The Cultural Marxism Conspiracy: Why the Right Blames the Frankfurt School for the Decline of the West

by A.J.A. Woods

A definitive history of the 'Cultural Marxism' conspiracy theory.

'Cultural Marxism' is one of the far-right’s favorite buzzwords – but what does this term mean and where did it come from?

This book uncovers the bizarre story of the cult leaders, right-wing intellectuals, neo-Nazi terrorists, and now politicians in the White House who believe that ‘Cultural Marxists’ are conspiring to trigger the demise of modern civilization. In this deeply researched account, Woods explains how the Frankfurt School group of German thinkers were recast as the orchestrators of a plot to destroy the West. Instead of simply debunking this conspiracy theory, Woods offers a sharp analysis and critique of the political movements who have advanced this damaging idea. Only when we identify the specific practices and agendas of those who promote the 'Cultural Marxism' conspiracy theory can we hope to neutralize its repressive and often fatal consequences. This is an essential book for anyone who wants to understand the ideological currents that are shaping right-wing politics in the 21st century.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, History, Philosophy, Sociology, Theory, Cultural

256 pages, Paperback

Expected publication April 20, 2027

Reviews

[sologdin · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is well paired with Rockhill's Who Paid the Pipers of Western Marxism?, examining the Frankfurt School's external connections (as opposed to its doctrines). Whereas Rockhill approaches the Frankfurt School as a instrument of imperialism, Woods surveys rightwing writers who approach the Frankfurt School as a tool of the communists who've secretly taken control of the United States. Woods does well in exposing just how silly these rightwing conspiracy theories are--but then again he examines several who admit not caring about truth as opposed to winning political authority. I suppose the Frankfurt School might be surprised by both sets of beliefs.

This one is generally persuasive, but doesn't get too much into the weeds with rightwing writers--there's perhaps less direct refutation of their arguments than simply holding them out as ridiculous (which of course they are) or contaminating them by genesis or association. That's fine--the conspiracism at issue is basically recycled fascist bullshit, and insofar as it's regurgitated anti-Judaic conspiracism, it goes at least as far back as the The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. One tactic that is exposed is that the rightwing conspiracist will state a Frankfurt argument but then invert it by claiming that what Adorno or Marcuse or whomever is describing and denouncing is actually secretly desired as a marxist policy preference that is furthermore actually being implemented by secret communists right now at this very moment.

I saw this happen in real time when teaching Foucault's chapter on the panopticon from Discipline and Punish--rightwing students apprehended the argument about how panopticism escaped the prison into society generally and then decided that Foucault actually desired that this should happen. It's totally irrational, not just shooting the messenger bearing bad news but acting as though the identification and explanation of deleterious social forces equals bringing them into existence. That is sort of the normal method of the far right, blaming activists for race or gender equality as drumming up fake grievances for theatrical self-aggrandizing purposes. There's plenty of that sort of evidence-free cynicism on display here.

Read with Rockhill, it's easy to see how the recent fascist conspiracy theory came about--if organs of the bourgeois state have pushed Frankfurt scholars, either in good faith to fight fascists or with the ulterior motive of creating a docile compatible anticommunist left, it may appear to the paranoid, low-information sort that some nominal marxists are taking over. They gloss over the 'anticommunist' part, of course, to focus on the components that they don't like--



--and conflate that with other things that they don't like. Easy recipe for a total mess.

The text is timely, written after the 2024 election, with attention mostly to the US, but with several notes on recent shenanigans by British and Brazilian fascists.

[T · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fantastic, timely explanation of how an insane conspiracy theory went from a lunatic fringe to being mainstreamed by think tanks and nutcases alike.

[Gabrielė Bužinskaitė · Rating 4 out of 5]

We, humans, love simplistic scapegoat-y answers to complex problems, because it frees us from uncertainty and the hefty task of thinking. “Cultural Marxism” has become a buzz-term that does us this very justice.

“Cultural Marxism” is now being blamed for all sorts of issues, especially the “downfall of the West” (namely: the erosion of traditional family, declining birth rates, mass immigration, political correctness, secularisation and so on). However, those that parrot this term seem to rarely be able to define it, except with vague definitions like “the out-of-touch woke ideology that infiltrated the universities”.

