Basic Gramsci Theory
Like Marx, Antonio Gramsci believes in a war of oppressed vs. Oppressor.
The oppressors are the homogeneous ruling class who either by force or hegemony dominate the values in society. In America, the oppressor would be the heterosexual male WASP. His values that he uses to control the oppressed are present in schools, churches and everyday society.
The oppressed are subordinate to the homogeneous ruling class. Groups included are women and minorities among others. Because of the cultural hegemony exercised by the WASP male oppressors, these groups are unaware that they are being oppressed (false consciousness), hence that is why there is no worker revolution as prophesied by Marx.
In order to give the subordinate classes a new kind of consciousness, the leadership “organic intellectuals” will seek to dominate the media, educational institutions, and other mass organizations (film industry and literature. The revolutionaries will seek to replace the ruling class concepts and values and educate the subordinates of their oppression. Values held dear by the old culture will be destroyed. Once the oppressed are giving their new consciousness, then they will begin the Marxist revolution. Ironically, by raising the “oppressed”’s consciousness, they will then oppress them under Marxism! Kind of a trick.
(thanks to Stephen Yates and Wikipedia)
Modern liberals are definitely influenced by Gramsci, perhaps more than Lenin, who started an outright revolution. This is definitely evident in the political movements of the 1960s. Now the Gramscians are raising the consciousness of illegal immigrants (well actually, mainly the Mexicans who crossed the border) (another thought, what the heck is Bush doing??)
In order to fight the liberal’s war on our culture, (I hope I have proved here that “culture war” is a liberal concept originally rather than a Buchananian concept), those who are against Marxism and socialism and a culture of victimhood must again seek to control the media and educational institutions. That movement has been in place, but I do not think that most of those who are against socialist movements know exactly what we are fighting against. This is an organized movement seeking to destroy good values like freedom, equality, and patriotism.
on May 22nd, 2006 at 5:26 pm
: )
on May 22nd, 2006 at 5:26 pm
: )
on May 23rd, 2006 at 1:10 am
Who is Antonio Gramsci? When did he live? Great article, you always do a wonderful job at finding out the unknown.
on May 23rd, 2006 at 1:10 am
Who is Antonio Gramsci? When did he live? Great article, you always do a wonderful job at finding out the unknown.
on July 6th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Were you stoned when you wrote this? Newsflash, bro: liberals and conservatives are two sides of the same capitalist coin. If you don’t know that by now there’s no helping you.
In addition, you’ve totally misconstrued Gramsci. You might try actually reading some of his work rather than bottom-feeding off of Wiki. The key concept here is ‘hegemony’ which isn’t something you ‘give’ anyone. It goes a lot deeper than you seem capable of understanding. It’s like watching someone perform heart surgery with a salad fork.
on October 3rd, 2008 at 8:07 am
“Liberal” is a euphemism for socialist in America at least when Conservatives use it. Americans all know this. You can’t use the word Socialist or Communist in American politics.
I know that liberal is used to mean a Conservative in other nations. Also, instead of ad hominem attacks, why don’t you correct my stupidity. I cannot stand when people start attacking someone personally rather than simply telling the person HOW they are wrong. Did it occur to you that I read about Gramsci in an academic journal? Any connection to Wikipedia was given to my family members to get the jist of Gramsci. They can read on about him if they like. Gramsci really isn’t THAT complex to understand. I believe heart surgery is a little more difficult than Gramsci.
I am tired of people making Nietzsche, Marx, Engels, and even Gramsci too complex for barbaric Conservatives. They were intelligent people who lacked wisdom.