Discussions concerning the academic, political, and aesthetic aspects of culturism
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Culturism and Racism
11 comments:
Anonymous
said...
It's not that easy though. Native Americans were once prohibited from practicing their celebrations, wearing their traditional clothing, playing their music, speaking their language, and learning their history in the name of "cultural integration." The problem is, it was obvious to all and themselves that they were not the descendants of Europeans, and that the celebrations, music, attire, and history they were being forced to learn were all the alien cultural practices of the descendants of Europeans. Cultures are the results of histories and to adopt a culture is to adopt a history as your own. Race is the result of history as well, it records the migrations of people around the Earth from the original migration out of Africa. In your race you wear the history of you ancestors on your sleeve, as it were. And so there is a cognitive dissonance that results when you are aware that you are practicing cultural practices that are alien and not your own. That is why integration is such a failure wherever it has been tried and always ends up with an alienated minority that can not feel authentically part of the dominant clture.
We must strive to totally look past race. As for adopting culture, it is easier for some cultures than for others.
Many scholars consider "white" people a new idea. Italian, German, Polish and Jewish (for example) immigrants' descendants have become "white." Yes, lingering characteristics in employment and education have been identified. But, the differences have been greatly minimized. These folks consider themselves Americans first and when they normally talk about the history of their country they are referring to George Washington.
The above examples are European. Institutions that prohibit assimilation, cultures that are antagonistic to the West, large concentrations of one non-American minority retard this assimilation. For these reasons Europeans and Koreans make better prospects for assimilation than Mexicans in California or Muslims that go to Saudi funded mosques.
This has nothing to do with race. Very interestingly, black people have traditionally followed the "white" mold in considering America their country and its history theirs. After 400 years here, they should. Multiculturalism has tried to get them to instead identify with a continent, Africa, to which few have been. Pre-multiculti left, even with discrimination, black Americans were very American. Even with decades of mmulti indoctrination, it is still the case. Blacks are largely Christian social conservatives, though economic liberals: Very American.
It is not, Empedocles, a matter of whether or not diversity will exist in America. It always will. That has some beauty to it. It is a matter of whether we, as public policy and common values, emphasize our differences or unity. Culturism says it is better to emphasize our unity and to do so via affirming our Western heritage.
Finally, racism, I hopefully need not argue too strenuously, is a great evil. Racist sentiment can only divide us. It offers no positive solutions and can lead to actual carnage. Besides, it is un-American to attribute success to received rather than earned merit. Racism sucks on many levels. It is cultural poison. That is why culturists hate it.
"black people have traditionally followed the "white" mold in considering America their country and its history theirs."
Depends on what you mean by "its history." African-Americans are "culturalist" in the sense that they identify with their history, are proud of its triumphs and mourn the tragedies, but they see this as a different history from the white experience in America. For example:
"Thus several years ago, the New Orleans school board decided to eliminate from the city’s schools the names of anyone who owned slaves or "did not believe in equal opportunity for all." The intent, of course, was to remove the names of Confederate generals and statesmen from schools in which about 90 percent of the students are black. But Carl Ganon pushed to change the name of George Washington Elementary School as well, asserting that: "to African-Americans, George Washington has about as much meaning as David Duke."
More recently, a committee of the New Jersey Senate killed a proposal to celebrate Washington by hanging his portrait in every one of the state’s 600 public-school districts. Curtis Ballard, a historian at Oklahoma’s Langston University opposed the bill, telling USA Today that "America was not a pretty place for black people when George Washington was present. Our people were still in slavery. This country doesn’t have much to celebrate when it comes to 200 years ago and its treatment of people."
More recently yet, at a congressional hearing on President George W. Bush’s faith-based initiatives, Rep. Melvin Watt, a North Carolina Democrat, launched a vitriolic attack on Washington in response to a proposal by both Democrats and Republicans to include in the record Washington’s "Letter to the Newport Hebrew Congregation," a correspondence that welcomed American Jews as equal citizens in the new republic.