As per the author, however, there’s not one definition of “Cultural Marxism”, thus he prefers to call it “Cultural Marxisms” (plural) because what it means highly depends on the context (like country) where it’s being used. Its definition, however, is mostly fictional and constantly evolving, for the word is functional more than it is descriptive. Its function is to mark enemies and delegitimise progressive movements by tying them to some secret, all-controlling evil agent. Jews? Globalists?

So, because “Cultural Marxisms” have no direct referents, it can’t be properly debunked. It does not describe anything precise. Instead, it attaches itself to certain signifiers such as names of Frankfurt School thinkers like Marcuse and Adorno, as well as figures neither Marxist nor German like Foucault, and things like gender studies, Hollywood, and the EU.

The book offers an intriguing historical analysis of the term and even finds its Nazi ancestor “Cultural Bolshevism”. However, understanding the depth of the term is not the goal; the author seeks to find out what it is about our society and its citizens that allows such terms to function at governmental levels.

Aside from it being somewhat repetitive and filled with some irrelevant details, I greatly enjoyed learning from the author. Complex societal changes, unfortunately for our energy-preserving minds, never have a straightforward enemy to blame.

[Jonfaith · Rating 3 out of 5]

As an anti-Critical Theory warrior with a large online following, Lindsay exemplifies the characteristics of the new right wing social media intellectual. These new “content creators” tend to act more like influencers or celebrities.

This was a birthday gift from Joel. He warned me it not coincide with interests or posture. He was correct. After Penman and a weeklong return to Fassbinder I was likely poised more towards Ulrike Meinhof or Fritz Lang. The book in question isn’t a survey of the Grand Hotel Abyss but rather how the ideas of the Frankfurt School were misinterpreted by Lyndon LaRouche and subsequently further distorted by serial think tank theorists and conservative pundits and media fear mongers. It spends far too much time on minutiae and splits between former allies. Such reminded me of Volodine. The final section describes the response to Wokeness in the US, UK and Brazil. It was interesting that Douglas Murray makes an appearance but Land and Yarvis went unmentioned. This was less analysis than a screed like every other plea to mobilize at this time of relative night. I’m very inclined to roll over and turn out the light.

[Zuzana Šmilňáková · Rating 4 out of 5]

this book, of course, does not come with brand new, revealing ideas, however, it goes into such detail in dissecting the ideology of the 1970s new right, that it ultimately develops the well-known thesis regarding the new right's strategic use of the cultural marxism conspiracies much further; the author basically just researched this book very well

[Andrew McNeely]

I have a confession to make: I never finished watching the Slavoj Žižek and Jordan Peterson debate over Marxism. It wasn’t the length of the debate that eventually did me in, nor was it Žižek’s quirky nose-wipes and Lacanian tangents. What did me in, rather, was an unbearable second-hand embarrassment for Peterson as he attempted to counter Marxism by solely engaging the principles laid out in The Communist Manifesto; which is not unlike being in a conversation with an atheist who assaults Christianity based exclusively on their knowledge of the Didache.

The perceptive viewer could see that Žižek knew Peterson was merely a pseudo-intellectual online influencer whom young, disaffected men find refuge in, but he played nice throughout the first half of the debate. The point at which I stopped watching, however, was during their exchange in which Žižek pressed Peterson on the latter’s obsession with the apparent threat of something called “postmodern Neo-Marxism.” Žižek wanted names; real names of Marxists who advocated such a ridiculous concept. Cue my second-hand embarrassment for Peterson. Peterson, who usually shelters behind Jungian theorizing when cornered, couldn’t name one Marxist. Instead, he named Foucault’s influence in the social sciences and humanities. Žižek rightly countered by explaining that Foucault was not a Marxist; in fact, Foucault embodied a logic throughout his entire body of work that cut against all structuralist philosophies and frameworks, including Marxism. Žižek let it go and purposefully changed the subject, but what became clear was that an undergrad philosophy major would have fared much better in this exchange.

Second-hand embarrassment aside, I was really struck by Peterson’s insistence that the specter of Cultural Marxism was haunting us in every realm of life. What is Cultural Marxism? Why are right-wing actors and pseudo-intellectual cult personalities like Peterson warning us about this? How is this phrase primarily being used and to whom is it being addressed? Some easy Googling led me down a Rabbit Hole of dark and, frankly, weird conspiracies that narrated Cultural Marxism’s covert infiltration of our nation’s institutions executed by the Frankfurt School.

