Saturday, September 27, 2014
Monday, September 15, 2014
We need to shout it from the rooftops, we need to spread this phrase: SEAL WESTERN BORDERS AND GET OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST NOW!
Were it not for Muslims living in the West, ISIS’s surge in the Middle East would present no possible physical danger for us in the West. This is a fact. The only danger ISIS poses in western lands comes from domestic Muslim sympathizers. As such, we should continue to monitor especially suspicious Muslims in the West. But, with such monitoring in place, Middle Eastern civil wars have nothing to do with our domestic safety; western troops have no reason to be there.
Having open borders directly impacts our safety and solvency. Muslim immigration increases the potential for blowback from our meddling in the Middle East. Furthermore, allowing impoverished, uneducated people, with foreign (even antagonistic) values and languages, into our nations strains our economic solvency and national cultural integrity. To protect western nations, (and lives), we must stop immigration from third world nations and, especially, Muslim nations.
President Obama wants to arm the rebels fighting Syria’s government, bomb ISIS and defend Iraq’s government. The Middle East is violent and tribal, (cultural diversity is real), sending them weapons will not change this. Furthermore, the rebels fighting Syria’s government (alongside ISIS) are Muslim warriors. We need to understand that the West and the Islamic world are distinct and at odds. We have no business backing sides in their tribal conflicts or arming their warriors.
I am not saying if a nation backs a terrorist act in our lands we shouldn’t react. We should attack with the intent of inflicting pain and death sufficient to deter any such future attacks. But, after that mission, we must come home and seal our borders. There can be no doubt that this is the best strategy to deter and prevent future attacks on our soil. Likewise, there can be no doubt that the globalist-humanitarian position of fighting in the Middle East and keeping our borders open is much more dangerous for us.
We need adopt the culturist view that the geo-political divide in the world is between the West and the Muslim world. From this perspective, we have neither a globalist-humanitarian obligation to let Muslims immigrate to our continents, nor an obligation to back factions in their tribal wars; we only have an obligation to safeguard ourselves. To signal such a paradigm shift, and to protect the West, we must SEAL WESTERN BORDERS AND GET OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST NOW.
Monday, June 23, 2014
‘This Must Be The Place, a film by Paolo Sorrentino, shows how the shock of the holocaust infantilized Western culture and its citizens. As jihadis presents us with images that make the holocaust photos look tame, the West must again contend man’s dark side. Watching this film and ISIS videos can help the West grow up.
Sean Penn does a superb acting job as an aged 1980s rock star, Cheyenne, who has never changed his 80s look, even though he hasn’t performed for 20 years. Coming too late to his estranged father’s deathbed, Cheyenne takes up his newly departed father’s hunt for his Auschwitz tormenter. The gorgeous and poetic chase leads him through a beautifully, nostalgically, portrayed American landscapes and homes.
Cheyenne has not spoken to his father in 30 years. And at one point, he says, “not having had children has really screwed me up.” The NAZI he is hunting is also estranged from his son. And, a boy Cheyenne bonds with during his NAZI quest, appears to have lost his father in one of America’s Middle East wars. The absence of fathers is – to put it lightly – a theme.
And, now my editorial begins . . . It has always amazed me that the 1960s generation followed on the heels of the WW II generation. One generation stared down evil. The next tried to convince us that bad guys were only an illusion to be overcome by love. The hippies’ dream has led to our multicultural nightmare, wherein all cultures, no matter how NAZI-like, are considered idyllic and to be embraced with love and kindness.
Cheyenne didn’t speak to his father for 30 years because his father rejected his goth make-up. Though not in the film, I have tried to imagine this holocaust survivor staring at his 1980s son playing at evil. It would have stirred emotions and been hard to take seriously. As in punk, the fifteen-year-old goth would be trying to acknowledge the evil their hippie parents ignored. But punk and goth lyrics aimed at imagined suburban kid horrors.
My analysis gets vindicated when Cheyenne meets a tough-looking, heavily-tattooed man in a bar, who is really just a nice guy. Cheyenne asks drolly, when informed that his new acquaintance is a tattoo artist, “Have you noticed how nobody works anymore and everybody does something artistic?” Yes. I have noticed both grown children playing tough guys littering western cities and the avoidance of responsibility.
