In bourgeois society, therefore, the past dominates the present; in Communist society, the present dominates the past. In bourgeois society capital is independent and has individuality, while the living person is dependent and has no individuality.There is no reversal of roles; this is the nature of Marxism, which the NYT writers do not comprehend.
Communist Manifesto, Chapter 2
That depends on your definition of culture. The Merriam Webster online dictionary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture) defines culture; its first three definitions are:
: the beliefs, customs, arts, etc., of a particular society, group, place, or time
: a particular society that has its own beliefs, ways of life, art, etc.
: a way of thinking, behaving, or working that exists in a place or organization (such as a business)
Webster then goes on to offer a "full definition" of culture:
a : enlightenment and excellence of taste acquired by intellectual and aesthetic training
b : acquaintance with and taste in fine arts, humanities, and broad aspects of science as distinguished from vocational and technical skills
It is here for the first time that we see the definition invested with a value judgment.
Yes, the left seeks to undermine that which is valuable in a society and in that sense it always undermines "culture" if culture is defined as containing a moral value.
I employed the term to describe our state of affairs as does Webster here:
b : the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group; also : the characteristic features of everyday existence (as diversions or a way of life) shared by people in a place or time
We have no argument, we see the left acting invidiously in the United States and in China. With my definition of "culture" I see a role reversal, with your definition, you do not.