So it was with great delight that I recently discovered A.J.A. Woods’ The Cultural Marxism Conspiracy: Why the Right Blames the Frankfurt School for the Decline of the West. Woods provides a materialist and critical account of the emergence, development, and spread of the Cultural Marxism conspiracy in right-wing political discourse. Although Woods never mentions Jordan Peterson, a cast of right-wing characters do make central appearances throughout his study, many of whom have cross-fertilized with Peterson’s own activist endeavors. Peterson’s campaign against “postmodern Neo-Marxism,” moreover, fits nicely into Woods’ exploration of the Cultural Marxism conspiracy, or what Woods dubs “Cultural Marxism/s,” because it’s a term that is highly liquid and easily appropriated in various contexts toward unique variations.

“Cultural Marxism,” Woods writes, “is the political right’s attempt to explain why the culture of western societies has changed over the past sixty years.” Woods articulates Cultural Marxism/s as a spurious hypothesis that details how theorists associated with the Frankfurt School purportedly “invented ‘ideologies’ of multiculturalism, feminism, and environmentalism to trigger the demise of Western civilization.” These Frankfurt School theorists infiltrated education, government, and media to indoctrinate the masses with Cultural Marxism beginning in the 1960s. Today, Woods continues, “right-wing activists and conservative pundits have used this theory to understand the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, the increased visibility of LGBTQ+ communities, and the efforts to tackle the climate emergency.”

No review of Woods’ analysis could do justice in narrating all the twists and turns that render his account so richly layered with careful complexity. It’s also periodically shocking at times. For example, the conspiracy of Cultural Marxism/s did not originate in right-wing think tanks or with conservative politicians scoring populist cheap points. It’s a conspiracy that emerged on the fringe, factional Left, first within the American Maoist organization called the Progressive Labor Party, which conspiracized that Herbert Marcuse, a theorist at the Frankfurt School, was secretly doubling as a CIA operative who sought to “dampen the revolutionary fervor of student protest” movements in the 1960s. Why?

Woods brilliantly contextualizes how the 1960s and 1970s factional Left jockeyed for resources, support, and new recruits at variance with one another as each organization vied for an authentic representation of the American working class. Different strategies and philosophies ensued. Some Leftist organizations and activists, who remained beholden to orthodox Marxist doctrine, sought to unite the working class and rising student movements on college campuses. Toward this end, Leftist leaders argued that “members of the student movement need to ‘proletarianize’ themselves,” Woods writes, to “join the workers on the factory floor, and establish a firm political alliance with their fellow laborers to overthrow capitalist hegemony.” In contrast, the Frankfurt theorists, decades prior, had deemed the goal of revolutionizing the working classes as insufficient in subverting the preservation of entrepreneurial and commercial capital. They instead introduced a discourse of post-Marxist Critical Theory that analyzed how pop culture, media, and new technologies pacified and reinscribed the working classes into systems of consumption that not only protected capital, but also ensured its dominance through the exploitation of a working class that supported it. Leftist organizations who collaborated with protest movements, especially on college campuses, opposed the Frankfurt School’s seeming resignation in the face of advanced capitalism and globalization, including a small sect of radical communists known as the LaRouchites.

Led by political activist-turned-cult leader, Lyndon LaRouche, the LaRouchites appropriated the Progressive Labor Party’s conspiracy about Marcuse and peddled it in and through its print culture apparatus. The LaRouchites, moreover, “recast these thinkers [of the Frankfurt School] as the semi-magical practitioners of an Aristotelian secret knowledge and the architects of myths–rock music, free love, drug consumption–that hypnotized the masses.” If that sounds like conservative moralizing that’s because over several years the LaRouchites maneuvered out of their communist roots and into fascist collaboration with antisemitic groups and Neo-Nazi organizations like Will Carto’s Liberty Lobby. Here we see the strange and peculiar horseshoe effect that lands countercultural actors in Far-Right fascist circles, not unlike Dimes Square’s performative and aesthetic fascism or Nick Land’s Deleuzian accelerationist defense of Tech-Right futurism and the reactionary politics of the Dark Enlightenment.

In chapters 2-4, Woods chronicles how Cultural Marxism/s spread into various right-wing think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, political organizations like the Tea Party movement, and disseminated in the writings of pseudo-intellectuals and pseudo-historians like William S. Lind, Kevin MacDonald, Andrew Breitbart, Christopher Rufo, and James Lindsay. Underlying Woods’ exposure of these organizations and the right-wing actors who perpetuate the Cultural Marxism conspiracy is the ironic projection in cultural politics they themselves engage in. In other words, the subterfuge and power the Frankfurt School apparently employs in the nation’s institutions mirrors the very same subterfuge and power right-wing activists have managed to amass in the last decade. Woods has much, much more to say about this phenomenon.