Both Cheyenne’s father and the caught NAZI, lament having their “lightheartedness” and childhoods stolen from them by WW II. Now in a Freudian transfer, our multicultural generation just wants happy depictions of all cultures. In our post-holocaust world only being a victim has merit. In such a world, being dominant and macho can only be a crime. It is a formula for emasculation. An absence of manliness.
After confronting his father’s NAZI guard Cheyenne grows up. Today, a new generation is seeing evil first-hand in jihadis’ tiny youtube videos. Perhaps the jihadis’ cruelty will end the West’s childlike multicultural fantasy.
Sunday, June 22, 2014
There has been a surge of ISIS terror in Iraq. We are told that this group’s killing is creating a humanitarian disaster; that we must intervene. But this is not a humanitarian disaster, it is an Islamic disaster. The West is not Islamic. We need to distance ourselves from this action, not get involved.
From a humanitarian perspective, western nations must stop
the blood shed in Iraq because generic people – global citizens - are in need
of protection. The humanitarian, globalist, multicultural vision, sees all
people as essentially the same and on the same side geopolitically. Culturism
believes in a ‘clash of civilization’ model. In this clash, western nations are not on the same side as
Islamic nations - we are antagonists. Rather than a ‘humanitarian’ obligation
to aid or arm our enemies, we have a culturist obligation to protect ourselves.
To keep the West out of the Iraqi conflict, we need to
replace ‘humanitarianism,’ with culturism. When people declare themselves globalists, tell them that
you are NOT a ‘global citizen;’ you’re a western culturist; a citizen of your
western nations, part of the family of nations that believes in freedom of
speech, the relative separation of church and state, democracy, individualism,
and women’s rights. Recognizing
that we belong to the western side is the first step to dismantling globalists’
‘humanitarian’ calls to arm Muslims.
Culturism will also help us avoid having to take in refugees
from the Iraqi conflict. Multiculturalists tell us that western nations are
culturally neutral space. Iraqi
Muslims are just as western as anyone else. This is not true. Iraqis come from the Muslim world. The West is not a part of that sphere.
Iraqis speak a non-western language, have non-western heroes, and hold values
antithetical to ours. If Muslim refugees need asylum, let an Islamic nation take
This ‘humanitarian’ crisis actually provides us with a
golden opportunity to defeat multiculturalism. When multiculturalists tell us to ‘celebrate diversity;’ we
can point to ISIS’s terrorist campaign. Diversity includes cultures that
celebrate beheading. Cultural
diversity includes cultures that honor beheading people. We don’t want to celebrate that. So we are not ‘celebrating diversity,’
we are honoring our own values. As
we use the example of ISIS to wake people up from the multiculturalists’
attempt to blind us to the importance, the real extent, of cultural diversity.
In fact, the ISIS crisis even gives us an opportunity to
defeat the globalist ideal of ‘humanitarianism’ and ‘human rights,’ because it
demonstrates that these are western concepts. If the West falls, Iraq will not
champion ‘human rights’ in the world.
They are fighting for Islamic domination. China doesn’t believe in ‘human rights,’ free speech,
democracy and such. If we want to protect so-called ‘humanitarian’ virtues, we must realize that they are only
western virtues and protect the West.
Giving Muslims funding or letting them into our country undermines our
ability to defend our western rights-based values.
To keep us from sending aid to Iraq or allowing refugees
into the West, we must replace the globalist, multiculturalist, humanitarian
ideologies with a culturist one The barbarian behavior of ISIS gives us an
opportunity to spread culturist doctrine.
You can do so by using the words ‘culturism’ and ‘culturist’ in your
conversations. Take action; do so
Friday, June 13, 2014
Thomas Mann’s The Magic Mountain is a classic of Western Literature. Starting just before World War I, it follows a middle class bourgeois, Hans Castrop, to a tuberculosis sanitarium on the top of a mountain (hence the title). His intended 3 – week visit to his cousin, turns into a seven-year internal odyssey among the sick.
