Tuesday, March 24, 2015

Culturist Policy Article # 2 – Foreign Policy

Culturism (cǔl-chər-ǐz-əm) n. The philosophy, art, and science that values, promotes and protects majority cultures.

Culturist (cǔl-chər-ǐst) n. 1. An advocate of culturism. 2. One who engages in the arts or sciences of managing and protecting majority cultures. 3. Adj. Of or pertaining to culturism, culturists or culturist policy.

--   --   --   --   --   --   --   --  -- 

Culturist foreign policy in a nutshell: bomb those who hurt us (with an intent to inflict pain); aid our friends, not our enemies; and otherwise mind our own business. 

Globalists think the world agrees on fundamental values and thus all people can be united: Multiculturalists promote that idea domestically.  Culturists believe that cultures disagree on, and fight over, values and territory.   

--   --   --   --  --   --   --   --   --   -- 

- Get out of Iraq and Afghanistan -

The US is officially in Iraq and Afghanistan to turn them into western-style progressive democracies with freedom of speech, separation of church and state, women’s rights, etc., However, Islamic nations reject these values; cultural diversity dooms these nation-building missions. 

From a culturist perspective, what Muslims do to each other is not our business.  If China does not have a democracy or gay rights, that is not our business.  Our culturist job is to protect our own western traditional majority culture, not to go bankrupt undermining other nations’ sovereignty.

- Bomb when you bomb -

That is not to say that culturist foreign policy is strictly isolationist.  If nation attacks us, we should bomb so heavily and hard that they will remember it for a long time.  Then, the next time a terrorist group tries to set up camp in their nation, the country might put some effort into routing them out. 

- Iran cannot have the bomb -

Because they are our enemy, Iran cannot have the bomb.  If they do not dismantle their means of production voluntarily, we should use military force to eradicate their bomb-making potential. After that, we should leave Iran immediately: no trying to make them a democracy, no rebuilding aid. 

- Reject non-Western asylum seekers -

The above policies can only lead to domestic terrorism via Islamic sympathizers in our western nations. Multiculturalists tell us that Muslims are also western and they share our values: Neither is true.  We must stop all Islamic immigration into the West now.

- We have sides in international battles -

Our globalist western leaders see themselves as neutral mediators in the Israeli / Palestinian talks (and those with Muslims in India, Thailand, Nigeria, etc. ).  We are not neutral! Where practical, we must check Islamic expansion.  We should not be asking our allies to make concessions to our enemies.

- Our first duty is to protect ourselves -


If we fall, neither China nor Iran will promote ‘human rights;’ Such rights are, in fact, only ‘western rights.’  Therefore, if we want to protect ‘human rights,’ we must avoid bankruptcy.  We should drastically reduce foreign aid and give zero dollars to non-western nations.

Thursday, March 19, 2015

The Culturist Battle in Ferguson

The U.S. is rightfully nervous about the battle in Ferguson: the shooting of Michael Brown, the retaliatory shooting of two police officers the shooter’s prosecution.  However, it is important that we know that the real battle is between two ways of defining America, because our nation’s fate depends upon which definition prevails. 

On one side we have the multicultural narrative.

Michael Brown’s supporters – and I include President Obama and his Administration in this category – see the Ferguson teenager’s death as proof that America is a racist nation that will never give “people of color” and other “historically under-represented minorities” a fair shake.  This narrative paints America as a source of oppression that must be fought.

On the other side, we have the patriotic narrative.

Our traditional patriotic narrative points to America as the New World, where innovation and freedom have led to the greatest expansion of wealth the planet has ever known. Here, with hard work, anyone can achieve their dreams. This narrative teaches us pride in our nation and challenges us to work hard in order to sustain and honor it.

If we continue to push the multicultural narrative, our nation will dissolve in race-based resentment.  If we can revive the patriotic narrative, we will be united, solvent and strong.

Since African-Americans are at the heart of the multicultural narrative, converting them to our narrative is key to winning this life-or-death debate.

