An inconvenient truth – the Frankfurt School lives on
The credibility of Iain F Cowie’s treatise (Have Your Say, November 16) disappears into a Dr Frankian black hole at his third paragraph when he asks, “How do societal settings make possible the truth claim that there is only male and female?” and goes downhill (if that’s possible in a black hole) when he claims that the Frankfurt School is “opposed to the disintegration of the family”.
Not wishing to miss an anti-Pike hate speech opportunity, Dr Frank dons a tutu and pom-poms as Cowie’s cheerleader to bog-trot forth from his Irish swamp and perform an undignified Tarantella on this page in Cowie’s support (Have Your Say, November 17).
In the post-truth era that currently prevails, facts and science are an inconvenience to the “societal settings” beloved by the cultural Marxists. For the rest of us gentlefolk, XX and XY chromosomes distinguish the male and female, and no amount of Critical Theory, hormone therapy, rearranged genitalia, silicone or lipstick is going to change it. Cowie would no doubt applaud Bertrand Russell’s contention that “social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black”, and (with particular relevance to last week’s sex education debate) that indoctrination of children must begin before the age of 10.
Cowie’s proposition that the Frankfurt School is opposed to the disintegration of the family is false – the school was founded on classic Marxism which sought to destroy the family as a unit of society. Although Marx, Adorno, Marcuse, Russell and the physical Frankfurt School are no more, the ideology is very much alive – just look at the state of Western society, listen to the drivel issuing forth from “woke” university students, reread the early 20th-century Frankfurt School texts and note the similarities. Conspiracy theory? Or massive coincidence?
Nigel Pike
Phang Nga
