Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:36, 23 February 2023

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article, in a manner that does not comply with Misplaced Pages's policies. Editors are encouraged to use neutral mechanisms for requesting outside input (e.g. a "request for comment", a third opinion or other noticeboard post, or neutral criteria: "pinging all editors who have edited this page in the last 48 hours"). If someone has asked you to provide your opinion here, examine the arguments, not the editors who have made them. Reminder: disputes are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote.

A warning about certain sources: There are two sources on the subject of "Cultural Marxism" that represent a citogenesis or circular reporting risk to Misplaced Pages as they plagiarize verbatim directly from an outdated draft that came from Misplaced Pages, which can be found here (2006 revision here). The sources are N.D. Arora's Political Science for Civil Services Main Examination (2013) and A.S. Kharbe's English Language And Literary Criticism (2009); both are from publishers located in New Delhi and should be avoided to prevent a citogenesis incident.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. United States Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Conservatism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Socialism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Politics: American Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Discrimination Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Judaism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Skepticism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Alternative views Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations: McKinney, Kara (2021-11-29). "Tipping Point". One America News Network. David Auerbach (11 December 2014). "Encyclopedia Frown". Slate. Alexander Riley (2022-05-12). "On Cultural Marxism, the Antisemitic Conspiracy Theory? Woke Deception at Misplaced Pages". Minding the Campus.

Neutral point of view

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This article is in clear violation of Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policies. There is nothing intrinsically anti-semitic about "Cultural Marxism" or even criticism of the Frankfurt School (Not one of the conservative influencers I listen to has ever listed their names, the act of which according to one of the linked sources is what makes this an anti-semitic conspiracy thoery). Joeedh (talk) 04:48, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Anti-semitism is a very important part of the topic, but the inclusion of the big anti-Semitism banner at the top of the article is (intentionally) unduly prejudicial. There are other categories/series that are equally or more applicable, such as socialism, conservatism, 20th century American politics, etc. Sennalen (talk) 20:20, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

While its main proponents are less overt than their predecessors and instead use coded language, the core of the theory is to accuse the Jews of trying to overthrow Western civilization, which is an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory. TFD (talk) 02:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@The Four Deuces What you said is itself a conspiracy theory. Claiming that people who criticize Marxism are secretly using coded language and that really they are just antisemitic, that is a conspiracy theory. 68.232.118.40 (talk) 18:55, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source for that opinion? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:00, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Criticism of cultural Marxism becomes conspiracism when those critics invent the existence of a secret plot. TFD (talk) 16:32, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Not a "Conspiracy."

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Marxist cultural analysis is a term Marxists themselves use. Lots of Marxists openly claim to want to subvert different elements of western culture. And the "long march through the institutions" is an idea the left openly promoted. I don't see where there is a conspiracy, and especially where is the antisemitic part? Just because Marx was Jewish doesn't make all criticism of Marxism antisemitic.

This article sounds like someone who has framed criticism of The Frankfurt school and certain strains of Marxism as a "conspiracy theory." I don't think it merits the term.

It would be like right wingers writing "The Trump Conspiracy Theory (TCT) is the false belief held by far left radicals that Trump and white Nationalists are secretly plotting to undermine American democracy and turn America into a authoritarian dictatorship. It is rejected by mainstream academia as a dangerous far left conspiracy."

Person note, I agree with a lot of what Marx said. Not a big fan of capitalism. But framing this as a "conspiracy theory" is ridiculous. 68.232.118.40 (talk) 18:53, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

«conspiracy» and «conspiracytheory» are not the same thing, in the same way that «wife» and «midwife» are not the same thing. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 19:10, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

«framing this as a "conspiracy theory" is ridiculous.» => Why? And how many of the following articles have you fully read?

• https://journals.openedition.org/amnis/2004
• Jérôme Jamin, Cultural Marxism and the Radical Right, https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137396211_4
• Tanner Mirrlees, The Alt-right's Discourse on "Cultural Marxism": A Political Instrument of Intersectional Hate, https://journals.msvu.ca/index.php/atlantis/article/view/5403
• Martin Jay, Dialectic of Counter-Enlightenment: The Frankfurt School as Scapegoat of the Lunatic Fringe, https://www.jstor.org/stable/41638676
• Andrew Woods, Cultural Marxism and the Cathedral: Two Alt-Right Perspectives on Critical Theory, https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-18753-8_3
• Jérôme Jamin, Cultural Marxism: A survey, https://doi.org/10.1111/rec3.12258
• Rachel Busbridge, Cultural Marxism: far-right conspiracy theory in Australia’s culture wars, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504630.2020.1787822
• Joan Braune, Who's Afraid of the Frankfurt School? 'Cultural Marxism' as an Antisemitic Conspiracy Theory, http://transformativestudies.org/publications/journal-of-social-justice/past-issues-jsj/journal-of-social-justice-volume-9-2019/
• https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2003/cultural-marxism-catching
• http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9029472
• https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/13/opinion/cultural-marxism-anti-semitism.html https://web.archive.org/web/20190301000000*/https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/13/opinion/cultural-marxism-anti-semitism.html
• https://www.smh.com.au/world/cultural-marxism--the-ultimate-postfactual-dog-whistle-20171102-gzd7lq.html
• https://www.salon.com/2019/05/05/a-users-guide-to-cultural-marxism-anti-semitic-conspiracy-theory-reloaded/
• https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2019/08/28/le-marxisme-culturel-fantasme-prefere-de-l-extreme-droite_5503567_3232.html
• https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/78mnny/unwrapping-the-conspiracy-theory-that-drives-the-alt-right
• https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/1/23/1828527/-How-the-cultural-Marxism-hoax-began-and-why-it-s-spreading-into-the-mainstream

Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 19:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

There's already a page for Marxist cultural analysis, this is a page specifically for the conspiracy theory claiming there's a planned agenda by The Frankfurt School, to take over society. Hence the page title Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory. 194.223.32.46 (talk) 03:49, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

There are some absolutely pants-on-head insane takes on the Frankfurt School. Then there are some grounded criticisms of the Frankfurt school that might be considered gauche by some. The article has shamelessly equivocated between these two kinds of things, but it's getting better over time. Sennalen (talk) 04:38, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Can you specify what criticisms of The Frankfurt School you mean? Also, wouldn't they just go on the page for The Frankfurt School? 194.223.32.46 (talk) 03:27, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm speaking to OP's core point that the members of the Frankfurt school were avowed Marxists with all that entails. Sennalen (talk) 03:50, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Most of them, particularly Horkheimer drifted away from Marxism, Marcuse is well known to have written his criticisms of the Soviet Union, Adorno is often described as a 'critical humanist' (likewise with Fromm) - and they're all somewhat considered to be neo-Marxists, or exiles from Marxism. Hence the "Grand Hotel Abyss" criticism. So I think to claim they were "avowed Marxists" is incorrect. They really weren't avowed Marxists, and were clearly working on something else, something different and beyond that label (Something within the Grand Hotel Abyss, rather than trying to destroy it). They weren't pushing some Marxist agenda, in fact, I think you could even describe them as Critical Liberals. 124.149.235.195 (talk) 05:00, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

They were weeping due to the failure of the Socialist revolution worldwide (well, mostly in Western countries). So, of course, they realized that orthodox Marxism or Stalinism weren't popular, so they tried to posit something else, more attractive to the masses. Of course, their promotion of sexual liberty wasn't conforming to Marxist standards: Communists were basically prudes. My point is also that they failed to offer something more attractive, they only made sense to other academics. And to the extent that the sexual revolution happened, it happened without them or despite them. tgeorgescu (talk) 05:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Weeping? I don't think so. That's very emotive language, and was far from their main focus. "failed to offer something more attractive" - their critique of The Culture Industry is widely accepted by both sides of politics, as is the use of inferential testing, which they pioneered in psychology. They also contributed to the Nuremberg trials, as well as contributing to work against the Nazis for the OSS during WW2, and work against the USSR for the CIA during the Cold War. Anyways, agree to disagree. There sure are a lot of negative views of The Frankfurt School around here. 124.149.235.195 (talk) 05:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Not exactly my original thoughts, if you read the article, you will see therein are cited sources for my statements. Oh, yes, in case I wasn't clear, I meant "attractive for the masses". tgeorgescu (talk) 06:00, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

The word weeping doesn't appear in the article. Just the idea that they "failed to offer something more attractive" than Stalinism, is silly. Even Oat milk is more attractive than Stalinism... they weren't even a group during the German 1918 - 1919 revolution. So I guess by "them" you must mean, pre-revolution Marxist intellectuals, rather than the actual Frankfurt School... I mean, Marcuse was 20 (and off shooting right-wing snipers), and Adorno was 15. I'm not really sure what you've come onto the thread to say. 124.149.235.195 (talk) 07:03, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

The critical theory is not exactly my cup of tea, but it does have merits for their fellow academics.

See Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory#Conspiratorial interpretations, look for "jeremiads".

And, yes, when the sexual revolution actually began, the critical theory turned against it. They no longer liked what they had formerly preached. Oh, yes, Freud was a conservative in liberal's clothing. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:57, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I think we might be agreeing that The Frankfurt School dropped their interest in understanding the 1918 German revolution - in favour of critiquing fascism, including culturally hegemonic forces such as The Culture Industry?.. so backed away from being avowed Marxists (if ever they were), and turned to being avowed anti-Capitalists (albeit ones living within Capitalists societies). 124.149.235.195 (talk) 11:59, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

The Culture Industry is very diverse, and its sole common denominator is the pursuit of monetary profit. tgeorgescu (talk) 12:03, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

While some Marxists may want to subvert different elements of western culture, Marxist cultural analysis is about analyzing rather than changing it. And the long march through the institutions was a term coined by a Marxist who had nothing to do with cultural analysis. IOW, the IP brings together unrelated things and theorizes their connection through a conspiracy, which is what a conspiracy theory is. TFD (talk) 12:16, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Herbert Marcuse had close and ongoing collaborations with Rudi Dutschke. Sennalen (talk) 03:23, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

What does that have to do with say - Michael Walsh's claim that The Frankfurt School were Satanists, or William S. Lind saying that The Frankfurt School were responsible for the appearance of gay people on television? No one is denying that the New-Left existed. Hell, there's a whole article on it, maybe you could discuss Herbert Marcuse having done a conference with, and exchanging letters with Rudi Dutschke (who was shot in the head a couple of years after meeting Marcuse) over on that page?

