New Right Jonathan Bowden Marxism & Frankfurt School 1

[Distortion0]

It doesn't seem to me like the Left are the only ones going center. In Adam Smith's time the Nationalists were anti-Liberal as well. Smith himself is much farther to the left than free-marketers today. Smith's liberalism is fairly leftist.

[pastrychef1985]

I'm sure this is what Breivik believes.

[otacon451]

@pastrychef1985 As you are an enthusiast of European high culture, I'm surprised you seem so averse to a school of thought so thoroughly focused on saving it.

[pastrychef1985]

@otacon451 Well, the Frankfurt School always was just a way of explaining the erosion of authentic cultures within a capitalist market logic - not a set of instructions on how to destroy it. This principle seems to be lost, even by many of those who give lip service to the FS - I can name a few lecturers at universities. PC culture is not exclusively left-wing either, it belongs to all means and modes of obfuscation - streamlining, downsizing, blue sky thinking etc.

[MrWatchdawg77]

The Social Democrats have high-jacked the term "Liberal!"

[NIETZSCHEAN14]

It is important that the New Right gets ALL its speeches on to YouTube. Why has no New Right person been given the responsibility for doing this? Where is the New Right Savitri Devi speech? Where is the New Right Robinson Jeffers speech? The Evola and Lovecraft speeches were available, but the the person controlling that channel (NewRightLondon) has decided to make them private, so the general public can not hear them??? All the speeches need to be available, in one place, on YouTube.

[bufsoftley]

@NIETZSCHEAN14 how do u get to attend theres things i want more speeches CAN U HELP

[NIETZSCHEAN14]

@bufsoftley. jonathanbowdendotcodotuk and new-rightdotorg will help you. The Voice of Reason website has some New Right speeches, including the speech by Jonathan Bowden about Savitri Devi.

[bufsoftley]

@NIETZSCHEAN14 thanks mate ill give it a try

[FlorisVanHolland]

Kevin MacDonald has written a great book about the Frankfurt school's undermining of European civilisation: "The Culture of Critique".

[tonee127]

@HyperBorealOperator Aww, you were doing so well, It's a real pity that you finished that comment with an insult, and therefore ironcally apply it to yourself...just sad. If name-calling doesn't constitute "mental immaturity" then I don't know what does.

[tonee127]

Left and right lol, grow up! they all work together. This guy is just trying to confuse. Sheesh it's dishearting that these dinosaurs still exist.

[quantumofhate]

Hes a greate giy but notice how in other vids he gets a white fomming spit forming on his lips hes a reail charickter and hes, right to.Id vote for Jonathan Bowden if he was a BNP member or not.

[NIETZSCHEAN14]

@quantumofhate. That is a very small-minded thing to say. I have watched many of his videos and I have not seen this. If you really think Jonathan Bowden is a great guy, as you claim, why do you make such a negative comment, especially when there are so many good things to say about him and his speeches? Your comment reminds me of the wartime lie that was told about Adolf Hitler - that he would go mad and chew the carpet - GARBAGE!!!

[MarkMuses]

Gramsci deserves our special interest IMO.

This talk by Mr Bowden had me on the edge of my seat. No, I do not need to get out more! Hehe, pay attention on this multi-parter folks, you might learn something...

[mikem1234]

I think while political correctness and multiculturalism can be very dogmatic and ideological, this doesn't serve Marxist objectives per se. The argument could be made that it actually serves capitalist objectives. When capital is free to move everywhere, under globalization, it creates the need for transnational and multiethnic relations, as work and identity are no longer tied to place as before. And capitalist trade has always had a cosmopolitan character. It's not "Marxism"...

[tomu860]

Marxism hasn't failed. It hasn't happened yet. It is a mass uprising of the opressed, not the use of vangaurd parties, as seen in supposedly "communist" countries like the soviet union. The Soviet Union was not communist! It as at best Stalinist and at worst a facist dictatorship. The fact that russian society took on the marxist name and dirtied it doesn't mean you can drag the ideology through the dirt as you are. None of these arguments are valid if you actually read and understand marxism.