The Magic Mountain is written as a bildungsroman – a genre wherein the main character develops his character via experience and help from guides. In this version, an advocate of Enlightenment values Settembrini and the Nietzscheian Naphta fight over Hans’ soul.
Settembrini is working on an Encyclopedia of suffering in order to help expunge suffering from the world; Naphta dreams of returning to Middle Ages values in which people knew their place and accepted suffering and shortcomings as a part of life. Settembrini’s dreams are based on science and progress; Naphta’s require and celebrate a bit of violence and oppression to keep man in order.
And this battle for Hans’ soul reflects that battles over the Weimar Republic that Mann faced as he wrote the Magic Mountain. Many bought Naphta’s appeal to save Germany via order during the inter-war period; they killed communists by the 100s and spawned the Third Reich. In turn, the Weimar Republic called for calm and appealed to Settembrini’s enlightened ‘republican’ (small r) values.
Hans’ never really buys either proponents’ position. He liked Settembrini’s Enlightenment ideals, but found them shallow and dull. And though he admires how easily Naphta destroys Settembrini in arguments, he understands that Naphta is a misanthropist and a monster.
In an exciting climax, the two intellectuals agree to a duel. As a pacifist, Settembrini fires into the air. Naphta then calls him a coward, and commits suicide. The intellectual battles over, Hans languishes, nowhere in thought, far removed from society, on top of that mountain.
Eventually, Hans leaves this sanitarium, to go back to the real world. He leaves arid thought to engage in life’s day – to –day struggles. Ironically, as World War I is on, he actually returns to the front lines of a thoughtless battle. We hope - as the book is a bildungsromans – that he is improved. Perhaps with irony, the narrator tells us that he hopes love will bloom from this carnage.
As a culturist, I understand the pull between the rational and the irrational. In Mann’s sanitarium, wherein bourgeois slowly rot, in the face of Islamic aggression and ghetto culture, we do nothing out of fear of being called ‘racist.’ I hope the term ‘culturist’ can allow us to have reasonable discussions about negative impacts of cultural diversity, sans the ‘r’ word.
But, as a culturist, I study cultural dynamics. I know that dry reasoned debates do not wake people up as much as the English Defense League smashing the offices of pro-immigration politicians offices would. So I too am torn between Settembrini’s placid debate and the evil attraction of Naphta.
The political correctness police should understand that by using Settembrini’s “universal” (not) “global” (not) Enlightenment values to stifle any sense of western pride, they are preparing the way for a backlash of Naphta’s irrational violence. As such, we culturists need to safely develop national pride and discussions of cultural diversity. Otherwise, as with Hans, we will have no option but to cower on a mountain top or join in mass carnage.
Sunday, June 1, 2014
I am struck by a paradox:
In the National Basketball Association (NBA) we laud the competitive grit of black players. Seven points down with two minutes left? Blacks don’t give up! Down 3 to 1 in the series? Believe! FIGHT! You can do it!!!
The paradox comes from comparing the Blacks’ never-say-die fighting attitude in the NBA to their constant victimization in social depictions. High crime rates? Blacks are victims of poverty. Poor school performance? Blacks are victims of hidden racism. Just hints of name-calling, apparently, causes black men to fold off the court.
To illustrate the paradox, in 1950, Nat “Sweetwater” Clifton became the first black person to sign an NBA contract. You never hear black people say, “We cannot compete in basketball because we were kept out of the NBA until 1949.” But, we hear, “We can’t compete because we were kept out of white schools until the early 1960s,” all the time.
Instead of toughness, on and off the court we get constant cry-baby reactions from blacks. “Waaaa!” They cry, “He used the N-Word! Waaaa! And we reply, “Oh. We feel your terrible pain widdle one. Do you want the government to punish the bad man who hurt your widdle feelings? Can you stop crying now? Is the ouchy better?”
Instead our reaction should be, “Shut the F up and grow a pair!!!! As on the court, don’t dwell on the unfair call from the last play. Stop crying get back to competing!!!! MAN UP!!! And, while we’re on the subject blacks commit insane amounts of crime, parent irresponsibly, suck at school, and rely on the government to feed them way.