What's your claim? Rudi Dutschke communicated with Marcuse - therefore Intersectionality is caused by a Cultural Marxist plot and thus has no merit? Jumping leaps and bounds and decades in between with no connection or explaination.

All conspiracy theories have some truth, that truth unfortunately doesn't justify their more grandiose and false claims. The fact is that leftists wanting to change society - doesn't make for a conspiracy theory, any more than Trump wanting to get re-elected in order to change society. Welcome to politics; where people want to change society. Trying to manufacture that into a world-controlling conspiracy just misapprehends the basics. That in politics, people discuss ideas, that in politics, people progress agendas, that in politics - people do activism to try to attain their goals (like DeSantis is with Critical Race Theory, or the left are, with complaining about the video game Hogwarts Legacy).

Does that mean Misplaced Pages should support the claims that Trump or DeSantis are trying to make women wear chastity belts, and create a fourth Reich? No, we should not.

We already have pages for Herbert Marcuse, Rudi Dutschke, The New Left and even, Long march through the institutions. Because they were all factual elements of the 1960s and 1970s. They are however not the cause of Stonewall or Third-wave feminism. Nor is there a consistent ideology titled "Cultural Marxism" which somehow remained in central control of the Education System, Media, and Politics from 1968 to 2023. This claim is a distortion of history, politics, the 1980s, Republicanism, and numerous other political factors which permeated through out those years. At any rate, there are various FACTUAL pages for you to contribute to, rather than trying to prop up a conspiracy theory here.

Coincidentally, this page - to its detriment - has never focused enough on the more preposterous claims around the conspiracy theory. So it's little wonder people still see the scant facts of leftists existing and communicating, as proof of an organized take over of society. I guess that's just natural for those who feel dominated by their own side's failures to keep up with reality and discourse. Perhaps if more conservatives, and conservative friendly "classical liberals" were interested in studying social justice issues - the left wouldn't dominate those fields, and the world would be more open to conservative solutions. 203.214.85.88 (talk) 04:05, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

OR perhaps you could - rather than trying to justify the term "Cultural Marxism" - focus on describing the LEGACY of The Frankfurt School, or the LEGACY of Herbert Marcuse. That's fine, of course - by changing that language, you can no longer just use your invented "ideology" as their MacGuffin. You couldn't falsely construct a motivation titled "Cultural Marxism". A motivation, which was up to them, not you.

You'd actually have to draw a consistent line between Marcuse and The Frankfurt School and modern progressivism, and even then you'd be making an argument of "influence" and you still wouldn't negate any of the logic or mechanisms progressives base their arguments on, and you'd look quite a bit like you were praising Marcuse and The Frankfurt School as pivotal.

No, civil rights movements, progressive movements, historical leftism, had its own motivations. Every actor in history had their own motivations. Saying that two people met, or worked on a conference together "and therefore", simply doesn't justify the construction of a new term or ideology being attributed to them. One they never used for themselves, and weren't aware of. One that didn't exist at that point. Sorry, you don't get to define what other people's politics were. You just don't. 203.214.85.88 (talk) 04:15, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

You may find Frankfurt School#Praxis worth your time. Sennalen (talk) 05:08, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

What makes you suggest that? It says nothing I wasn't already aware of. Also, like I said, Marcuse isn't the whole Frankfurt School. Perhaps Conservatives should have leveled their complaints at "Cultural Marcusianism" rather than at the whole of The Frankfurt School as "Cultural Marxism". Likewise nothing there suggests responsibility for modern progressivism, or justifies the conspiratorial claims the term "Cultural Marxism". 203.214.85.88 (talk) 06:49, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

The entirety of the problem can be summed up as Conservatives trying to blame Marxism for Liberalism. 203.214.85.88 (talk) 08:14, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Western Marxism is another name for cultural Marxism

But cultural Marxism is not another name for Western Marxism! 😂 Which demonic hermeneutics is this?  Tewdar  12:00, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for opening the section, Tewdar, but my (edit-conflict) version had the following section heading:

The phrase "cultural Marxism" is another name for Western Marxism/the Frankfurt School?

I did think that heading was, ahem, more complete.

In any case, I know that you and Sennalen believe that this is true of the phrase (and Sennalen invoked simplicity and truth in service of the edit war). But this isn't what the provided source says, it doesn't align with other sources, and it contradicts the conclusion of prior discussions on this Talk page (such as the one at the top of this archive).

As you have noted, Tewdar, what Sennalen's source actually says is, also started to focus more on cultural rather than economic problems and it is for this reason also known as "cultural Marxism". Sennalen's text both flips the formulation and introduces the another name for claim. Now some published source might potentially say that I am "also known as 'the Boss'", but that wouldn't justify text in wikivoice that "'the Boss' is another name for Newimpartial" since the phrase, "the/The Boss", has many other significations according to various sources.