[biosun2]

go to Cuba you commie braindead fag:-)

[tomu860]

This is exactly what I mean. You havn't even articulated a point. You've just decided to pass judgement without the knowledge to back it up. You havn't even comprehended what I was writing, Cuba ISN'T marxist. So how about next time you try and be a smartass and come up with a witty comeback you actually make sure it has a point backed up by facts, you ignorant, homophobic, xenophobic retard

[biosun2]

My time is too precious to insult you thoroughly or point out the obvious (i.e. Cuba is a marxist-leninist shithole). You are a brain dead commie psychopath who thinks that despite the millions communism have killed and the failure of this system in all its manifestations you should keep trying to impose it to the world.

In other words, you are a psychapath and none argues with psychopaths, they just put them in straightjackets. GTFO

[tomu860]

For the last time, Marxism-leninism and Marxism ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS! Marxism has most certainly not killed millions and has definitley killed far less than the corrupt, production oriented capitalist systems of the world today. As i said to begn with IT HASN'T EVEN HAPPENED YET! Marxism as marx predicted it hasn't come to pass yet. You still havn't even logically explained your veiwpoint, just made it more obvious you lack the mental capacity to satisfactoraly articulate your point

[dpvirk]

@biosun2

a child born in Cuba is less likely to die than a child born in London...just sayin

[StatelessEuphoria]

@dpvirk

Are you referring to the infant mortality rate?

You do realise that, unlike america and england, if a child dies during or shortly after birth, cuba doesn't count them as infant mortalities, right?

[biosun2]

The official ideologyof all Cold War communist parties in Europe and elsewhere was Marxism-Leninism.

That's a fact easily checkable by everyone.

You simply lie and you are a braindead commie.

Your ideology has failed miserably and it was a humanitarian disaster of biblical proportions wherever it was enforced. You are the people responsible for the death of millions.

[tomu860]

I feel sorry for you. You lack the capacity to make an argument against what I am saying so you just ignore it, rather than admit the lunacy of your argument. The title of this video is "MARXISM and the frankfurt school". Note that it says marxism NOT marxism-leninism. I am by no means a marxist-leninist. am a marxist. I have not lied about this. I realise you wont even be reading what i am saying, rather you will just reply again in the same belligerent, ridiculous manner that you always do.

[DarkFulanito]

And fair trade is possible, but hasn't happened yet. Milton Friedman was right, but free trade economies have been unable to correctly apply this ideology.

Bullshit.

[ImprovOblivion]

Well said!

[FightMarxism]

True liberalism is now called classical liberalism.

[napajedlacek]

when and where is going to be a next NEW RIGHT meeting in London ???any website ?thank you

[TheAjdam]

Surely the best thing for everyone is to mix the good ideas from the left the right and middle mix functionalism with socialism and sort the world out, this guy is just an whinging man possibly having a mid life crisis.

[bapyou]

This video is simple far right vitriol.

The speaker seeks to discredit leftists simply by saying "They're wrong! They're wrong! I'm right! I'm right!"

Stalin was not in any way a communist.

The only true communist movement that has ever existed was the Paris Commune. And what happenned to them? They were murdered by the French bourgeousie! Thirty-thousand people murdered. This simple-minded speaker is selective in his examples and makes baseless claims.

[behaack]

"Stalin was not in any way a communist."

Except in the sense that he called himself a Communist. And in the sense that he was the leader of ComIntern and the leader of the leading Communist country in the world.

Other than that I agree, he was not a Communist.

[bapyou]

Stalin jailed the leftists in Russia. You know nothing. Just like the twat speaking in this video.

[behaack]

Are a comedian? Because surely you aren't trying to be serious.

[bapyou]

No. The true history of the Soviet Union is propagandized in the west. Therefore you get the erroneous idea that Stalin was a leftist. He wasn't. He was a totalitarian monster. He jailed those who truly had the revolutionary spirit.

In the west, details such as these are subsumed in the propaganda to whitewash capitalism's own murderous history.