The whining reply to the prior statements, “Mommy he was waaaaycist.” It is a sad little trick. The above facts are not racist, they are culturist. They’re not statements about your genes; they refer to how much of your culture sucks off the court. These are not irrational bad calls, they are totally accurate depictions in the weakness of your off-court game.
So man-up black man! The Asians are dunking on you in the game of life. Hell, even the Latinos are stealing your balls! Don’t cry because I mentioned it. Drink some testosterone, put on your big boy pants and start playing off the court with as much grit as you do on it.
John Kenneth Press, Ph.D.
Thursday, May 15, 2014
Ali G. is the proto-typical 'whigger,' (a white pretending he is an inner-city black gangster
type): tough and swaggering. He is also a comic creation of Sacha Baron Cohen. The
comedian mocks society by playing this part to a tee and enjoying the fact that no one is
brave enough to call him on it. But, one great culturist did: the late American editorialist,
The heroic culturist moment starts when Ali G asks Rooney, "Does you think the media has changed since you first got in it?" Rooney corrects him, "'Does you think the media has changed?' Do you think the media has changed?" Rooney confronts this Ebonics bastardization of our language head-on, insisting on adherence to basic rules of English grammar.
When Ali G. attributes the linguistic error to a difference between the British and American vernacular, Rooney snidely refutes his attempt at relativism saying, "The English language is very clear. I have fifty books on the English language if you'd like to borrow one." Rather than pander or ignore Ali G's destruction of language, Rooney refutes and rejects it, saying, "I can't waste my time."
This may seem like a small act of defiance. But, in fact, it conforms well to the 'broken windows' technique that drastically reduced crime in New York City. That is, by not allowing small crimes to go unpunished, by locking people up for small infractions, you dissuade people from even contemplating undertaking larger crimes. Every time we fail to confront whigger gangsters' small improprieties, we enable the downfall of western civilization.
Proving the aged American culturist was over the target when he confronted Ali G., the comic accused Rooney of "racialism." We all know that any assertion of linguistic or behavior standards is met with this defiant, but empty, accusation. Having none of it, Rooney informed him that the word is "racist;" and promptly left. This confrontation revealed Ali G. as the foolish, overgrown infant that he is – small and pouty.
Liberalism's cowardly failure to judge a person for poor English, being degenerate, or even criminality, emboldens anti-social behavior. Our governments need to stop supporting people who have babies with no means of paying for them; our schools must fail those who can only write in Ebonics. We must affirm that we have a language with standards and that culture matters.
But, before our institutions will take up the torch – as uncomfortable as it is – culturists must individually emulate Rooney's confrontation of Ali G. If a person has ghetto English, confront them on it. Otherwise, you must know that Baron Cohen's joke is on you.
Sunday, May 11, 2014
This week America's First Lady, Michelle Obama, joined the ever growing #Bring Back Our Girls campaign that aims to rescue kidnapped Nigerian girls. The culturist instinct is to say 'NO!' to intervention in any part of the world that isn't western. But, this is somewhat dependent on to whom the 'our' in #Bring Back Our Girls refers.
The girls being kidnapped are largely Christian. Their abductors are Muslims. If the pronoun 'our' in #Bring Back Our Girls refers to saving 'our' Christian girls from Muslims, I might have some enthusiasm for this cause. If Mrs Obama wishes to go on a crusade saving Christians worldwide, I would have some sympathy – maybe even enthusiasm – for the project. But, since the West has eschewed any culturist Clash of Civilizationsconsciousness for decades, I doubt that is what the pronoun stands for.
Rather, I would assume that the 'our' refers to the global 'our' of the "we are the world," "all people are on the same side" variety. The appeal is to a globalist 'our' vision wherein we are responsible for all people around the world with no reference to culture or opposition to us. This is the thinking that got us to create a Muslim stronghold in Kosovo, has us sending billions to Afghanistan and Iraq, and facilitates mass Muslim immigration into the West.
We are not all the same. We are not all on the same side. We have our 'ours,' they have theirs. The little jihadis-in-training Palestinian boys are not 'our' boys. They are 'our' enemies. I don't want to give scholarships to deserving Saudi Arabian students. The Saudis support terrorism and the destruction of the West. I want to help our children, but not my enemy's children. This is basic culturist logic.