Regardless of that hypothetical, the paraphrase already in the stable version of the article, Predating any conspiratorial usage, the phrase "cultural Marxism" has been occasionally used in accepted academic scholarship to mean the study of how the production of culture is used by elite groups to maintain their dominance, seems already to include the focus "on cultural rather than economic problems" while being based on sources that make more specific claims. The proposal to add additional text, in either proposed formulation, seems to cater to the minority view that "cultural Marxism" referred to a school or a group of thinkers - rather than an activity - before the conspiratorial usage (which the Oxford Dictionary certainly does not support) while presenting said minority account without qualification, in wikivoice. Without an RfC or other explicit instrument to change consensus, this just isn't on, IMO. Newimpartial (talk) 12:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

The source is clearly saying that the etymology of 'cultural Marxism' derives from 'Western Marxism' 😐  Tewdar  14:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't see any such claim in the source. The dictionary entry I see is on "Western Marxism", not "Cultural Marxism", and the sentence you and Sennalen are invoking makes an interesting shift of tense: Western Marxism started to focus on culture (in the past) and is for this reason also known (in the present) as "cultural Marxism". I dont see an etymological claim there, or a statement that this usage predated the conspiratorial one (though I might be missing something). Newimpartial (talk) 15:08, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, that was a joke about previous content...I thought that emoji means 'deadpan' or something?  Tewdar  15:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I guess straight faces are hard to read lol.

In any case, you have now provoked Sennalen into taking your reverse-wording proposal seriously, so I hope you're rethinking your life choices. :p Newimpartial (talk) 15:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Very happy with my life choices, tyvm. 😁👍  Tewdar  16:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Well that is disappointing. Newimpartial (talk) 16:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Equivalence is a commutative operator. Since Western Marxim is a synonym for cultural Marxism, cultural Marxism is a synonym for Western Marxism. Sennalen (talk) 15:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

The paper says "also known as", however. I myself may be "also known as 'the Boss'", but that doesn't turn "Newimpartial" and "the Boss" into synonyms. Newimpartial (talk) 15:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

The source is clearly saying that 'Western Marxism' and 'cultural Marxism' are different terms for the same thing...  Tewdar  16:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

It really isn't, though, emoji or no emoji. The source is completely agnostic about whether "cultural Marxism" is used to refer to anything other than certain explorations carried out by my Western Marxists. Newimpartial (talk) 16:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC) Freudo-Marxian slip corrected by Newimpartial (talk) 18:22, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh, so they're your Western Marxists, now we know who to blame! (j/k) — The Hand That Feeds You: 17:10, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

"Fixed" Newimpartial (talk) 18:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps you are more concerned about what someone might do with that assertion, than what the HQRS actually says? What does your hermeneutics of suspicion think my the conspiracy theorists are going to do with something like 'Western Marxism and cultural Marxism are different terms for the same thing?' Fill the whole article with lunatic bollocks, now that the floodgates are open? Or what?  Tewdar  18:55, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I just don't believe that they are terms for the same thing. Apart from Belgians and grad students, I don't see anyone using "cultural Marxism" as a synonym for "Western Marxism".

And please read the discussion I linked at the topic of this section, from Archive 14. My interptetation of these terms is shared; it isn't simply some idiosyncratic, personal view. Newimpartial (talk) 19:00, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I thought Ian Buchanan was Australian, and seems to have qualifications above grad student? I've probably read the archive before - is that the one where RGloucester confuses a SAGE encyclopedia entry for a self-published source? 😂 Or people talking about 'orders of magnitude' when two or three sources are more than enough elsewhere? 😂😂 Hey, here's an old favourite: do we have a source that says cultural Marxism and Western Marxism are not different terms for the same thing? 😂😂😂 Anyway, don't worry, the usual suspects will be along soon to agree with you, you'll soon have the article back to normal...  Tewdar  19:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

My apologies, it was the old 'they're just putting the word cultural next to the word Marxism' discussion. Great, great times...  Tewdar  19:33, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I really don't see anything in the Dictionary that says what you think it says; "also known as" does not mean synonyms in two directions. Newimpartial (talk) 19:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

My interpretation of the source is that Buchanan is saying that cultural Marxism and Western Marxism are interchangeable terms. I do not think your 'Boss' analogy above is appropriate, although it may be a perfectly fitting nickname for you in real life for all I know. Perhaps an RfC is needed (rubs hands together).  Tewdar  19:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Like, in this article, The Shulaveri–Shomu culture, also known as the Shulaveri-Shomutepe-Aratashen culture means that the Shulaveri-Shomutepe-Aratashen culture is also known as the Shulaveri–Shomu culture. Just normal common sense is needed really.  Tewdar  19:56, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

And anyway, the new improved version does not reverse the order of the original source, thus invalidating this objection. And it helps improve the section in my opinion. So, I don't see the harm, but maybe I'm not suspicious enough.  Tewdar  20:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

The Dictionary only mentions "cultural Marxism" in passing; it is not a suitable source for the claims that you or Sennalen believe to be true. Newimpartial (talk) 20:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Seems fine for an AKA claim. Anyway, look at the two sections above: This article was written by a cultural Marxist, Not a "Conspiracy." - the cranks are still getting cranky, so everything's just fine here. 😁👍  Tewdar  20:20, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

RfC: Cultural Marxism as a valid construct

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The 2014 AfD on "Cultural Marxism" was justified with a lack of reliable sources that something called "cultural Marxism" existed apart from a conspiracy theory. More sources have been identified since then.