Rep. Watt mocked the first president. "For us to be applauding the statements discussing bigotry that were written by a person who owned slaves is a little bit more than I can, without churning stomach, be able to tolerate," said Watt. "I’m sure he did magnificent things and wonderful things. But we should also keep in context the reality that there is substantial pain still among many people in our country about this chapter in our history." http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/owens/02/washington.html
The question is why, as you put it, have "Italian, German, Polish and Jewish (for example) immigrants' descendants have become "white" ... These folks consider themselves Americans first and when they normally talk about the history of their country they are referring to George Washington." Yet African-Americans who have been in America longer than most European immigrants, when they normally talk about the history of their country they are NOT referring to George Washington. This tension between being pressured on the one hand by the political push for integration to adopt the “mainstream” or “white” history and the resulting values, politics, and identity, and on the other hand by the obvious fact that “our” history results in a very different lessons, values, and political beliefs-- leads to the feeling of alienation that minorities universally express, and finds its way into different political beliefs, social mores, artistic expressions, etc. The cognitive dissonance between the pressure to adopt an alien history, and the impossibility of doing so when ones race and its attendant history is ever apparent, results in the widespread alienation and its attendant social ills. The facts of slavery and Jim Crow can not and should not ever be dropped for the adoption of an alien history, but since integration requires the adopting of another’s history, integration is impossible. No matter what efforts are made on behalf on integration, it could never result in people with distinct histories--African-Americans and European-Americans, or white Australians and aboriginal Australians, or the British and Middle-Eastern immigrants, or the Tamils and the Sinhalese in Sri Lanka--possessing the same histories. As Malcolm X said "we didn't land on Plymouth Rock, Plymouth Rock landed on us." However, the failure of integration is not a moral failing on anybody’s part, it is the result of the adoption of a faulty theory of identity giving rise to false beliefs, and was bound to fail for this reason.
Given the fact that history is essential to ones identity, one of the worst things you can do to a person is force them to abandon ones true history/identity and adopt a false history and resulting values of another race, ethnic group, or religion whose history results in very different values, and cultural identity (as was attempted with Native Americans). This is, “identitycide” and is one of the worst forms of racism imaginable. And yet identitycide is the basis of America’s educational system, and much of the alienation that plagues African-Americans and other racial groups. Almost inevitably, this very alienation itself becomes part of cultural identity and gets passed down through generations.
Empedocles, I disagree with your facts, interpretations and conclusions. But I appreciate you thoughts and hope you'd reconsider.
The hatred of American history you cite is all recent. There has been a revolution that rode on the backs of the black power movement, the Frankfurt school, Margaret Mead and the hippie generation that goes under the name of multiculturalism. Yes, since we've had 40 years of multiculturalism and race pride assertion, love for America has taken a beating.
In the 1970s the book, "the Rise of the Unmeltable Ethnics" noted that the "black power" motif had spread to ethnic whites. But that was a new phenomenon. These traits are fungible. The basic Western civ taught pre-1960s, showed the West as the march of progress from Greeks on that included an ability for the individual to fashion themselves. This creed has deeper roots than the race pride motif now prevalent. Listen to Martin Luther King's speeches for details. He is citing Jefferson and that tradition up and down the block.
Anybody who compares Washington to David Duke has been brainwashed. It sounds like an SLA chant.
Again, diversity will always exist in America. But the idea that holding to the American creed of equal opportunity and democracy is "alien" and impossible to embrace due to one's race is inane. Our national motto, the creed of Croveceur, the Enlightenment and history run contrary to the racial / cultural essentialism you posit. If one's "true" identity is fixed by history and racial categories, democracy, social mobility and individualism are doomed. Western man has evolved since base tribalism. Your either / or proposition has no fluidity in it. I do not dig it.
As with the school naming incidents, the alienation you speak of is a symptom of multiculturalism. It tells people that they are irredeemably separate and antagonistic to the society in which they live in. We should, instead, all see ourselves as crusaders on the cutting edge of the West's experiment in democracy and self-governance. That links folks to the society. It does not demand conformity. It does not link one to their birth as your "true" group identity form does. It allows choice. Choice is very important.
Again, some cultures have a worse time of this than others. The West finds its roots in Jerusalem and Athens. Again, if you are muslim and believe in theocratic dogma should be imposed, it will be hard for you to assimilate at all. That is why we should be culturist, as Saudi Arabia is, in our immigration policies. But few cultures have such antithetical ideals.
One last point. This "true identity" concept negates progress and is based on anthropological mistakes. Most of the wonderful old cultures are horrific according to Western standards. Life was brutal, short and nasty before civilization and the West lead the way out. If we call the West and progress "white," as black radicals have done, it not only creates alienation that leads to nihilism, it send people back to their uncivilized natural violent behavior. We need progress. When the West dies we'll miss rights. Take up the mantle and create a brave new world from the application of your potential with me. That is the Enlightenment cry.
