“Cultural Marxism” is a term that is often used by right-wing individuals who believe that the humanities are disconnected from ordinary Australian life. They criticize the humanities for being dominated by radical voices that suppress free speech on university campuses. The term gained popularity about a decade ago, with former senator Fraser Anning denouncing cultural Marxism in his 2018 speech to parliament. The question remains whether cultural Marxism is truly infiltrating universities and academic thought.
The concept of “cultural Marxism” emerged in the media around 2016 when psychologist Jordan Peterson protested a Canadian bill related to gender discrimination. Peterson blamed cultural Marxism for certain phenomena that he believed restricted freedom of speech. The term itself is not new, with its origins tracing back to a 1992 essay by Michael Minnicino. It gained traction among American conservatives who targeted various social movements, such as women’s rights and gay activism, as examples of cultural Marxism.
The main figures accused of promoting this ideology are Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci and the theorists associated with the Frankfurt School of Social Research. These thinkers were concerned with how fascism could influence society despite promoting prejudice and hatred. Critics argue that cultural Marxism is behind political correctness, promoting minority causes, and influencing public debate on various issues. However, quantitative research conducted on academic publications does not support the claims of conservative anxieties about cultural Marxism taking over academia.
In recent decades, Marxist thought in academia has declined, with post-structuralist thinkers gaining more prominence. Figures like Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Judith Butler, and Gilles Deleuze are now more influential than traditional Marxist scholars. Post-structuralism challenges Marxist ideas of revolution and social progress, focusing more on culture and identity. The term “cultural Marxism” is seen as a post-factual dog whistle, representing an intellectual confusion rather than a legitimate academic concept.