contribute to this page?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_materialism_(cultural_studies) 117.102.157.154 (talk) 15:40, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

@117.102.157.154 I don't think the overlap between the topics is very large. The Marxism of Raymond Williams isn't inflected by Frankfurt School or Gramscian analysis, for starters. Newimpartial (talk) 22:58, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Not really the point, but okay. 101.115.135.199 (talk) 21:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)