This RfC is not directly about any page deletion or redirect. Nor is it to rehabilitate a wild conspiracy theory about satanic mind control. The RfC is to assess the reliable sources that are known today.

Please indicate your agreement or disagreement with the following:

• The phrase "cultural Marxism" has been used legitimately and academically from at least 1973 through the present, in works that have nothing to do with a conspiracy theory.

Sennalen (talk) 20:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Responses

• Agree, as proposer.

Much thanks to Tewdar who collected more than thirty examples of "cultural Marxism" as a phrase in scholarly literature. Participants in 2014 simply did not find that evidence, probably because not so many sources had been digitized and indexed. Nonetheless the 2014 RfC continues to be cited as a precedent, so a new RfC is needed to re-examine the facts.

In the prior RfC an argument swayed many editors with the theory that the phrase "cultural Marxism" in academic literature does not denote a particular school of thought. Scholars just happen to produce the phrase "cultural Marxism" in an Infinite monkey theorem kind of way. Sidestepping the special pleading, the theory doesn't match the evidence. Sources exhibit a clear pattern of using "cultural Marxism" to mean something specific, which is the work of the Frankfurt School.

One of the most influential uses of the phrase was in Trent Schroyer's 1973 Critique of Domination, which names a chapter "Cultural Marxism". Schroyer doesn't define the term, but the chapter is a summary of the Frankfurt School. Although there are some sentences in this work that lend credence to the infinite monkey theory, there is a certain specificity in that this is about the Frankfurt School, not a random application of an adjective to a noun.

There are also many cases where "cultural Marxism" refers more particularly to "British cultural Marxism". That is somewhat of a different animal. Drawing minimally on the Frankfurt School but instead coming more from Gramsci and Althusser, it's nonetheless a branch of the same tree. The British and Frankfurt strands were also co-mingled in the works of Michael Apple and Henry Giroux, who played a large part in a rennaissance of both strands in U.S. universities in the 1980s.

Since many of the principal players in this drama were German, there is naturally also a long precedent for the equivalent German Kulturmarxismus. For example, in 1988 it was attested as referring to the work of Herbert Marcuse, In the earliest example I've seen, it was used in 1924 to mock devotees of György Lukács.

The advent of conspiracy theories in the 1990s did not erase the record of scholarship. Several reliable sources confirm that the conspiracy cultural Marxism is a garbled account of a real cultural Marxism.

• One of the issues associated with the Cultural Marxist conspiracy is that Cultural Marxism is a distinct philosophical approach associated with some strands of the Frankfurt School, as well as ideas and influences emanating from the British New Left. However, proponents of the conspiracy do not regard Cultural Marxism as a form of left-wing cultural criticism, but instead as a calculated plan orchestrated by leftist intellectuals to destroy Western values, traditions and civilisation, carried out since at least the 1930s
• In an ironical sense this literature can perhaps be understood as popularizing simplified or otherwise distorted versions of certain concepts initially developed by the Frankfurt School, as well as those of Western Marxism more generally.
• Cultural Marxism and the Frankfurt School have been studied in multiple ways by academics for decades. This paper suggests that a specific interpretation of Cultural Marxism opens today a new area of research for those who study conspiracy theories. In concrete terms, next to the history of Cultural Marxism as a well‐documented theory, developed by Marxist scholars and thinkers within cultural studies from the 1930s, another theory has emerged during the 1990s, and is particularly influential on radical forms of right wing politics.

Scholars also did not cease to use the phrase once conspiracy theories burst upon the scene. It continues to appear in new works.

2002 In the first part of the article I begin to account for this absence by illustrating how early research on youth and music rejected the need for empirical research, relying instead on theories and concepts drawn from cultural Marxism.

2006 By the 1960s and 1970s Western cultural Marxism was engaged in a dialogue with structuralism, post-structuralism, and semiotics.

2010 Our concern from the very outset had focused on the "historical avant-garde" of the 1920s and 1930s, seeing in the political and cultural implications of the Brecht-Lukács debate - as well as in the theoretical critiques of orthodox cultural Marxism in the writings of such thinkers as Karl Korsch (Marxism and Philosophy), the young Georg Lukács (History and Class Consciousness), Walter Benjamin, and Ernst Bloch

2011 There has been a persistent line of cultural Marxism influenced by psychoanalytic theory which has always acknowledged the crucial significance of the irrational shaping class relations

2011 One important strand of the Frankfurt School is thus the birth of what today is called "cultural Marxism".

2016 The Frankfurt School is an important tradition in cultural Marxism.

2019 From a more orthodox position the turn to cultural Marxism was difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile with Marx himself.