[Exoteric01]

Not exactly baseless.  JB is definately a far right postulate, but the fact remains that the 20th century was the bloodiest of all, and although leftism/marxism/communism etc. has some very good ideas, you cant escape from the fact that in order to enforce those ideas , they have gone to brutal lengths. And yes ,so has capitalism.

[bapyou]

The problem I have with rightists criticizing communism/socialism and its supposed failings in the 20th century, is what they leave out of the discussion. Namely, the fact that the U.S. has either crushed, overthrown, invaded, corrupted, perverted, subverted, destabilized, or has otherwise made life impossible for every leftist government that has come into existence, including the USSR; which was invaded in 1918 by the U.S., U.K. and France. Read William Blum's 'Killing Hope.'

[Exoteric01]

Without sounding like a tinfoil hat type, it is my sincere belief that communism and capitalism are simply thesis and anti-thesis for globalist elites. Communism"failed" when the wall came down, and capitalism is failing, right now. When the US attacks Persia, oil prices will skyrocket and break the back of US dominance. The synthesis of the two ideologies with be something akin to fascism. Jingoistic, symbolic, with a veneer of civility while conducting evils not yet seen in the world.

[bapyou]

Communism failed when the wall came down? Hmm. There are still socialist/communist governments in the world. And, in South America, several have come into existence since 1989 (Chile; Bolivia; Venezuela; Ecuador; Brazil). And these governments are not necessarily incompatibale with democracy.

Again, what you ignore is the long history of antagonism by the U.S. against fledgling socialist states. It's as if someone tripping you keeps telling you every time you fall that you can't run.

[willyrobinson]

left/pink/communism has bad ideas - failed ideas - sterile ideas etc. Egalitarianism isn't useful because anyone who promotes success, glory, being the best (in whatever sphere) is also pursuing inegalite.

[NickDiPerna]

The liberal/leftist establishment views everything right of centre as 'extreme' and anything left of centre as 'reasonable'. But in the current climate of today, the 'extremists' of the right seem to be talking more practical sense than the extremists of the left-wing variety.

[bapyou]

Good blabbering.

[NickDiPerna]

Thanks, maybe I would make good socialist material?

But seriously, the leftist bias in the media is well documented, especially in the UK.

[bapyou]

Hmmm. Truly, the media is slanted right in the U.S. Leftist bias is a complete canard cooked up by the right to make them look like victims. To which I say "Boo hoo."

[NickDiPerna]

I'm sure the U.S. media is normally slanted very right-wing, that is to say, in those moments when they're not giving Obama a blow-job.

[bapyou]

Read Noam Chomsky's books on media propaganda.

Look at the Iraq War: The US media pretty much towed the Pentagon line on most issues. (Embed/In-bed: a telling homonymic/synonymic congruity.) The media parrot government-issued statements as if they are fact, and, these days, do little investigative journalism.

[FightMarxism]

Chomsky is part of the problem

[bapyou]

Noam Chomsky, the most influential & important intellectual of the 20th & early 21st century, is YOUR problem.

For thinking people, Noam Chomsky is a bright light of humanity.

To right-wing sewer rats like yourself, he is a scourge.

What else is new, sewer rat?

Cheers.

- FightNeoliberalism

[yayitsezekiel]

no, its totally left.

[FightMarxism]

Only FOX & some radio stations (usually AM) are on the right, all other American media is on the left.

[willyrobinson]

Well that's good. They're shifting the 'centre' and thus shifting the poles so the vast majority of Conservatives end up being extremists and not moderates - this is good.

[TheSpineyOne]

This is a pisstake, right? It's Harry Enfield doing his "Tory Boy" routine.

[pastrychef1985]

It appears to be.

He doesn't go to any length to substantiate the claim that Marxists set up the school of modern liberalism. The whole ultra-materialistic account of Marx appears as a strawman and the explanation of why the structuralist and post-structuralist Marxists ended up being batshit insane, with a few exceptions like Meszaros, Eagleton and Bourdieu to a lesser degree. It only touches on a crisis, but based on the said strawman it only superficially attacks.

