is it because of oppressor/oppressed memes

No, it's because of my experience dealing with progressives

what does "application of Marxist theory to social structure" mean

Replace economics with social structure, replace bourgeoisie with white men, replace proletariat with minorities.

you could do the same thing with early liberals who were an influence on marx's class theory

the core of what you're getting at is that an anlysis of power dynamics = marxism

which is silly, the core of marxism has to do with a materialist interpretation of historical development and the role class struggle plays in this development

no, progressive "manifestos" and other similar writings are eerily similar to "down with the bourgeoisie" type stuff.

i don't think superificial similarities between polemics constitutes these ideologies being the same

I think this gives an accurate description of Liberalism, https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/293022642230001676/434084687103787019/image.jpg

I'm not saying their the same, but they are eerily similar

literally can be used in a loose manner of meaning

Which is what I was doing when using the word "literally"

Meaning they are very similar and are against several of the same tenants of liberalism.

so when oldschool liberals like adolphe blanqui were writing about how there are two "classes", those who live by their own labor and oppressors who live on the labor of others

could you not just use the same example you have used with marxism and progressivism here

just replace the parasites with white men and those who live by their own labor with minorities

Liberalism, like any other ideology has many versions of itself, I am a classical liberal.

yes and adolphe blanqui was a classical liberal

many classical liberals had similar ideas

they were a big influence on marx

Also, at that time, society was something much more akin to exploitation.

That's why Marx has some valid criticism of society at the time he wrote, but now his points are mostly moot.

Society evolves and changes, ideologies do the same to match society.

I prefer to prescribe to the ideas of John Locke, except the blank slate idea.

ideologies can evolve and marxism has evolved a lot

yes, and yet it is still wrong.

it is just that right wingers have not been able to demonstrate that modern progressivism and post-modernism as a whole represents an evolution of marxism

at least not anymore so than marxism would constitute an evolution of classical liberalism

they don't represent an evolution of marxism, they represent the subversion of marxism into western society.

what does that mean

modern progressives would almost never call themselves marxist, most of their teachers would neither, and most of their teachers would neither, the people who were the actual marxists in academia are long gone or very old, very few progressives would describe themselves as marxists, but tracing their ideology back leads to marxist roots, especially looking at intersectionality and feminism.

how are intersectionality and feminism marxist

There were even 2nd wave feminists who outright wrote that their ideology had a basis in marxism.

yeah marxist feminism is a thing

liberal feminism is also a thing

neither of these things make feminism as a whole marxist or liberal

and marxist feminism has become the dominant voice of feminism in the progressive movement.

I'm nto sayin it does

but one has overtaken the other

that's why even progressives will go after liberal feminists from time to time for "excluding transgenders".