First of all, to win the debate, we must aggressively criticize black-American culture.  Black - Americans are poor because their thug-life culture is violent, too sexualized, and hostile to education.  Black – on –black homicide is the cause of cheapening black lives, not police.  They are not victims of America, (America is great), they are the victims of themselves and their cultural degeneracy.

Using the term ‘culturist’ will allow us to make these necessary criticisms of black culture.    If we say it now, multiculturalists just call us ‘racist.’  Using the term ‘culturist’ points overtly to our concerns being about culture, not race. “If cultural diversity is real,” we can reply, “then we need to be able to talk about it.”  The discussion, we will note, is culturist, not racist.

Secondly, we must appeal to what the black – American author of the book Culturism calls “right – minded” blacks.[i]  They are sick of having their reputations tarnished by association with the black under-class, he tells us.  And, we must join them in celebrating great black-American patriots such as Crispus Attucks and Kobe Bryant.  If we can get African-Americans to again see themselves as a great part of a wonderful country, we will all win.  

Winning this debate will take discussing facts. But, it must also involve culturist public events and pressure.  Handing out American flags in Ferguson, and shaming all who do not treat the flags well, would be a great start.

The physical battle in Ferguson is terrible.  But, it is only a symptom of the real battle, the narrative battle.  If we lose that battle, I am afraid, we will lose the nation. 



[i] Hampton, Scott, Culturism: The Real Reasons People Dislike African-Americans - And Race Has Nothing to Do with It. Atlanta: Lehigh Press, 2014.

Friday, March 13, 2015

Culturist Policy Article # 1 - Islamic Immigration

Culturism (cǔl-chər-ǐz-əm) n. The philosophy, art, and science that values, promotes and protects majority cultures.

Culturist (cǔl-chər-ǐst) n. 1. An advocate of culturism. 2. One who engages in or supports the art or science of managing and protecting majority cultures. 3. Of or pertaining to culturism, culturists or culturist policy. - adj.

--   --  --   --  --   --   --   --   --  --

Culturist immigration policy calls for an immediately halt all Muslim immigration into western nations.  Cultural differences, history, and recent events justify this position.  We must counter globalist and multiculturalists politicians’ culturally-neutral, open-borders agenda.

Western culture has its roots in Athens (the scientific / secular approach) and Jerusalem (our Judeo-Christian roots).   Both sources of western culture dovetail in esteeming the conscience of the individual.  Democracy and freedom of speech, for example, are rooted in respect for individual’s reasoning capacity.

Islam means ‘Submission.’  Submission herein is not just a matter of establishing a personal relationship with God as the individual sees fit. Muhammad ruled the government and religion at the same time, making theocracy an Islamic ideal.  Thus in Islamic nation after Islamic nation we find either full-blown theocracies or pressure for theocracy. 

Individual conscience and theocracy are incompatible.  Increasing the size of a population that holds values inimical to those of our traditional majority culture erodes and endangers the foundation of our culture.  History and recent events prove that this is not only a theoretical debate; It is a matter of life and death.

Historically, Islam has long been hostile to the West: They took Spain; They took Constantinople; Islam’s western attacks were stopped in France by Charles ‘the Hammer’ Martel in 732; Islam’s eastern advances were halted at the Gates of Vienna in 1683.   Culturists agree with Faulkner’s sentiment - the past is never dead and buried; in fact, it isn’t even past.

Recent terrorist attacks provide all-to-concrete evidence that the past is prologue. 9/11 in New York, the 7/7 London bus bombing, the Madrid train bombing, and the Charlie Hebdo attack are just the peaks of a sustained hum of terror coming from the West’s Islamic population.  We have a right to immigration laws that err on the side of physically protecting our populations.  Politicians who deny this have blood on their hands.

Prohibiting more Muslims from becoming citizens in western nations is not racist – it is culturist.  It would not depend upon whether the Muslim were black, Middle Eastern, white, Asian or Latino.  Religion is cultural, not racial. Cultural diversity is real, therefore culturist policy is rational and justified. Culturist will happily debate any politician who thinks cultural diversity is not real and important.

Those who say this immigration policy violates some ‘universal,’ ‘human rights’ norm are globalists, not culturists.  All non-western nations have culturist or racist immigration laws. Culturists need to ask globalist politicians why only western nations must be held to their ‘globalist,’ ‘human rights’ standard, why we cannot be culturist like other nations.   