[TheSpineyOne]

I can't bear to listen to the whole thing, the minute I managed to get through began to eat my brain.

How does he attempt to get around the fact that liberalism predates Marx by over a century?

[cidseven]

I've noticed that you are a particularly stupid little ponse aren't you spiney.

Prove to me that class consciousness exists.

Prove that the ancient teutons were communalists.

Prove that humans are not naturally hierarchical.

If you cannot do this, you and all marxists have offically lost the debate.

[TheSpineyOne]

"I've noticed that you are a particularly stupid little ponse aren't you spiney."

I love you too.

[TheSpineyOne]

"Prove to me that class consciousness exists."

I am working class. I am conscious of this. Therefore class consciousness exists.

However, Marx was well aware of the fact that the ruling class would try to suppress class consciousness, as outlined in the following paradox: The emancipation of the working class will be the act of the working class; the prevailing ideas are the ideas of the ruling class. Hence the need for the revolutionary party.

[cidseven]

That is a gross oversimplification of what class consciousness is, as it does not include the extremely important marxist concept of class interest, which revolves around the idea of class conflict.

This model has no psychological validity and this is why people probably feel more of a common affinity to people supporting a particular football team than someone who shares the same class as them.

Of course working class is an ambigious pompous term anyway.

[TheSpineyOne]

"That is a gross oversimplification of what class consciousness is, as it does not include the extremely important marxist concept of class interest, which revolves around the idea of class conflict."

No, class consciousness is exactly as I explained it. Given that the prevailing ideas are those of the ruling class, mass class consciousness happens only at times of great struggle, when the ruling classes are unable to control the society properly. This is well understood in Marxist circles.

[cidseven]

On Class Consciousness:

Are you honestly trying to suggest that farmers and factory workers were under the impression that they belonged to the same class as royalty and industry owners?

Class consciousness in the marxist sense, and in the sense you clearly support revolves around class interest and furthermore class struggle.

Awareness of ones class however does not automatically = a "class for itself" mentality. Evidence: many classes are actually at peace with the other classes.

[TheSpineyOne]

"This model has no psychological validity... people probably feel more of a common affinity to people supporting a particular football team than someone who shares the same class as them."

It's sociological, not psychological. Class conflict objectively exists in that the interests of the worker (high wages, healthcare, safe conditions, short hours) are in conflict with the interests of the capitalist. One depends no more upon consciousness than does the earth's orbit around the sun.

[TheSpineyOne]

Analogy:

A child's body is constantly in conflict with bacteria and viruses. The child is not conscious of this conflict but is, without doubt, engaged in it. In fact, he hates his own body's defence mechanisms (vomiting, the runs, sweating) than he does the organisms that necessitate these actions. Just as the reactionary worker hates the progressive worker defending his interests by stopping him from crossing a picket line.

[cidseven]

The problem with this analogy, despite the fact that many children can understand that such mechnisms are required and thus "good", is the fact that you are essentially saying that any working class individual who does not subscribe to marxist interpritation is simply "ignorant of the situation".

One could quite easily say that one who feels that doctors, lawyers and artists are against them is indeed ignorant of the true dynamic of society.

If class conflict exists, explain Marx/Engles?

[cidseven]

Sociology, human social organization and social dynamics are a direct result of human psychology and how human psychology operates within a social environment.

Humans, especially clever ones, do generally organize themselves, as I have said, you can impliment social experiments which will show this occuring a lot, even if people are simply looking for an authoritative opinion to learn from.

Your model does not take into consideration working class capitalists, who do exist.

[TheSpineyOne]

"Of course working class is an ambigious pompous term anyway."

On the contrary, the working class (or proletariat to use the Marxian term) is extremely well defined. It is the class of people, in capitalist society, who do not own the means of production on which they labour and whose only means of susbsistance is to sell their labour power to a capitalist.

Simples.

[TheSpineyOne]

"Prove that the ancient teutons were communalists."