The conspiracy theories are wrong. However, it's not a choice of terminology that makes them wrong. The original iteration of the conspiracy theory, Michael Minnicino's 'New Dark Age', does not even contain the phrase "cultural Marxism". Minnicino explicitly says there is a conspiracy, but he just calls it the Frankfurt School. He wasn't wrong because of the phrase "cultural Marxism"; he was wrong because the Frankfurt School never infiltrated a government or sent satanic mind control over the radio. Sennalen (talk) 20:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

• 1. Maybe, but that has nothing to do with the topic of this article. Furthermore, that usage seems to have fallen by the wayside now that it primarily refers to the conspiracy theory.
  2. Disagree. While some may mean that by the phrase others may not. The meaning is not stable or coherent.
  3. Shrug. I am not aware of any specifically British connotations here. I assume that this is a minor matter.
  4 I'm not completely clear on what this means but I think I mostly agree. We should try to disambiguate terminology to make it clear what a source is actually saying. If we quote a source saying "cultural Marxism" we should be aware that this is likley to be ambiguous to readers so we should provide contextual information so they can be sure what the source means by it. When not quoting it is better to swap the phrase out for its actual meaning in that particular instance whenever possible. I think this is similar to how we handle the phrase "national socialism" where we point out the occasions where it does not mean Nazism to avoid confusing readers or unfairly tainting anybody with an implication of Nazism. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

• Bad RFC. Not brief, not neutral, per WP:RFCNEUTRAL. Andre🚐 20:34, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose As per all the previous discussions. Also agree the RFC fails WP:RFCNEUTRAL. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 20:53, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Threaded discussion

I see a great deal of handwaving in Sennalen's proposed support for her own four theses. She states that Sources exhibit a clear pattern of using "cultural Marxism" to mean something specific, which is the work of the Frankfurt School, and then produces a large number of sources that don't actually do what is advertised - they either concern only part of what the Frankfurt School did, or they include activity that was not by any account part of the Frakfurt School. Even most of the recent sources provided do not agree on the something specific, apart from the conspiracy theory, to which the term would supposedly apply. We already have a separate article, Marxist cultural analysis, in which to discuss these various strands, so why would we want to incorporate them in the article that, following WP:COMMONNAME, is concerned with the conspiracy theory? Newimpartial (talk) 20:18, 16 February 2023 (UTC) Also, Sennalen states that Several reliable sources confirm that the conspiracy cultural Marxism is a garbled account of a real cultural Marxism and then offers in support of this her ref_4 which uses the term Cultural Marxism exclusively for the conspiracy theory, as far as I can see. And what is more, in what seems to have been a citation strategy based on a phrase search, neither the 2002 nor the 2006 reference appear to use "cultural Marxism" to refer to the Frankfurt School. This is special pleading, to A the most possible GF.Newimpartial (talk) 20:27, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Something about the way you say it makes it sound like you're not really Aing a great deal of GF... Tewdar  20:34, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

There is no proposal here to add particular content to a particular page. What needs to be said is adequately said at Frankfurt School. The reason for the RfC is to prevent future content discussions from being derailed by the obsolete findings of an old RfC. Sennalen (talk) 20:38, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Concerning this edit, Schroyer does not use "cultural Marxism" as a phrase, to mean something specific, so your whole RfC is prima facie unmoored from evidence. Newimpartial (talk) 20:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

He uses it to mean the Frankfurt School. Sennalen (talk) 20:58, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Really? That chapter is the only part of the work where he discusses the Frankfurt School? Newimpartial (talk) 21:08, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

That doesn't make sense. There needs to be a constructive question at hand. Andre🚐 21:08, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

This is an invalid RfC: see WP:RFCNEUTRAL. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:34, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@AndyTheGrump: @Andrevan: I belive guidance was followed, but in the interest of compromise I have trimmed it to the maximum that seems possible. Sennalen (talk) 20:46, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Also pinging DanielRigal since he answered all of the original four questions Sennalen (talk) 20:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

No, it's still a leading question. It contains the answer and it's a false dichotomy. An RFC is supposed to be a question. Not "agree or disagree with my framing." Andre🚐 21:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

There's really not much better I can do than, "do you ackowledge the sources or not?" If you think it's absurd to be asking the question, I agree. Sennalen (talk) 21:04, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Nope. That's not how this works. Andre🚐 21:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Can you suggest a wording? Sennalen (talk) 21:07, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

You stated There is no proposal here to add particular content to a particular page., therefore, there is no need for an RFC as there is not a dispute. Andre🚐 21:08, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I think the best venue for what Sennalen actually wants to do would be a proposal, to be made at "Redirects for discussion", to change the redirect for Cultural Marxism that points here to a disambiguation pointing either here or to Marxist cultural analysis and specifying the context for each.

(See Tewdar? Sometimes I can provide iron-skinned versions of proposals with which I disagree.) Newimpartial (talk) 21:13, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I can see the wisdom in temporarily withdrawing the RfC and rewording it in a way that also includes a content proposal. Does anyone object to this? Sennalen (talk) 21:19, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

If you want to propose a change to the existing redirect, please follow the instructions here. Newimpartial (talk) 21:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't. Sennalen (talk) 21:25, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Reflist

1. The chapter goes on to name Herbert Marcuse as providing the most systematic account of the School's work, and as Schroyer explains Marcuse's central thesis, "The classic psychoanalytic model, in which the father-dominated family was the agent of mental socialization, is being invalidated by society's direct management of the nascent ego through the mass media, school and sports teams, gangs, and so forth."
2. The author Emerich Zempleni specifically uses the eyebrow-raising phrase "Talmudist of cultural Marxism". He's mocking people who read Marx as if it were scripture, not particularly making an issue of Lukács' Jewish heritage. Zempleni actually accuses socialists of using anti-Semitic tropes, so it is unlikely that I have found here the true origin of an anti-Semitic conpiracy. Nonetheless, nazis gonna nazi, and this passage was resurfaced by one named Klaus Schickert in 1937.

