How Television Created Cultural Marxism

progressive tv propaganda

There has really never been a better time to be a Commie. Ideas like teaching sex and transgenderism to children, that would have been shunned by society only 20 years ago, are now supported by Hollywood, the media, teachers, school boards and even many elected officials.

Today, even pedophilia has been somewhat normalized for select progressives like Roman Polanski and Senator Bob Menendez — an “achievement” that radical progressives could only have dreamed of a couple of decades ago. The question is, what made all of these radical changes in society and culture possible in such a short period of time? One of the key answers to this question is television.

Before TV’s were widely distributed in the mid 20th Century, it was difficult for progressives to sway public opinion. Progressive Liberals were moderately effective, with news stories about injustices towards whatever minority interest was friendly to their cause, but these were far and few between, and printed words were never able to convince vast swathes of the population, or create any kind of significant change in culture.

Radio was more effective, but not quite as time-consuming and enthralling as the visual vortex that is broadcast media. But with the advent of television, progressives finally had the ability to distribute their “Pravda” to millions of people around the world. Humanitarian crises were no longer just abstract descriptions that had to be imagined – you could now switch on the TV and be enraged by emotionally-driven social topics, or made paranoid by fear-mongering, evoking strong emotions and reactionary moral outrage in millions of people. What people watched on TV became their reality, and would usually be the basis of what they discussed with friends and family, and which politicians they supported. For the first time in history, progressives had the chance to brainwash the masses on a large scale.

Once people became addicted to TV, progressives finally had the chance to literally engineer their perception of reality. Although TV’s may not seem as advanced as the Oculus Rift, they really are a powerful form of virtual reality. People are inference machines, who form their views of reality through observation, and by adopting popular opinions shared by those in their social circles. By hooking them all into visual media, from the news to movies and TV series, their observations and popular opinion were thereby significantly influenced. What’s more, they could engineer the most convincing and emotionally-charged observations possible, with heart-wrenching stories, despicable antagonists, and lovable protagonists the viewers could identify with.

By controlling peoples’ observations, and with a basic knowledge of human psychology, they were able to literally create whatever reality they desired. It didn’t matter what was going on in the real world, because people began to see less and less of it. They got most of their observations from their TV, and from discussing the things they watched with others. Interestingly, TV only became popular in South Africa in the late ’70s, and they remained one of the most Conservative countries in the world for many years, who found the views of American and European Liberals downright laughable.

Today, however, the progressives have a problem. Broadcast news networks and television shows are rapidly giving way to new forms of internet media, which aren’t always controlled by progressives. Conservatives and Libertarians are now starting to use these new platforms to challenge Marxism and get people to question the sources they’ve been getting their observations from all these years. Google, Facebook, Twitter and cable networks are desperately trying to stop them, but it’s too late. People are starting their own alternatives to these platforms without the hindrance of progressive filtering and shadowbans.

This is why the UK Government is doing everything in their power to enact internet regulations and impose guidelines for what a “qualified journalist” is, to quell this rising opposition. BBC and The Guardian believe people should have to get a costly license to be a journalist, and that licenses should only be handed out to a few select companies that can be trusted to spread an “acceptable” message.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here