I currently have a running list of books in my head that best explain our current political moment. This now finds itself near the top. Andrew Hartman’s blurb sums it up well: “To understand the Cultural Marxism conspiracy is to understand the ideological makeup of the modern Right.”

[C. Thomas · Rating 3 out of 5]

Wanted to like this more than I did. Felt overlong in spots (especially on the now-familiar history of the New Right) and underdeveloped in others. The prose often feels just-so. The highlights, though, are the sections on Larouche and political discourse in Brazil — kudos to Woods for looking beyond the Anglosphere when so many works of this kind are constrained by lack of language competence.

[Jake R · Rating 4 out of 5]

Could almost be tempted to go up to 5 stars - was an enjoyable read if a bit repetitive at points, and the conclusion was excellently put.

[agalmagalma · Rating 3 out of 5]

Me cuesta un poco de trabajo ponerle calificación. I guess it's alright. Está bien estructurado y la investigación es rigurosa. A veces parece más un relato, muy resumido obviamente, sobre la derecha anglosajona (aunque en algún momento, para mi mayor sorpresa, se ocupa de Brasil y Bolsonaro), con el añadido casi accesorio del uso que esta fuerza política ha hecho del sintagma "Cultural Marxism". Sorprendentemente, apenas se hace mención de Foucault o Derrida, tan importantes para la estructura de esa quimera ideológica, independientemente de sus tenues, o de plano inexistentes vínculos con la Escuela de Frankfurt. Aunque el autor nos previene contra la idea fácil de aglutinar de manera rigurosa y conceptual la fantasía del "Marxismo Cultural", parece que él mismo cae presa de lo que esa advertencia intentaba prevenir: circunscribe demasiado estrictamente a la Escuela de Frankfurt (y sus pretendidos avances para "destruir Occidente") su campo de análisis. No sé, como lector curioso de las jeremiadas ignorantes de la derecha "intelectual", me pareció muy raro no escuchar más sobre el "nihilismo postmoderno" y sus santones usuales (Foucault, Derrida, Baudrillard y cualquier "francesito remilgado antiamericano").
Interesante, difuso e incompleto. Aún así, su lectura no me parece un desperdicio y agradezco su existencia. Salu2

[Karolina · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fabulous book and, as other reviews state, very timely.

Woods makes a convincing argument about the origins of the cultural Marxism theory and how this conspiracy is used by the right to manufacture consent for removal of progressive policies and influence media. My limited knowledge of American politics and relevant personalities beyond the last couple decades of Presidents was not penalised, and I thoroughly enjoyed the first sections of the book outlining the LaRouche, Adorno and the Frankfurt School. It was particularly fascinating reading about the origins of the Cultural Marxism conspiracy and how this arose from fringe groups on the left as a Marcuse defamation campaign. If left-wing infighting to the detriment of the movement has been so pervasive, then what can we do going forward to provide a strong front against populist fascistic agendas on the rise in Europe? It fills me with dread realising that the tragedy of Jeremy Corbyn's career is not an acute cultural issue, and therefore will not be a easy problem to reconcile.

Additionally, I liked how Woods extended the analysis to the UK (more familiar territory) and Brazil. The brief overview of how the cultural Marxism conspiracy was moulded and has influenced Brexit, GB news and the status quo maintained by Starmer (the artist formerly known as prime minister) to be quite succinct and I was pretty impressed at the amount of information distilled.

Overall, great book and puts all the right wing books I've perused (terrible gifts I have previously received) to shame as the quality of research and writing is incomparable. The effective chronological narrative and the organisation of a great deal of information is undoubtedly the strongest feature of Woods' writing.

[Colin Cox · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Cultural Marxism Conspiracy is a fascinating study of the Frankfurt School and how conservative thinkers and media have transformed it into a, if not the, predominant agent of "cultural degeneration" (10) that has slowly but effectively destroyed the West. But conservative pundits give the Frankfurt School, what they also call "Cultural Marxism," too much credit, and in doing so, they render the Frankfurt School a signifier without a signified. As Woods writes, "Cultural Marxism/s is not a generic conspiracy theory but, rather, an ever-changing combination of narrative elements that possesses different meanings and functions in various political contexts" (13). The reasons conservatives animate and reanimate the Frankfurt School as this ghost that haunts the West are simple: opposition to equality. Woods writes, "The elements of Cultural Marxism/s have been deconstructed and reconfigured time and time again as reactionary political forces across the world search for new ways to justify their opposition to equality, democracy, and justice" (22).