Politicians who reject culturist immigration policy because western culture is grounded in religious tolerance must understand that our western Constitutions and laws only protect our western citizens’ freedom of religion.  Our laws are national, not international. A later culturist policy article will discuss domestic freedom of religion. But, our religious tolerance laws do not protect foreign Muslims’ right to immigrate to the West.

Lastly, multiculturalists will object to this proposed immigration policy with their defining beliefs: The West has no core culture to protect; It is a culturally neutral zone where random cultures happen to coincide; the West is just as Hindu and Muslim as it is Christian and secular; we cannot favor any culture or consider any cultural traits in our laws. Culturists affirm that the West is not Islamic; Islam is hostile to the West; and we have a legal right to protect ourselves. 


Because cultural diversity is real, history is important, conflict exists, and our citizens have been harmed, culturist immigration policy would immediately halt all Islamic immigration to western nations.

Tuesday, March 10, 2015

Culturist Lessons from Argentina's Border

Half of the Foz do Iguacu waterfall is in Argentina and half is in Brazil.  The Brazilian half is amazing.  But, the wife and I heard that the Argentinean side was even more spectacular.  Getting to the Argentinean side fueled the following explosive culturist rant!

Long story short, Americans must pay $160 to visit Argentina for a day.  Why?  Reciprocity.  We charge them for visas generally, so they charge us huge sums for one day.  They said it was fair?  Fair?!?!  I’ll tell you what fair is!

When nations get angry at the United States for not being fair and generous, remember that the West – largely the US – invented the ideas of being fair. 

We have endless nuclear weapons and Argentina has zero.  If we wanted to, we could easily tell them, “Tell you what, you drop the visa fee, and send us 4 billion dollars a month and we won’t nuke you!  Is that fair?”

If you think this policy suggestion is outlandish, think again. Historically, nations have gone to war to steal land and get slaves.  Even now, Iran just wants to nuke Israel to kill its people, with no eye to profit.  China is slowly retaking Asia via expanding its air and water borders because it can, not to spread fairness. 

So Argentina is using the “fairness” doctrine we created, with resentment, against us.  As always, of course, it is much worse than it seems.

In 2012 Argentina got 178.9 million dollars in aid.[i]  This is from the ‘global community.’  But the ‘global community’ always means the US is footing the majority of the bill.  This even though, Pew Global Attitude Survey shows Argentina’s population largely considers us, an “enemy.”[ii]

Of course, it is much worse than it seems.  In 2012, the West Bank and Gaza got 1.8 billion dollars in US aid.[iii]  This is the very same Gaza that is hurling missiles at our ally Israel every chance it gets.  Is that fair enough for you?

Of course, it is worse than it seems.  Afghanistan housed the terrorists that murderously attacked the US and the heart of the Western economy on September 11th, 2001.  As a result, we are trying to rebuild their nation and are supporting its infrastructure.  Is that fair enough? 

China is kicking our butts economically.  And, though the amount is declining sharply, we gave China 28.3 million dollars in foreign assistance in 2012.[iv]  That may not sound like a lot.  But, compare it with the amount of financial assistance the world has given the West in the last 100 years: exactly ZERO dollars.

Aiding our enemies and competitors is more than fair.  It is insane.  This insanity stems from a combination of multiculturalism and globalism.  The multiculturalism means that we don’t judge any cultures – including our Islamic enemies. The globalist part means we don’t take sides.  Saudi Arabia only aids the Palestinians, but we aid the Palestinians and the Israelis because we’re ‘global citizens.’  We support everyone on the globe equally.  Globalism means never taking sides.

The culturist foreign policy position is that we take care of ourselves first!  And, if we must send money or military overseas, we aid our friends, not our enemies.  That may not be fair, but it isn’t insane either!

OK.  I have a proposal meant to clarify the parameters of the possible:  Argentina drops the fees on us and we make Argentineans pay huge fees to enter the US.  We do this until all of the foreign aid we have ever given them is paid back.  And, if they refuse?  We’ll show them what normal nations - with the imbalance of power our nukes provides – have normally done. 

