@Polka83
Democracy, which you cite, means, in practice, we get to mark an "X" on a piece of paper every five years or so. Some of us will make this choice based on the candidate's manifesto; many more others will do so abdicating themselves of their critical thinking skills, and allowing their vote to be influenced by prejudice, whatever that may be.
In either case, that is where democracy begins and ends, for whatever party is in power will exercise its will to do as it pleases until the next election, where they will either be voted back in, or voted out.
As for the international alphabet organizations, since when has anyone of import given a damn? The U.S. didn't in Vietnam, neither did the Argentinians in the Falklands, nor did the Serbs in Yugoslavia, not the Russians in Afghanistan / Chechnya / Ukraine. UN / ICJ judgements are enforced by consent, and where there is none the response is usually along the lines of "Sorry, I wasn't listening." I suggest your faith in these institutions is misplaced.
As for your denigration of cultural Marxism, well on that point you are very wrong indeed. Antonio Gramsci was one of the founding members of the Italian Communist Party. At some point he got banged up for his troubles, and while in jail he started asking himself why a backwater like Russia had become communist, yet advanced Western countries had not. As we know, Marx thought that societal development was a process necessitating the passage through the capitalist stage before communism would be realized, and to that end he believed Britain a ripe candidate for revolution. As we know, Britain did not become communist - indeed, communism had a bit of a PR problem and the proles loathed the idea. Gramsci realized that the West would never undergo a "bottom up" revolution in the way Russia did, so he mused that communism would have to be imposed "top down".
Now, the man on the Clapham omnibus might not have been taken in by Marx and Engels, but the chattering classes were. And slowly, slowly, catchee monkey: communist ideals started spreading through what we would now call the public sector in what is now called "the long march through the institutions". So, why is this important? It is important because, unlike politicians, teachers, lecturers, civil servants, media bods and so on cannot be voted out. In a cunning sleight of hand, communists and their sympathizers circumvent the democratic process. Now I realise few professors would openly self-identify as Marxists (Terry Eagleton is one, Raymond Williams another), but openly holding what might be considered "right wing views" <sic> in education and academia would be career suicide. Even voting Conservative would be beyond the pale for some.
Thus, in most Western countries, the left own the cultural means of production. These are the people who regulate public discourse, legislate what we cannot say, or who we can criticise. These are the people who frame their entire world view in terms of oppressed and oppressor; those whose acts are justified, however depraved, and those whose never will be.
I can understand your incredulity. Cultural Marxism is now in integral part of Western society that, like the air, we do not even realise it is there. But, if one is prepared to do a little reading around history and research, if only in outline, prominent political figures, the dots are there waiting to be joined.