Thanks so much for the discussion. I wish others were reading it. I think it is important. John
I like your analysis John. The idea that if one is of a black race, then they are permanently incapable of assimilation within a culture is disturbing. This is racism if nothing else. In Australia, the aboriginal community that has most difficulty with integration are the ones that cling to an ideal of their culture of the past which bears no resemblance to their current lifestyle/situation. There is endless talk of cultural identity, the threat of losing indigenous languages and traditions. It is these notions that hinder and hold back the aboriginals from becoming part of the mainstream society. In contrast, other aboriginals that have cast off their "aboriginality" have integrated quite successfully into Australian mainstream society. The aboriginal communities that are either incapable or unwilling to cast off their heritage are doomed to exist in limbo, a sub- community within an mainstream society. The aboriginals who live in reservations live in dire poverty and are plagued with poverty, poor health, poor nutrition, alcoholism, unemployment child abuse, domestic violence. And worse, they blame it all on the western society that came to dominate their land. There is no lack of examples of communities that exist on the fringe who take no responsibility for their dire straits and blame other cultures for their demise. The Palestinians for example.
I thought that culturism was an effort to have people identify with their history/cultural traditions. If so, how come when African-Americans practice culturism they are accused of being "brainwashed"? Do you expect African-Americans to pretend that they landed at Plymouth Rock, or Ellis Island, or pretend that the horrors of slavery never existed, or that Jim Crow never existed? When these horrors are part of your history instead of the nice story of the Pilgrims, the Founding Fathers, the pioneers, etc., you are inevitably going to feel alienation. I think that the idea that we will all see the pilgrims, George Washington, etc., as "our" history is impossible simply because it is false. You argue that the alienation felt by African-Americans and other minorities is the result of their being brainwashed by multiculturalism. I think that you have this backwards and that multiculturalism is the result of the alienation, not the other way around.
Just a couple of corrections: I don't believe that equal opportunity and democracy is "alien" and impossible to embrace due to one's race.
I don't believe in racial / cultural essentialism. You're the one who said "I condemn Muslim presence in America because we are essentially different."
Despite these differences, I think we agree on much more then we disagree.
Empedocles, I wonder when African Americans turn their backs on education, if they are identifying with their cultural heritage of the noble African savage?
So good to get your perspective. I know too little about the Aboriginals. But the situation sounds parallel. The difference is, again, attitude. Those who join mainstream society thrive. Those who take the "noble savage" strong group identity, all allegiance to the West is suicide route end up very sad.
The proof is somewhat in the pudding. Apparently they are allowed to hunt and can even use modern technology. Am I right? If their aboriginal ways were so fantastic, they could purely avoid electricity and be quasi-nomads. But that route will not do. The truth is Native American culture was quite violent and superstitious.
The bad anthropology of multiculturalism leads to sad results with our "aboriginals" too. The opposition to modern life leads to similar reservations. In black culture, education is called "acting white" and being for "the man." This failure to look forward makes life sad and oppositional. Better take pride in what "your people" have contributed to the modern western world. It is waaaaay healthier.
The extremes of multiculturalism hurt minorities. They chop off fluidity of identity. They can divide us. They undermine our ability to teach values based on positive contributions to western freedoms. Culturism allows for cultural exploration, but, at the end of the day, gives you and all of us positive options.
I know that we agree on a lot because you have taken the words right out of my mouth many times. But I think you misunderstand culturism. It is the opposite of multiculturalism. Check www.culturism.us for details.
The reason those who are oppositional to the West are delusional is because, despite rights violations I'll discuss below, western civilization has been a HUGE BOON to all of us benefactors. Life pre-west was violent, hierarchical and superstitious. Poor people in the West mostly have homes, running water and electricity. Before the West nearly everyone starved. To think Western civilization is the reason for your problems is to be delusional.
Yes, slavery happened. But the West is not unique for having slavery. We are unique for stopping it. The slavery, BTW, of North America was very mild compared to Islamic slavery and Latin American slavery. Indigenous African slavery is under explored. Native American slavery was brutal. The West, particularly protestant nations used Enlightenment ideals to get us past that.
