Cultural Marxism’s Intellectual Agenda By Brian Simpson

     An informative article at:, has made the argument that the “out-of-Africa” paradigm in anthropology, has been advanced primarily because of cultural Marxist egalitarian ideology, as the author Austin Layard, observes:

“ Largely due to the anti-racist politicization of anthropology, the currently accepted evolutionary paradigm is that Africa was the source of an intellectual watershed event sometime between 100,000 to 50,000 years ago, and that it was only a matter of time before this new breed of clever Africans spread out and replaced all the dim-witted archaic human populations in the rest of the world, such as Neanderthals.  (As used here, the term ‘racist’ refers to views that race and racial differences are a legitimate variable in research on humans, with none of the usual negative connotations found  in the popular and scientific literature.)

The concept of behavioral modernity as it has been applied to the Paleolithic seemingly arose out of the Cultural Marxist obsession with proving that Africans are just as good as, and even better than the evil racist nineteenth-century White scientists who dared to rank societies and point out that advanced civilization never developed in certain areas of the world, such as south of the Sahara.

The problem with this paradigm is that, using the same set of criteria proposed by those scholars pushing for an African origin for modern behavior, it seems to have originally appeared in Europe instead, when modern humans first arrived there and replaced Neanderthals.  Furthermore, the so-called modern behavior in the African Stone Age is not qualitatively different from that of Neanderthals, who were supposedly replaced by cognitively-advanced modern humans.”

     The paradigm of cultural Marxist anthology though does face some challenges, even though it rules as a dominant ideology, serving the interests of the current regime. Marxist Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002), famously argued in his book, The Mismeasure of Man, (Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1981), that the nineteenth century physical anthropologist Samuel George Morton had manipulated the brain volumes of human skulls to favor a bias that Europeans had larger brains and Africans smaller skulls. But more recent research has revealed that it was Gould who had manipulated the data to support his ideology: J. E. Lewis (et al.), “The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould Versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Biases,” at

     Biologist Roger Trivers, in his paper at, said about Gould:

“Many of us theoretical biologists who knew Stephen Jay Gould personally thought he was something of an intellectual fraud because he had a talent for coining terms that promised more than they could deliver, while claiming exactly the opposite… Where are the unconscious processes at work here? Is Steve flying upside-down on auto-pilot, unconsciously looking for the actions (substitute Nordic for Tropical, delete all samples smaller than four) that will invite the results he wants (while hiding his bias)? Is the conscious organism really completely in the dark while all of this is going on? Hard to imagine—but at the end the organism appears to be in full self-deception mode—a blow-hard fraudulently imputing fraud, with righteous indignation, coupled with magnanimous forgiveness for the frailties of self-deception in others.”

     Gould probably knew what he was doing in pursuit of his agenda:

     Hopefully, there is still time to debunk the rest of the cultural Marxist agenda, but the fight will be infinitely difficult given that they have completed the long march through the institutions and now control the nerve centres of society, like in the Matrix movies.
The alternative university of the internet, of which we are a part, is a good first step.



No comments made yet. Be the first to submit a comment
Already Registered? Login Here
Sunday, 05 February 2023

Captcha Image