Don't want to. Neither do I need to. This is an irrelevance. We know of primitive tribes still in existance, whose societal structures have remained the same for thousands of years, who live communally. Tribal Aboriginees for one.

[cidseven]

You do need to, this was considered the intellectual historical basis for Marx's views of the true nature of man. As a Historian I know for a fact that the ancient Teutonic people and ancient Indians and Irish Celts were not communalists, but were hierarchical in the trifold model.

The aborigines are themselves hierarchical and have chiefs and shamans, however, it would be erronous to compare them to European people for example.

[TheSpineyOne]

"this was considered the intellectual historical basis for Marx's views of the true nature of man."

It wasn't until they were added as a footnote by Engels to the Communist Manifesto in 1888 that they were mentioned.

"The aborigines are themselves hierarchical and have chiefs and shamans."

Apologies, I am not a geographer. It is the Kalahari bushmen to whom I meant to refer. Their very existance shows that there is not some inexorable propensity to hierarchy in human nature.

[TheSpineyOne]

"Prove that humans are not naturally hierarchical."

The burden of proof lies with the party making the positive claim, ie. you. From a moral standpoint, the burden of proof is with the party advocating the use of force/coercion. Given that this is intrinsic to hierarchy, the burden of proof rests heavily upon your head.

However, some hierarchy, for instance the authority of the guardian over the child, is both natural and in accordance with Marx's thinking.

[cidseven]

No, the burdon of proof lays on your shoulders. Humans, like ther homonids, are a naturally hierarchical species, and will naturally organize themselves according to mutual objective and differing ability.

Not only is this a key theme of evolutionary psychology, it is also easily observable in basic social experiments.

Take five random people and give them a common objective of constructing something, they will organize themselves at best most logically and at worst through a pecking order

[TheSpineyOne]

"Take five random people and give them a common objective of constructing something, they will organize themselves at best most logically and at worst through a pecking order"

This statement is missing some vital qualifications. Take five random people, nurtured within a hierarchical social system like capitalism, and they will do what they have been taught to do. This gives no insight whatsoever into human nature.

[cidseven]

On social organization:

That isnt true, I have seen people of all sorts of economic backgrounds take on all sorts of roles when it comes to such things, infact, the only major problem I have observed is not the class thing, but the ethical difference.

For example, some people want a leadership position just because of the status of leadership, as opposed to those who are naturally good leaders with good ideas.

The problem is not so much stratification & class but, corrupt personalities.

[TheSpineyOne]

Prove to me that social hierarchy between adult humans is both natural and legitimate.

Prove to me that class collaboration is beneficial to the working classes.

Prove that the rich are somehow intrinsically superior to the poor, in order to justify their privelige.

Prove that you wingnuts are not trying to make up for the inadequacy you feel as a result of having been anally raped by a refuse collector.

If you cannot do this, you and all fascists have officially lost the debate.

Cunt.

[cidseven]

evolutionary psychology, humans are a social species and will organize themselves and cooperate based on mutual objectives, as humans are usually physically and cognitively different, they will often organize themselves along these lines to achieve maximum results.

A good leader will be one who can recognise and organize the skills of others as well as identify key objectives.

I never claimed rich = intelligent, that is obviously not true.

Tradesmen benefit from doctors, & vice versa

[TheSpineyOne]

"I never claimed rich = intelligent, that is obviously not true."

Well, in order to legitimise and defend social stratification and differential advantage, as a right winger must do, you would need to give some kind of justification for the priveliges offered to the idle rich.

[cidseven]

I am not a right winger, nor am I a fascist, nor do I have to equate wealth with intelligence, as there is no such correlation.

Actually, I think that if humans organized themselves far more to do with intelligence/personality as opposed to simple wealth and status, we would have a far more effective society.

Wealth and success is not always achieved on the basis of corruption, if someone naturally does well for themselves, what is the problem? what crime have they commited?

[TheSpineyOne]

"Tradesmen benefit from doctors, & vice versa"

Class is defined by relationship to means of production. If both doctor and tradesman use materials, buildings etc. owned by others, both are proletarian.