People, political movements, and ideologies are complicated and complex. Yet, books like The Cultural Marxism Conspiracy remind me that while the world and the people who inhabit it are far from simple, we would err if we ignored those moments of unmistakable simplicity. That is to say, conservatism, in action, is about the suppression of equality for certain, often marginalized, people.

[Jack Fredericks · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read a lot of these types of books and I think this is definitely one of the better efforts I've encountered. I was delightfully pleased by the precision of the first few chapters, which explain how Cultural Marxism became a bogeyman in American political discourse. The chapters on Trumpism didn't really interest me too much, because there are so many hot takes on this moment in history that I find them all kind of flat. If Ezra Klein can parrot the arguments, then they can't be that complicated. I appreciated the parts of Brazil and Bolsonaro, though. Overall, this is a really good book for anyone trying to understand how Cultural Marxism has morphed into a specter, haunting right and left wing politics alike.

[Caleb Labbe · Rating 5 out of 5]

Finally done this one, which I really took my time with. At first what felt a bit repetitive in its arguments, I think turned out to be a very thorough and erudite history of ideas which is essential for politics today. It does not judge the right-wing pseudo intellectuals pushing to depoliticize the social (and many of whom’s books you can find innocuously on an Indigo featured reads table), but rigorously show that they are naive reactionaries against a distorted Frankfurt school and are equally nostalgic racists. I was very impressed with the conclusions this book reached, which has many inspiring suggestions for how to move forward and why we must value culture and the study of the humanities today.

[Alex Giacobbe · Rating 4.5 out of 5]

A.J.A Woods’ work traces the origins of the alt right movement from the 1960s social justice revolution through today. It’s surprisingly insightful and darkly humorous; there is an intense sarcasm in Woods’ narrative and I found myself cringing and eye-rolling at these right wing reactionaries who harken back to a time of white supremacy and patriarchal family values. There is a heady mix of intellectual Neomarxism from the Frankfurt School and socio-psychoanalysis of convergent conservative ideology: when combined together, the Right’s ignorance and misuse of “Cultural Marxism” has played an enormous role in building up authoritarian power in government. From the incipient counter revolution; the establishment of the New Right in the early 90s; the emergence of Breitbart and the Tea Party; there is a lot that this short book analyzes and it’s fascinating stuff.

[Yorgos P · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very well researched, well structured, and written in an accessible academic prose, Woods offers a much-needed and timely book on the origins of contemporary alt-right fascism. The book's aim is not to debunk the mythologies that the new conservative right has constructed by scapegoating the Frankfurt School and Marxist theory for any social progress of the last 70 years, but rather to trace the history of such reactionary right and provide the conceptual tools through which we can develop a progressive counter-paradigm. At times slightly repetitive, but overall highly recommended.

[Santiago · Rating 3 out of 5]

6/10

the first chapter on the larouchites is unbelievably funny and very good. the rest of the book (mostly the stuff on right wingers) starts to read a bit like a breadtube video essay. unfortunate because it's probably not aja woods' fault, but i didn't find those sections particularly eye-opening.

[Deiver Melo · Rating 3 out of 5]

I like the way the book shows us the origins of weird conspiracy theories we usually think were born on twitter but actually were here way before internet and social media. However, the methodology of the book is confuse. I can’t see where is the Gramscian stuff the author claims is going to orient their discussion throughout the book. It’s just a series of stories of a bunch of people important to the movement, without any actual conjuncture analysis and with huge gaps on how we got from one weird person to another. It’s an interesting collection of facts and curious ideas of picturesque individuals, but not a global analysis as it proposes to be.

[WAIA · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's an interesting history book. I think one of the things is abundantly and clearly shows is the importance of the aesthetical dimension in communicating about politics. How by flooding all kinds of media channels, by repitition, by hyperstition, the right wing was able to fabricate a reality completely which has almost no basis in the texts and authors they claim to "fight with". It is "forces" in that sense which won over "truth". Doesn't mean the left should start lying all over the place. But it would be worth considering something like say, hyperstition and so on. Anyway cool read. Lets find those "new weapons" given the unclosed nature of politics. Nothing is really set in stone.