Cultural Marxism and Wokeism: Same Play, Different Stage
In the modern battleground of ideas, the term “Cultural Marxism” is tossed around as a sinister force reshaping society. Its successor, “Wokeism,” wears a fresh coat of paint but dances to the same rhythm. These two ideologies share an overarching agenda: changing society to mould the individual, no matter the cost.
Let’s delve into how these two movements are, at their core, remarkably similar, with an eye rolled firmly towards the sky.
The Foundations: Utopian Visions and Endless Recalibration
Cultural Marxism emerged as an intellectual offshoot of classical Marxism, where the focus shifted from economics to culture. While Karl Marx envisioned a workers’ revolution overturning capitalism, Cultural Marxists sought to dismantle societal structures like religion, family, and tradition. The premise? If the culture could be transformed, the individual would naturally fall in line.
Wokeism, with its hyper-focus on social justice, identity, and privilege, follows a similar blueprint. Its proponents aim to uproot systems of oppression—real, perceived, or exaggerated—while reimagining society in line with their ideals. In both cases, the common thread is the belief that society, as it stands, is fundamentally flawed and must be re-engineered.
The glaring issue is that neither ideology stops questioning the practicalities of these utopian visions. The relentless tweaking of norms, language, and behaviour seems less about improving lives and more about controlling the narrative.
The Villains: Oppressors, Privilege, and the Eternal Scapegoat
Cultural Marxism posited the bourgeoisie as the villain, exploiting the proletariat and maintaining power through oppressive institutions. This dichotomy was easily translatable into cultural terms: dominant ideologies oppress minority cultures, and societal norms perpetuate inequality. Cue the academic jargon and decades of essays dissecting the “hegemonic structures” of Western civilisation.
Wokeism merely updates the cast of characters. The oppressors are now straight, white, cisgender, able-bodied men (preferably wealthy ones). Privilege replaces class as the original sin, and no amount of personal penance can entirely absolve one of it. In both cases, the oppressor group must be shamed, silenced, or dismantled, all in the name of justice.
These simplistic dichotomies feel like a lazy rehash. Reducing complex societal dynamics to “us vs. them” stifles genuine discourse and ensures that the grievance machine never runs out of fuel.
Privilege replaces class as the original sin, and no amount of personal penance can entirely absolve one of it
The Methods: Language Policing and Thought Reform
One hallmark of both Cultural Marxism and Wokeism is their obsession with language. In Cultural Marxism, language was seen as a tool of power—something to be deconstructed and reclaimed. Critical theorists argued that words shaped reality, making them a battleground for societal change. (see Woke Propaganda)
Wokeism takes this concept and ramps it up to Orwellian levels. A misstep with your pronouns, fail to use the latest jargon or question the validity of the prevailing narrative, and you risk public shaming, cancellation, or worse. The moral panic surrounding “microaggressions” and “toxic language” mirrors earlier cultural critiques but with a digital megaphone.
This fixation on words feels like a distraction from tangible issues. Policing speech does little to address real-world suffering, but it does create an army of enforcers with a vested interest in controlling others.
The Targets: Institutions as Battlegrounds
Both ideologies thrive on infiltrating and reshaping institutions. Cultural Marxists aimed to revolutionise academia, media, and art, believing these were the arenas where culture was forged. They succeeded in embedding their ideas into university curriculums and intellectual discourse.
Wokeism follows a similar trajectory, with corporate boardrooms, entertainment venues, and even primary schools becoming ideological battlegrounds. HR departments, diversity initiatives, and mandatory training sessions enforce compliance, ensuring that no dissenting opinion gains a foothold.
This institutional capture feels less like progress and more like indoctrination. The idea that society must change first so individuals can fit into the new mould reeks of arrogance and overreach.
The Endgame: Perpetual Revolution
Perhaps the most striking similarity between cultural Marxism and Wokeism is their lack of a finish line. In Marxist ideology, the revolution was supposed to lead to a classless society, but cultural Marxism offers no endpoint—just an endless cycle of critique and dismantling.
Wokeism follows suit. There’s always another oppressive structure to uproot, another privilege to unpack, another person to cancel. Progress is never enough; anyone resting on their laurels quickly becomes part of the problem.
This endless revolution is designed not to achieve real change but to sustain itself indefinitely. After all, if the revolution ends, what happens to the revolutionaries?
Changing Society, Shaping the Individual: At What Cost?
Ultimately, both Cultural Marxism and Wokeism prioritise societal transformation over individual agency. The individual is seen not as an autonomous being but as a product of oppressive systems. Freedom is reframed as conformity, and dissent becomes a sign of ignorance or moral failing.
This approach feels disturbingly totalitarian. Societal change is not inherently bad, but when it comes at the expense of personal liberty and common sense, it looks less like progress and more like social engineering gone awry.
Conclusion: The Same Old Song
Cultural Marxism and Wokeism might wear different masks, but their underlying principles are strikingly similar. Both seek to reshape society, using culture as their battlefield and individuals as their clay. Both vilify certain groups while sanctifying others, enforcing their ideologies with a zeal that leaves little room for dissent.
It’s hard to see these movements as anything other than two sides of the same coin. The names and buzzwords change, but the playbook remains the same: control the culture, mould the individual, and march onward to an ever-elusive utopia.