The petty-bourgois tradesman's interests aren't the same as the doctor. Each wants to pay less and charge more.

Though it is true that the work of the doctor is vital to the tradesman and vice versa, only when bothdoctor and tradesman are proletarian do they share class interests.

[cidseven]

You are a typical marxist in that you are preaching equality and morality while calling other people stupid and making rape jokes and encouraging suicide.

You also do not seem to know what a fascist is.

There is nothing fascist about pointing out that humans, like many mammals, are hierarchical as hierarchy and support for hierarchy has existed well before fascism.

[TheSpineyOne]

"You are a typical marxist in that you are preaching equality and morality while calling other people stupid and making rape jokes and encouraging suicide."

If people are stupid I will label them as such. I always look reality in the face, no matter how unpleasant. People who go to public schools get raped up the bum. This is fact, from this empirical observation my hypothesis follows. As the enemy in a class war I do hope he tops himself, it would be very unMarxian of me to wish him well.

[Counterrevolutionite]

Bowden should author a book specificially on this topic.

[TheSpineyOne]

The only thing I would like to see authored by Bowden would be his suicide note.

[Counterrevolutionite]

LOL he really has you reds wound up doesn't he? The Trots have lost. What do you have now? Violent groups which attack people in defense of a neoliberal, imperialist party Labour. You're a joke.

[TheSpineyOne]

He's not quote my favourite though. Lee Barnes (LLB Hons) is much better. AND he's legally sane. Can Harry Enfield say that?

[andy7666]

An excellent term - "Soft Marxism", thats exactly what we have..

[FinalWar1444]

Did you get your shotgun certificate yet ?

[barrywinehousexp]

Gramsci-an Trotsky-ites. Neo-Con ex Trotsky-ites.  Scourges of Civilization.

[ENDEUARABIA]

Marxism doesn't work. Look at the results of it attempting it to day

[DMPineau]

This guy makes a lot of sweeping generalizations, and the way he confuses Marxist theory with the policies of 'Communist' regimes is misleading. Still, I've got to admit that he knows what he's talking about, and he hits on a lot of the fundamental failings of the left today.

[DMPineau]

In a way, this guy has it right: The far right is the Marxists' best friend. They're the bogeyman, the inversion of the far left ideal. And yet because they are so alienated from the status quo they're revolutionary and therefore married to a desire to transform society. I think Georg Lukacs said that Nietzsche, who is an eloquent icon for irrationalists, sentimentalists, and romanticists, tends to appeal to immature intellectuals who mature into a more Marxist viewpoint.

[danburnfin]

times change, and ideas in turn, deal with it.

[WhiteMinority2040]

Strickland Marxism Frankfurt Benjamin Horkheimer Adorno

[panzermatt]

fantastic

[britishboy7]

Ye but I still find kemp a better speaker. Although the BNP have never had a bad speaker I just prefer kemp.

[GremoryRecords]

Equality has nothing to do with Socialism, it's a big lie, don't buy this bullshit. Socialism and fascism and all the "'isms", are abberations of clear thinking. schisms and mechanisms of the human organisms trying indoctrinate racism into some form of legalism whilst hiding it's true Darwinism.

[JackBrindelli]

what about anarchism, how does that indoctrinate anyone, its based entirely on voluntary order and society.

[britishboy7]

I dont think he's as good as Aurther Kemp but he tells it like it is. Im supprised the left has'nt hould him over the hot coals.

[PreserveDiversity2]

Kemp is for Race History and Bowden is for political history.

[RogerHoare]

I hope you are going to upload a recording of "Dave Brysten" and his talk regarding "Lifeboat Britain" — one of the best New Right talks for a long time.

[FergusRaliegh]

Bowden always gives an excellent speech. He deserves a much wider audience. Every White college student in the English speaking world - and beyond! should hear this man as he speaks for the People and the future of politics in the Anglo-shere and Europe and Russia in a way few others - Strache, Nick Griffin perhaps - do. Listen Well and Distribute widely!