1. SAGE Ecyclopedia of Social Theory, chapter "Cultural Marxism and British Cultural Studies" https://www.google.com/books/edition/Encyclopedia_of_Social_Theory/mTZ1AwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PT209&printsec=frontcover
2. Gottesman, Isaac (2016). Apple, Michael (ed.). The Critical Turn in Education. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-138-78134-4.
3. Cultural Marxism: far-right conspiracy theory in Australia’s culture wars - Rachel Busbridge , Benjamin Moffitt & Joshua Thorburn - https://doi.org/10.1080/13504630.2020.1787822
4. Cultural Marxism - Marc Tuters - https://archive.krisis.eu/cultural-marxism/
5. Cultural Marxism: A Survey - Jérôme Jamin - https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/rec3.12258

Discussion to merge Marxist cultural analysis and Cultural studies

There is a discussion to merge these two articles that may be of interest to those here. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 12:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Rich Higgins and things that have been removed from the page.

Rich Higgin's is once again pushing the conspiracy, specifically that the existence of The Frankfurt School is proof that the progressive left is in cahoots with International Islam, as both disapprove of racism. Here is the source . This is part of a new 501c3 conservative intelligence think tank Richard Higgins has launched.

Also, I noticed that all mention of Ron Paul's "Cultural Marxism" tweet fiasco, and all references to the alt-right's attempted boycott of Star Wars Rogue One as Cultural Marxist propaganda , , have been removed from the page. Anyone know the reason? What else of this page has been watered down? This page is meant to be about the conspiracy theory remember. 203.220.137.141 (talk) 08:50, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

I guess this is what's important to the culture warriors right now? Richard Higgins is in the "United States" section. I'd wait for more than a SPS to notice any new shenanigans. Sennalen (talk) 15:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

No, it's just part of documenting the conspiracy theory (the topic of the page, as you've been told many many many times). Your standards aren't the same as Misplaced Pages's. 203.220.137.141 (talk) 01:29, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Whatever fight you're looking for, no one's showing up for it. Sennalen (talk) 03:59, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't know what that's supposed to mean. But please stop with the harassment. 203.220.137.141 (talk) 09:51, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

It means you're casting aspersions and editing with a battleground mentality. Sennalen (talk) 13:56, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I added your requests to the article, apart from the new Higgins stuff. Looks like it's been reworked a bit by others, and someone else removed the white genocide conspiracy theory link. If you want anything else added, I'm not doing it.  Tewdar  05:13, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

This page is meant to be about the conspiracy theory remember

This does not mean we document every last bit of nonsense that pops up related to the topic. WP:DUE still applies. — The Hand That Feeds You: 16:08, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I think a boycott movement against a major motion picture, and that Rich Higgins was fired by H.R. McMaster is WP:DUE. 203.220.137.141 (talk) 02:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Any rando can start a boycott hashtag on Twitter. That doesn't mean there's an actual, notable boycott, or that it's relevant to this page. Only the account name mentions Cultural Marxism, making it a passing mention that I don't feel suits this page.

The source for Higgins being fired is Higgins himself, so not an independent source. I don't see why we need this. — The Hand That Feeds You: 14:18, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

There are multiple reliable sources for both stories, which of course, is part of what makes them notable; multiple articles from major outlets which are reliable sources and commenting on a current event. , , , .

...and the name of the account which originated the boycott, was "end cultural marxism" - an account which focused on spreading the conspiracy theory. You know, the topic of this page.

Notability is after all the factor of importance here, it's WP:DUE for the academic stuff, and NFRINGE for the conspiracy theory stuff (because technically no conspiracy theory is WP:DUE, and that's not the reason Misplaced Pages has pages on them, notability is).

So much push back on fairly simple events that are directly relevant to the topic. Anyways, the star wars boycott does get a mention in the article as is. You'll have to remove it if you still think it's irrelevant to the topic. 220.235.231.146 (talk) 03:20, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

...and the name of the account which originated the boycott, was "end cultural marxism" - an account which focused on spreading the conspiracy theory. You know, the topic of this page.

That's my point: it's the name of the account. That's it. The boycott itself never once mentions the subject of this page. Trying to force it into here just because of the Twitter account's name is over the top.

I disagree that these events are directly relevant to the topic. I'm all for removing that mention of the boycott as undue weight. — The Hand That Feeds You: 12:48, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, this is a good idea.  Tewdar  13:31, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Concur. I wouldn't mind it as a briefest possible sentence next to Ghostbusters in the alt-right section. Sennalen (talk) 15:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

The artnet source I first cited (an article titled "How a Right-Wing Obsession With Art Theory Became a Racist ‘Star Wars’ Boycott") discusses how it relates to the conspiracy theory at length. It reads:

The most oft-quoted of all the Twitter warriors goes by the handle @genophilia, with the tagline “End Cultural Marxism;” he has been furiously promoting a variety of links holding forth on the question, “What Is Cultural Marxism?” That points to the deeper worldview that explains the otherwise curiously apocalyptic over-investment in the signifiers of multiculturalism (not just in this particular dust-up, but elsewhere, as in some of the more surreal moments of #GamerGate).