Can black people identify with the progress of America? Black people have contributed so much to America, including its achievement of racial justice, that they should be proud. Look, I'm genetically Jewish. Western civ has poured loads of crap on Jews. Still, I am proud to be called a westerner. Socrates is my hero. Washington and Voltaire and Locke and Bentham and William James and even Jesus. . . are my heroes. I love western civilization.
The alternative is what Lex pointed out for aboriginals. Sad indeed. I hope black people look back on their role in creating America with lots and lots of pride. From Crispus Attucks to MLK, black people have contributed heaps. This does not mean, we do not tell about slavery or Jim Crow. But we must put it in context and show that it has been a long struggle to overcome that blacks have really helped in. AND, blacks have not only suffered in America. Many, many, many have always prospered and still do.
I am glad to hear you do not believe in the essentialism that makes your parents' past or race your destiny. I would hope that all wish to be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. I hope that your profession, philosophy and dreams define you as much as your ties to "your people" (whomever they may be).
Now to the final point . . . Yes, I see the Islamic culture as fundamentally at odds with the West. Beyond my opinion, this has been historically true. That said, the vast majority of muslims in the West will lead uneventful lives. But a small vocal minority can cause major damage. Terrorists and pressure groups use multiculturalism to erase our history and our ability to defend ourselves. We (meaning the West) are under no universal obligation to allow indiscriminate immigration.
Culturism takes culture seriously. Some cultural heritages are, again, harder to meld with Western ways than others. I stress individualism, but know that culture has an impact. Here are a litany of examples.
Jews have had a profound leftist impact on the West. THat is not genetic, it is cultural. Still, terrorism and the destruction of the West and imposing theology are not part of the equation. Mexican culture has a historic antipathy towards America's control of the Southwest. This is best combated by telling the truth about culture and the West, by encouraging a rational and individualistic approach to life and history. We in the West must push our side or lose it. We must understand cultural dynamics. Koreans work hard and have no historic beef with us and never threaten to undermine our values. They make great immigrants - if you're looking for immigrants. Again, you want to make them realize ASAP, that the kids are Americans and should identify with it. They'll still kick butt in school for a couple of generations due to residual cultural impact.
Look at culture realistically. That is part of culturism. But if you are going to tie everyones' identity to the glories of their separate culture, you make folks oppositional to progress. In the case of blacks, Mexicans and Islam you can actually foster hatred towards the West. In the case of blacks, since they have nowhere else to go, it just undercuts achievement. In the case of Mexicans, it could cause secession and undermines our ability to talk about achievement oriented values. In the case of Islam it encourages terrorism. In the case of Koreans, it creates minor alienation.
In all cases, it is better to teach people that we are all Americans and contributing to the realizations and progress the West has fought for with bitter struggle. It unites us. It teaches us to protect and appreciate ourselves. It allows us to teach progressive values. The only downside is that it teaches that some cultures are a bit backwards. Guess what?? From a western standpoint, THEY ARE!!! Lots of babies and no education is a western no - no. It is fine in other nations. But here, we have a culture to teach. It is required for us to sustain rights, democracy, freedom of speech and progressive values for ourselves.
You are so into it, so darned sweet about life, and embrace all people.
So how why can you relate to yeagley, he is so racists and anti-liberal, anti-Indian, anti-female and very, very, very anti-Black, though he claims he loves the Jewish People, and of course ann coulter! He also claims the White Anglo Protestants are the saviors of American, had no help from the Natives.......won't give the Natives any credit, though they saved his white ancestors from starvation their first winter. The rest is history!!!!
He won't allow the true Indian History to be told on his supposidly Indian forum, in fact no Indians are allowed to post! The reason being, they have constuctive critism.
I am amazed at your interest in this racist, yeagley! You sound too good to be true, though I feel you are very sincere! Its so good to know there are real people like you out there.
Anonymous, I haven't seen any replies from Yeagley. From what you say, perhaps I embraced him too quickly. I thought he stood for some of the points of view you are advocating.
To be sure I am a big fan of Protestantism - though not one myself. I also think that Native American culture had many problems we should not romanticize. Than again, most traditional cultures have serious problems we should not overly romanticize. But, yes, the presence of Native Americans, the presence of the West, the freedom from civilization the Native Americans represented, the presence of difference itself and the escape Native Americans offered, helped us create a free culture.