Even if the 'our' in #Bring Back Our Girls refers to the Nigerian girls as 'ours' because they are Christians, I am dubious about saving them. Nigeria is not a core western nation. If we want to save 'our' girls I suggest we start by pursuing and severely prosecuting Muslim 'grooming' gangs who target British girls for gang rape and prostitution. Britain is a core western nation. Rescuing grooming gang victims would keep our money in the West, and promote culturist thinking at home.John K. Press, Ph.D. Namseoul University www.culturism.us
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
One evening recently, my literature group dove into Seeds, by Sherwood Anderson. This short story explores the Freudian, sexual dynamics within a young woman. Largely raised without a father figure, she craves sex, and yet, simultaneously, is entirely repelled by it. At the end of this article, I will discuss how such art can add to vital culturist discussions.
This young woman who is repelled by sex exudes it in other ways; she routinely keeps the door ajar when showering and lays around the boarding house in seductive poses. Near the end of Anderson’s story, her landlady tries to evict her for this inappropriate behavior.
Facing her imminent eviction, the young woman runs into the room of a poor painter who has a facility for words. Among the men, this painting intellectual had taken the least notice of her. While asking the painter to "take her," she drops to her knees. When the trailing landlady enters the room and sees this, she pulls the wanton woman up to her feet and both women begin berating the painter. This reaction seems counter-intuitive, until we consider Seeds as a Freudian analogy.
Positing Freudian symbolism, I told my literature group that the sex-obsessed woman is the id: that is, the primal sexual drive postulated by Freud; the landlady represents the super-ego (that is, what society demands of you – in this instance keeping your sexual urges contained); and the man, the painter, represents the ego. Our egos are the attempt to balance the two opposed forces, to satisfy our sexual drive within the limits of social propriety.
In the literature group I defended Anderson's main supposition, the idea that unresolved issues from our family upbringing impact who we love and what we do for a living. I know that, in my own case, I have followed in my father's profession of being a professor, partially out of competition. And, my battle for acknowledgement – this very article in fact – in some ways comes from an urge to be acknowledged, to make up for love I lacked as a child.
But, then I took a leap of faith – I postulated that Koreans (I live and work in Korea) have fewer subconscious traumas than westerners. Koreans feel less individual strife as they do what their families and nation tell them to do. Being collectivists, they live with a much stronger sense of super-ego and very repressed ids. My friends disagreed: Korea is very strict around virginity prior to marriage, yes, but it has – as a result – more prostitution than other nations. I cannot confirm that assertion. But, this brings up the idea of psychoanalyzing nations.
Nations have different psychologies. The id has been let loose in the West. We have forgotten that sexual force needs to be controlled and constrained by the super-ego. And this is disastrous. If our young women are all pregnant by seventeen with no sense of social responsibility, their generation will not get educated. This dismissal of the super-ego, calling society's restraints 'artificial,' will lead to the West's end as a first-world civilization. On the other hand, Korea is not making babies. It is turning into a first-world ghost town. Balance is required.
In Anderson's Seeds, the painter offers to marry the sexually driven woman. He sees this as a way to resolve her issues. But, he then realizes that she will still be a mess of untidy subconscious drives (he realizes this because he sees such never-ending drives in himself and realizes marriage will not solve them). He thinks undertaking a marriage in the hopes of quieting the subconscious is dishonest and shallow. Perhaps fearing he'll lose inspiration for his paintings, he abandons the young woman.
I agree that we will never stop the battle between rationality and irrationality – individually or collectively. But, I disagree that this means we throw out institutions such as marriage. In fact, I take our inability to resolve subconscious struggles to mean we can keep marriage without fear of mental sterility. Thus, in fighting over Anderson's short story, my literature group hit upon some fundamental realizations about our selves individually and our society.
We need to debate the balance (or imbalance) of the id and super-ego in our culture. We need to understand the impact of our considering limitations 'artificial' and 'inauthentic.' Literature groups and engrossing psychoanalytic stories such as Anderson's Seeds can provide a great springboard for such discussions. That's why, as a culturist, I implore you to start a literature group, read Anderson's Seeds, and disseminate cultural psychoanalysis.