That seems fair to me!



[i] List of Countries by Foreign Aid Received, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_foreign_aid_received
[ii] The U.S. Gives the Most Aid to Countries that Hate It the Most, Vocative, http://www.vocativ.com/usa/us-politics/irony-alert-u-s-gives-aid-countries-hate-us/
[iii] West Bank and Gaza Strip, Global Humanitarian Assistance, http://www.globalhumanitarianassistance.org/countryprofile/palestineopt
[iv] Aiding and Abetting: Why are the United States and Japan still giving Tens of Millions of Dollars in Aid to China? Foreign Policy Magazine, July 12, 2013, http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/12/aiding-and-abetting/

Sunday, February 22, 2015

Culturist Lessons from Rio's Carnaval


I am in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil for carnaval - the biggest party in the world. Drums and costumes, imagination and dance, pervade the megalopolis.  Taking part in this celebration has provided me with some valuable culturist insights. 

Culturism is the science and art by which nations protect, promote their traditional majority cultures.  It is the opposite, therefore, of multiculturalism, where nations are to deny they have a majority culture and promote other cultures within their borders.

Carnaval is a great culturist tool.  The costumed drum and dance troupes, usually including over 3,000 people, are largely drawn from poor neighborhoods; this creates community cohesion.  Ultimately, people of all races and classes get involved.  In the end, this televised explosion of light, color and fun, unites all Brazilians by making them proud of their vibrant culture.

Art can help bind a nation.  When possible, culturism should be fun!! And, to be effective, it should invite wide participation.

Walking home from one of the massive carnaval-related events tonight, I stopped at a food cart.  A 30-something brown-skinned woman took dough and cut it way too slowly, then she put meat on it, wrapped it, and dropped it in a frying vat.  While waiting I spoke with a local man in Spanish. 

He probed, “The US is very capitalistic, eh?”  “Well,” I replied, “you couldn’t just set up a stand like this in the US.  You’d need a business license and the food server would need certificates.  We couldn’t be drinking beers on the street like this.”

We regulate street-level economic activity far more than other nations.  Allowing more sidewalk shops and street food vending in the US would give people easy access to self-employment.  This would make the transition from welfare to work much more feasible. 

My walk home from the carnaval street party took me between neighboring wealthy homes and ghettoes called ‘favelas.’  Favelas consist of improvised brick mountainside homes stacked on top of each other.  In America building homes means adhering to byzantine codes. The favela homes can be rented and sold. Loosening building codes could raise levels of home ownership.

Rio’s favelas are safe now, but they used to be ruled by brutal drug gangs.  These same drug gangs launder money through supporting carnaval.  The police and military battled these forces and won.  Brazil’s heavily armed police still have a heavy presence in the favelas.

Governments must forcefully combat bad people for good people to have a decent quality of life.  Sometimes this requires armored cars and heavy artillery.

These culturist proposals run against our Protestant-Enlightenment culture, from which well-built homes, food served in proper restaurants, and self-policing naturally stem.  But, as we import millions who value babies much more than education, whose culture is rife with gangs, as we increasingly embrace carnaval-style commercialized sensuality, Rio offers culturist tools with which to soften the downfall.

Saturday, December 13, 2014

Ferguson: The Culturist Road Not Taken

The riots subsequent to Michael Brown’s shooting were based on multicultural logic.  Multiculturalists know police arrest and shoot black Americans more than any other group.  But, as they hold that all cultures are wonderful and equal, they cannot attribute differing arrest records to culture. So, having no other basis upon which to explain disparities, multiculturalists conclude that differing arrest rates indicate that police and society are racist. 

President Obama publicized this narrative after Brown’s death.  Suppose the President instead acknowledged that the inner city black culture is broken.  What if he said, “Blacks killing blacks, failing to take education seriously, and family breakdown need to be halted.”  Blacks would have then had to look upon their educational, criminal, and economic disparities as sources of shame, rather than justifications for resentment.

