The modern day Leftist is a student of Antonio Gramsci, not Karl Marx

[Votto]

Antonio Gramsci is the real father of modern-day Marxism. After all, Marxism did not spread like wildfire like Karl Marx had predicted. In fact, it was the opposite. During his time Capitalism was as dominant as ever. So he came up with his own theories as to why and solutions for the problem, thus became known as a neo-Marxist.

Gramsci gave much thought to the role of intellectuals in society.[48] He stated that all men are intellectuals, in that all have intellectual and rational faculties, but not all men have the social function of intellectuals.[49] He saw modern intellectuals not as talkers, but as practical-minded directors and organizers who produced hegemony through ideological apparatuses such as education and the media.

In other words, his view was that people were sheep and all that needed to be done was to take over such things as the media and academia to indoctrinate the masses into embracing Marxism. He was correct that people would not embrace Marxism otherwise. Marxism needed to be transformed into a cult-like apparatus and incorporated into society as "the norm" into all of the institutions of society. In other words, people needed to be brain washed into embracing Marxism or it would fail.

This is the model embraced today by the Left and it seems to have worked like a charm.

Antonio Gramsci - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[notmyfault2020]

I think this idea of hegemony or controlling the "little people" so as to maintain the statu quo of a capitalistic society is OFF base.

Especially in that time period in which Gramsci lived, people were "kept in line" as it were by CATHOLICISM and other forms of Christianity.

The popes always taught against Communism

Until the infamous Vatican II came along...



But the Vatican II church (as I call it) .. the Francis church is not the real, true Catholic Church. I sometimes think the real true CatholicChurch exists in Catholics alone and it has been that way since Vatican II

 

[Dogmaphobe]

If this forum is any indication, I'd say that today's modern leftists are not a student of anything.

What a bunch of ignorant fucks.

 

[Votto]

I think this idea of hegemony or controlling the "little people" so as to maintain the statu quo of a capitalistic society is OFF base.

Especially in that time period in which Gramsci lived, people were "kept in line" as it were by CATHOLICISM and other forms of Christianity.

The popes always taught against Communism

Until the infamous Vatican II came along...



But the Vatican II church (as I call it) .. the Francis church is not the real, true Catholic Church. I sometimes think the real true CatholicChurch exists in Catholics alone and it has been that way since Vatican II

Hegemonic control is a fascist tactic. Don't go by what people want or think as individuals, rather, brain wash them into doing what you want them to do and think collectively as a group. Intellectual diversity is to be shunned at all costs.

You are dealing with fascists, but that was the society Antonio was immersed in, so it is understandable he would embrace their tactics.

 

[Votto]

If this forum is any indication, I'd say that today's modern leftists are not a student of anything.

What a bunch of ignorant fucks.

They are mostly the brain washed sheep of Antonio.

 

[Votto]

Antonio was not right about everything, however. He was a Marxist after all. LOL.

Antonio Gramsci rejected the state-worship that results from equating political society with civil society, as was done by the Jacobins and Fascists. He believes the proletariat's historical task is to create a "regulated society", where political society is diminished and civil society is expanded. He defines the "withering away of the state" as the full development of civil society's ability to regulate itself.[52]

The state, or political party of the Left, will never wither away. Instead, it will dominate and control ever so increasingly. Instead, becomes the god of the Left.

Although Antonio was smarter than Marx, as most are, he was still a fool and did not understand human nature related to power.