As I explained earlier the account's focus is spreading the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory. As all the articles on the topic explain this was the origin of the boycott, and is a fine example of the conspiracy theory having real world effects that make it into the mainstream media (ie propagation by controversy). This is relevant to a conspiracy theory in the digital age.

Here's a document from The Heritage Foundation, titled "How Cultural Marxism Threatens the United States—and How Americans Can Fight It"

"Hollywood is starting to pay the commercial price for the near-absolute wokification of its output. From the disastrous results of making massive moneymaking franchises like Star Wars and Star Trek woke,120 to the stock market losses incurred as a result by the likes of Netflix and Disney,121 it is plain that a significant portion of the American people have had enough with being politically preached to through their TV and movie screens."

Keep in mind, I'm not suggesting this as a source for the page, I'm showing it on the talk page so that you can be aware that organizations spreading misinformation do in fact see this as relevant to the conspiracy theory.

But I guess you'd argue that the topic is in the title, and this does nothing to comment on how conspiracy theories are pushed in the age of digital and social media. Where as I'd say, that this is a phenomena that is PART of the conspiracy theory, and that this page should be capturing the progression of that attempted spread, not dismissing it as irrelevant.

Even a Forbes notes the relevance:

Indeed, there is almost no political commentary in modern Star Wars, other than “The First Order are like Nazis, and Nazis are bad.” There’s certainly nothing to compare with George Lucas’ boldly political themes. But the presence of unhinged misogynists, obsessed with “Mary Sues” and “cultural Marxism,” turned almost every comment section into a cesspit.

Why here's a YouTuber by the user name "The SJW Slayer" with a video titled "Has Cultural Marxism Killed Star Wars? Rogue One Review (No Spoilers) - The SJW Slayer" (again, a talk page only source for how this stuff is spread) - and here's a small town news paper in Ohio noting it as part of the discourse around complaints of "anti-whiteness" its self a feature OF THE CONSPIRACY THEORY .

Oh here's one you'll appreciate because you think WP:DUE is always in play (a fact only true to the academic side of the discussion) - Tanner Mirrlees (Associate Professor in the Communication and Digital Media Studies program at The University of Ontario Institute of Technology ) writes in a paper published by the journal "Critical Studies in Gender, Culture and Justice":

As a radically simplistic explanatory mode, the cultural Marxist conspiracy theory might provide the alt-right subjects that digitally prosume it with a way of feeling “in the know,” of having special insight into the truth of society, and of being perceptive about the elite. Like all conspiracy theories, the alt-right’s cultural Marxist conspiracy theory enables its alt-right prosumers to gaze behind appearances and reveal what they hide or distort. For example, for the alt-right, Star Wars: The Force Awakens (201 5) has a multi-gendered and multi-cultural cast, not because Hollywood seeks to turn a profit by producing globally popular films that target a diverse American and trans-national audience, but because cultural Marxists are pulling Hollywood’s strings!

Now can we stop having these stupid discussions where the ghoulish protectors of the conspiracy theory roam the page defending and down playing it's idiotic ideas. There's just absolute no need to wander Misplaced Pages trying to protect misinformation, and a conspiracist world view. This is NOT what Misplaced Pages is meant to be for. You should all be ashamed. If you can't get on board with a rational and realistic view of the world, you should not be here. Please leave. Why are you spending your time here, coddling a whack job far right conspiracy theory? Don't you have something better to do with your time???

There's really no need to create a bunch of artificial obstacles to including the nutty claims of various conspiracy theories. For instance, I'm still not sure why Michael Walsh's claims that Cultural Marxism is an example of the "The Left" being "small s satanic" aren't cited . those claims were after all published in The National Review, the largest and most well known conservative magazine in the world, and he is notable enough to have his own Misplaced Pages page Michael_Walsh_(author)... but that's a different threat to be had I suppose. Anyways, enough lecturing you lot for one day - what an uphill battle this page can be. 220.235.231.146 (talk) 03:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

This source gives a more sober view of what actually unfolded. Sennalen (talk) 03:18, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

See above reply, WP:DUE is not the policy at play. It doesn't matter if the boycott was successful, it matters if it was notable in the fringe discourse. See NFRINGE. 220.235.231.146 (talk) 03:21, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

WP:DUE is always in play. The boycott may be relevant in a page about the movie, but it has no actual discussion of the conspiracy theory, making it irrelevant to this page. — The Hand That Feeds You: 12:50, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages controversial topics
• All unassessed articles
• B-Class United States articles
• Low-importance United States articles
• B-Class United States articles of Low-importance
• WikiProject United States articles
• B-Class Conservatism articles
• Low-importance Conservatism articles
• WikiProject Conservatism articles
• B-Class socialism articles
• Low-importance socialism articles
• WikiProject Socialism articles
• B-Class politics articles
• Low-importance politics articles
• B-Class American politics articles
• Low-importance American politics articles
• American politics task force articles
• WikiProject Politics articles
• B-Class Discrimination articles
• Low-importance Discrimination articles
• WikiProject Discrimination articles
• B-Class Judaism articles
• Low-importance Judaism articles
• B-Class Skepticism articles
• Low-importance Skepticism articles
• WikiProject Skepticism articles
• B-Class Alternative views articles
• Low-importance Alternative views articles
• WikiProject Alternative views articles
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press