Michael Brown would have made an exemplary platform for culturist analysis. We must confront Rap music’s anti-social messages.  In his rap recordings, Brown spoke about killing people and 'smoking weed since 9.’  This is pertinent because Brown had marijuana in his system when he died.  At the same time, Brown graduated from high school via a credit recovery program and enrolled in a vocational education program.[i]  Brown personified the impact of cultural choices.

Brown’s “father” could have highlight the breakdown of the black family. Michael Brown Sr. left the family when his son was 2 years old.  In 2012 a case was brought against him for not paying child support.[ii]  Michael, the son, wrote songs about his pain over his father’s lack of financial and emotional support.  Thus the son’s anger at being abandoned could have brought sympathetic attention to the connection between fatherlessness and crime in black America.

Being both black and President, Obama would have been the perfect person to lead this culturist discussion; he could highlight the fact that discussing cultural diversity is not racist.  And, as all Americans need to scrutinize their cultures relative to American standards, such a speech could have united all of us in a common mission of cultural elevation. Instead Obama chose to frame Brown’s death in racial terms and fuel black resentment.  I hope our next President has the stomach to launch discussions about culture, the achievement of communities, and the fate of nations. 



[i] Elgen, John, Michael Brown Spent Last Weeks Grappling with Problems and Promise, New York Times, 8/24/14, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/25/us/michael-brown-spent-last-weeks-grappling-with-lifes-mysteries.html?_r=0
[ii] Collins, Laura, Daily Mail, Who was the real Michael Brown, . . . 11/27/14, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2730153/A-kid-broken-home-beat-odds-to-college-A-rapper-sang-smoking-weed-feds-A-violent-robbery-suspect-caught-shocking-video-just-real-Michael-Brown.html

Thursday, December 11, 2014

Culturist Lakers' Heartbreak


Culturists, I am a bit pissed and heartbroken.  The basketball team I have loved all my life - the Los Angeles Lakers - have worn "I can't breathe" shirts.  They have taken a stand against law and order.

I can cut Kobe Bryant some slack, he took a lot of heat for refusing to join in bashing Zimmerman and lauding Trayvon. He always promotes patriotism at the Olympics. But, not every team wore "I can't breathe" shirts.  They did so under Kobe's leadership.

Perhaps I can just see them as trendy misguided youth.  But, it does take the mystique out of THE LAKERS to see them as just another group of half-wit leftist idiots, who happen to wear the greatest uniform of all sports.  And, if they are a group united against me politically . . . well, it is complicated.

www.culturism.us

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Culturism: The Culturist Review

In 2007 I, John K. Press, Ph.D., published the first edition of my book, ‘Culturism:  A Word, A Value, Our Future.’  In 2014, Mr. Scott Hampton published, ‘Culturism: The Real Reasons People Dislike African-Americans.’  Upon noticing Mr. Hampton’s book, I wondered how his work would add to, or undermine, the use of the terms ‘culturism’ and ‘culturist’ I had already established and promoted. 

I was glad to find that Hampton, like myself, utilizes the terms ‘culturism’ and ‘culturist’ to sidestep those who would call all criticism of any ethnic group ‘racist.’ Hampton is black.  This means that he, more effectively than I, (being white), can make the argument that criticizing black culture is not racist.  To bolster this claim, he distinguishes between ‘black-trash’ and ‘right-minded’ black people.  He uses the fact that many black people are law-abiding, productive citizens to prove that his attack on black-trash culture is culturist, not racist.

Hampton’s ‘Culturism’ provides an engaging analysis of black-trash pathology via anecdotes.  He skewers a mother who was indignant over a doctor mispronouncing her child’s ebonic name while showing no guilt over having birthed many children, who she could not support, by multiple men.  And, I was shocked to learn black-trash women inject Fix-a-Flat in their buttocks to make them bigger! Such peppered anthropological tidbits kept me glued to the page.   But, in the long run, what is of most value in Hampton’s book is his overall systematic – if impressionistic – analysis.

