« Race killings | Main | Muckspreading Blogging »

Gramscian policies

One of my more learned commentators has been using the phrase "Gramscian" about many aspects of modern culture: I thought it worth while to learn a bit more and pass it on - Antonio Gramsci - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Capitalism, Gramsci suggested, maintained control not just through violence and political and economic coercion, but also ideologically, through a hegemonic culture in which the values of the bourgeoisie became the "common sense" values of all. Thus a consensus culture developed in which people in the working class identified their own good with the good of the bourgeoisie, and helped to maintain the status quo rather than revolting. The working class needed to develop a "counter-hegemonic" culture, said Gramsci, firstly to overthrow the notion that bourgeois values represented "natural" or "normal" values for society, and ultimately to succeed in overthrowing capitalism. Gramsci stated explicitly that, in the West, these bourgeois cultural values derived directly from Christianity, and therefore much of his polemic against hegemonic culture is aimed at religious mores and values.

So the route to the socialist utopia demands that you first destroy the culture of a country by attacking all "normal" mores and traditions - sound familiar?


I think both capitalism and communism maintain (or maintained) control ideologically, through a hegemonic culture...all kind of political, religious and/or economical power use the same way, I suppose.
Just think about this, I study Communication and Media at Univercity, and our course is part of the faculty of Economics Science.

Apologies in advance for putting things into their historical context, but...

"So the route to the socialist utopia demands that you first destroy the culture of a country by attacking all "normal" mores and traditions - sound familiar?"

Not really times two. What Gramsci had in mind was the network of Party-run social organisations (including sports clubs and the like) the SPD had established in Germany (a network immitated by the German Communist Party when it was created). So the idea was to create the same sort of 'socialist civil society' in Italy (after, that is, having overthrown Mussolini). While Gramsci of course never lived to see it, the postwar Italian Communist Party did an approximation of this.

If you want real power over people, you cannot tolerate pesky competition for their beliefs with religion or common sense. Many a classical tyrant has tried to make himself a living god.

The more modern approach is to replace religion with “the state.” During the French Revolution, Robespierre turned on the Catholic Church and tried to replace it with a corny state sponsored religion. Since then, every leftist revolutionary has been openly hostile to religion while using the language and feel of a religious revival meeting to garner support.

"I study Communication and Media at Univercity"


What does "LMFAO" stand for?

Sean Gabb had some interesting thoughts along these lines a while ago. Have a look at http://www.seangabb.co.uk/flcomm/flc113.htm

(Sorry don't know how you do href etc from FireFox)

Gamscian theory contradicts the idea that there is a manipulative dominant culture, and also argues against the idea that the middle class is one homogenized group. The Gamscian theory suggests that the middle class is made up of many different culture groups with conflicting and contradicting ideals. In regards to media, popular culture does not manipulate its audience, nor does it derive from a essentialized and unified middle class. Essentially, the producers and the consumers have diverse and contradicting ideals.

What does "LMFAO" stand for? : Laughing My F*cking Ass Off

Post a comment