Thanks for the comment, Culturist John
PS If you see a response from yeagley to me, please let me know.
11 comments:
It's not that easy though. Native Americans were once prohibited from practicing their celebrations, wearing their traditional clothing, playing their music, speaking their language, and learning their history in the name of "cultural integration." The problem is, it was obvious to all and themselves that they were not the descendants of Europeans, and that the celebrations, music, attire, and history they were being forced to learn were all the alien cultural practices of the descendants of Europeans. Cultures are the results of histories and to adopt a culture is to adopt a history as your own. Race is the result of history as well, it records the migrations of people around the Earth from the original migration out of Africa. In your race you wear the history of you ancestors on your sleeve, as it were. And so there is a cognitive dissonance that results when you are aware that you are practicing cultural practices that are alien and not your own. That is why integration is such a failure wherever it has been tried and always ends up with an alienated minority that can not feel authentically part of the dominant clture.
We must strive to totally look past race. As for adopting culture, it is easier for some cultures than for others.
Many scholars consider "white" people a new idea. Italian, German, Polish and Jewish (for example) immigrants' descendants have become "white." Yes, lingering characteristics in employment and education have been identified. But, the differences have been greatly minimized. These folks consider themselves Americans first and when they normally talk about the history of their country they are referring to George Washington.
The above examples are European. Institutions that prohibit assimilation, cultures that are antagonistic to the West, large concentrations of one non-American minority retard this assimilation. For these reasons Europeans and Koreans make better prospects for assimilation than Mexicans in California or Muslims that go to Saudi funded mosques.
This has nothing to do with race. Very interestingly, black people have traditionally followed the "white" mold in considering America their country and its history theirs. After 400 years here, they should. Multiculturalism has tried to get them to instead identify with a continent, Africa, to which few have been. Pre-multiculti left, even with discrimination, black Americans were very American. Even with decades of mmulti indoctrination, it is still the case. Blacks are largely Christian social conservatives, though economic liberals: Very American.
It is not, Empedocles, a matter of whether or not diversity will exist in America. It always will. That has some beauty to it. It is a matter of whether we, as public policy and common values, emphasize our differences or unity. Culturism says it is better to emphasize our unity and to do so via affirming our Western heritage.
Finally, racism, I hopefully need not argue too strenuously, is a great evil. Racist sentiment can only divide us. It offers no positive solutions and can lead to actual carnage. Besides, it is un-American to attribute success to received rather than earned merit. Racism sucks on many levels. It is cultural poison. That is why culturists hate it.
"black people have traditionally followed the "white" mold in considering America their country and its history theirs."
Depends on what you mean by "its history." African-Americans are "culturalist" in the sense that they identify with their history, are proud of its triumphs and mourn the tragedies, but they see this as a different history from the white experience in America. For example:
"Thus several years ago, the New Orleans school board decided to eliminate from the city’s schools the names of anyone who owned slaves or "did not believe in equal opportunity for all." The intent, of course, was to remove the names of Confederate generals and statesmen from schools in which about 90 percent of the students are black. But Carl Ganon pushed to change the name of George Washington Elementary School as well, asserting that: "to African-Americans, George Washington has about as much meaning as David Duke."
More recently, a committee of the New Jersey Senate killed a proposal to celebrate Washington by hanging his portrait in every one of the state’s 600 public-school districts. Curtis Ballard, a historian at Oklahoma’s Langston University opposed the bill, telling USA Today that "America was not a pretty place for black people when George Washington was present. Our people were still in slavery. This country doesn’t have much to celebrate when it comes to 200 years ago and its treatment of people."
More recently yet, at a congressional hearing on President George W. Bush’s faith-based initiatives, Rep. Melvin Watt, a North Carolina Democrat, launched a vitriolic attack on Washington in response to a proposal by both Democrats and Republicans to include in the record Washington’s "Letter to the Newport Hebrew Congregation," a correspondence that welcomed American Jews as equal citizens in the new republic.