In the new Culturism we learn that the cause for educational and economic disparities between black-trash and others comes from “rejecting America’s language (bad grammar), educational system (bad grades, high school dropouts), laws (drug, violence), and familial customs (out-of-wedlock children).” (88) The author lists causes, such as horrible role models, short-term thinking, and peer-pressure.  He then attacks excuses black-trash often given for poor behavior: Racism and slavery; unequal schooling; poverty; lack of job prospects, etc.  Finally, he lists solutions: Cessation of the blame game; extracting detrimental aspects of black culture, and more. Overall, Hamilton provides a tight problem / solution organization.

Hampton, however, fails to make some policy connections. He documents that approximately 75% of black households contained a wife and husband in the 1950s. (172) And, while he mentions government assistance five times (by my accounting; there is no index), he never blames the ‘Great Society’ subsidizing of single motherhood, via welfare, for undermining the black family.  He also fails to identify the antagonism between culturism and the values-undermining nature of its opposite, multiculturalism.  His focus on anecdotes keeps him from identifying the systematic forces supporting and justifying black pathology. 

There is a sense in which Hampton’s book should not be called ‘culturism.’ My book’s chapters discuss culturism in history, philosophy, natural sciences, psychology and anthropology, as well as a range of culturist policies.  After page 44, Hampton only uses the words ‘culturism,’ and ‘culturist,’ once (171).  But, rather than focusing on culturist theory, his book provides a concrete example of culturist analysis and solution.  In fact, in some ways, Mr. Hampton’s eschewing academic analysis in favor of real examples makes it a stronger book than mine.


Because he is black, Mr. Hampton’s criticism of black-trash culture might be better received by black people than my book. Furthermore, his book highlights the fact that culturism actually empowers minorities more than does blaming all their ills on whites’ racism.  Hopefully, Mr. Hampton’s work can inspire all of us to frankly discuss the wider cultural pathologies weakening America as a whole.  ‘Culturism: The Real Reasons People Dislike African-Americans - And Race Has Nothing to do With It,’ compliments, rather than detracts from, my work.  It is a welcome addition to the culturist literature.

Saturday, November 22, 2014

Culturist Suicide

The following is a reprint from American Thinker: Please join the discussion there:

With Obama’s promised amnesty for illegal people, America has committed culturist suicide.  Culturism is the belief that a traditional majority culture has the right and duty to protect, promote, and promulgate itself.  This mission is now lost beyond hope.  And this is fatal to America, because cultural diversity is real and important.

Obama claims that his amnesty will impact only 5 million people.  How will they check that?  Who will check that?  Believe me, fraud will be rampant and we do not have the resources or will to check it.  And, this news will – as did Obama’s earlier promise not to deport children – create an enormous spike in illegals.  We no longer have a southern border.

As a culturist, I hold that America had a traditional majority culture that made it great.  Mexicans are not Americans.  They have a different language, holidays, and heroes. Multiculturalism claims we never had a core culture; the US is just as Islamic, Pilipino, etc., as it is Protestant European.  No.  We had a traditional majority culture, and the new immigrants are not of it.

Culturism believes in assimilation.  When minorities are pressured to assimilate, over time, they will.  But this means schools must push majority culture pride.  When large swaths of the nation are Latino, when multiculturalists push Spanish and Latino pride, we will assimilate to them, not the reverse; the majority culture will be replaced. 

Cultural history matters.  The U.S. and Mexico had a war over the U.S.’s southwestern territory.  Mexicans are extremely proud culturists.  Thus, “re-conquering the land” and “we didn’t cross the border; the border crossed us” sentiments will thrive.  Even if these ever-present sentiments don’t predominate during peacetime, they will undermine all attempts as assimilation.

So the cultural composition of America has been forever changed.  Does this matter?  Might the overwhelming of America’s traditional culture be not just a matter of aesthetics?  It matters, because cultural diversity is real.  Mexican culture – their high birth rates and low educational motivation – leads inexorably to third-world economic realities.  We will increasingly become a third-world nation.

Britain, Australia, and Europe must resist multiculturalism.  Practice culturism.  Teach pride in your heritage.  Cut off immigration from hostile and poor-performing cultures.  Maintain your traditional majority cultures.  America no longer exists.  In the mission of keeping Western civilization going, you’re now on your own.