Two questions regarding the following paragraph:

First question: Which meaning is grammatically true for the first bold lines? (My problem is to know what the sentence "as the Marxist critic Herbert Marcuse has proposed" refers to)

1. According to Herbert Marcuse's belief, the reason for such behavior to Steiner was that the experience of Beauty in the eighteenth century was not an affirmation of bourgeois capitalist identity.

2. the reason for such behavior to Steiner was that in contrast with Herbert Marcuse's belief, the experience of Beauty in the eighteenth century was not an affirmation of bourgeois capitalist identity.

Second Question: Does the final sentence of the paragraph want to say:

Now, does not have Steiner any role in the conflict between feminists and the Marxists?

Context:

Steiner may be recognising a hitherto suppressed feminine aesthetic but even to dare to speak of beauty seriously is to lay herself open to accusations of naivety, self-deception and a lack of humour. And, also, of course, of gross political incorrectness. For was not the experience of Beauty largely reconstructed in the eighteenth century as an affirmation of bourgeois capitalist identity, as the Marxist critic Herbert Marcuse has proposed? Rich and powerful men desire to possess it as a sign of their wealth and power – their lovely architectures and landscaped vistas, their art and clothes, their beautiful women and children, indicative of their superior position, health and happiness. In the grumbling skirmishes between the feminists and the Marxists, is Steiner not complicit with this state of affairs?

Two questions regarding the following paragraph:

First question: Which meaning is grammatically true for the first bold lines? (My problem is to know what the sentence "as the Marxist critic Herbert Marcuse has proposed" refers to)

1. According to Herbert Marcuse's belief, the reason for such behavior to Steiner was that the experience of Beauty in the eighteenth century was not an affirmation of bourgeois capitalist identity.

2. the reason for such behavior to Steiner was that in contrast with Herbert Marcuse's belief, the experience of Beauty in the eighteenth century was not an affirmation of bourgeois capitalist identity.

Second Question: Does the final sentence of the paragraph want to say:

Now, does not have Steiner any role in the conflict between feminists and the Marxists?

Context:

Steiner may be recognising a hitherto suppressed feminine aesthetic but even to dare to speak of beauty seriously is to lay herself open to accusations of naivety, self-deception and a lack of humour. And, also, of course, of gross political incorrectness. For was not the experience of Beauty largely reconstructed in the eighteenth century as an affirmation of bourgeois capitalist identity, as the Marxist critic Herbert Marcuse has proposed? Rich and powerful men desire to possess it as a sign of their wealth and power – their lovely architectures and landscaped vistas, their art and clothes, their beautiful women and children, indicative of their superior position, health and happiness. In the grumbling skirmishes between the feminists and the Marxists, is Steiner not complicit with this state of affairs?