Rep. Watt mocked the first president. "For us to be applauding the statements discussing bigotry that were written by a person who owned slaves is a little bit more than I can, without churning stomach, be able to tolerate," said Watt. "I’m sure he did magnificent things and wonderful things. But we should also keep in context the reality that there is substantial pain still among many people in our country about this chapter in our history."
http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/owens/02/washington.html
The question is why, as you put it, have "Italian, German, Polish and Jewish (for example) immigrants' descendants have become "white" ... These folks consider themselves Americans first and when they normally talk about the history of their country they are referring to George Washington." Yet African-Americans who have been in America longer than most European immigrants, when they normally talk about the history of their country they are NOT referring to George Washington. This tension between being pressured on the one hand by the political push for integration to adopt the “mainstream” or “white” history and the resulting values, politics, and identity, and on the other hand by the obvious fact that “our” history results in a very different lessons, values, and political beliefs-- leads to the feeling of alienation that minorities universally express, and finds its way into different political beliefs, social mores, artistic expressions, etc. The cognitive dissonance between the pressure to adopt an alien history, and the impossibility of doing so when ones race and its attendant history is ever apparent, results in the widespread alienation and its attendant social ills. The facts of slavery and Jim Crow can not and should not ever be dropped for the adoption of an alien history, but since integration requires the adopting of another’s history, integration is impossible. No matter what efforts are made on behalf on integration, it could never result in people with distinct histories--African-Americans and European-Americans, or white Australians and aboriginal Australians, or the British and Middle-Eastern immigrants, or the Tamils and the Sinhalese in Sri Lanka--possessing the same histories. As Malcolm X said "we didn't land on Plymouth Rock, Plymouth Rock landed on us." However, the failure of integration is not a moral failing on anybody’s part, it is the result of the adoption of a faulty theory of identity giving rise to false beliefs, and was bound to fail for this reason.
Given the fact that history is essential to ones identity, one of the worst things you can do to a person is force them to abandon ones true history/identity and adopt a false history and resulting values of another race, ethnic group, or religion whose history results in very different values, and cultural identity (as was attempted with Native Americans). This is, “identitycide” and is one of the worst forms of racism imaginable. And yet identitycide is the basis of America’s educational system, and much of the alienation that plagues African-Americans and other racial groups. Almost inevitably, this very alienation itself becomes part of cultural identity and gets passed down through generations.
Empedocles, I disagree with your facts, interpretations and conclusions. But I appreciate you thoughts and hope you'd reconsider.
The hatred of American history you cite is all recent. There has been a revolution that rode on the backs of the black power movement, the Frankfurt school, Margaret Mead and the hippie generation that goes under the name of multiculturalism. Yes, since we've had 40 years of multiculturalism and race pride assertion, love for America has taken a beating.
In the 1970s the book, "the Rise of the Unmeltable Ethnics" noted that the "black power" motif had spread to ethnic whites. But that was a new phenomenon. These traits are fungible. The basic Western civ taught pre-1960s, showed the West as the march of progress from Greeks on that included an ability for the individual to fashion themselves. This creed has deeper roots than the race pride motif now prevalent. Listen to Martin Luther King's speeches for details. He is citing Jefferson and that tradition up and down the block.
Anybody who compares Washington to David Duke has been brainwashed. It sounds like an SLA chant.
Again, diversity will always exist in America. But the idea that holding to the American creed of equal opportunity and democracy is "alien" and impossible to embrace due to one's race is inane. Our national motto, the creed of Croveceur, the Enlightenment and history run contrary to the racial / cultural essentialism you posit. If one's "true" identity is fixed by history and racial categories, democracy, social mobility and individualism are doomed. Western man has evolved since base tribalism. Your either / or proposition has no fluidity in it. I do not dig it.
As with the school naming incidents, the alienation you speak of is a symptom of multiculturalism. It tells people that they are irredeemably separate and antagonistic to the society in which they live in. We should, instead, all see ourselves as crusaders on the cutting edge of the West's experiment in democracy and self-governance. That links folks to the society. It does not demand conformity. It does not link one to their birth as your "true" group identity form does. It allows choice. Choice is very important.
Again, some cultures have a worse time of this than others. The West finds its roots in Jerusalem and Athens. Again, if you are muslim and believe in theocratic dogma should be imposed, it will be hard for you to assimilate at all. That is why we should be culturist, as Saudi Arabia is, in our immigration policies. But few cultures have such antithetical ideals.
One last point. This "true identity" concept negates progress and is based on anthropological mistakes. Most of the wonderful old cultures are horrific according to Western standards. Life was brutal, short and nasty before civilization and the West lead the way out. If we call the West and progress "white," as black radicals have done, it not only creates alienation that leads to nihilism, it send people back to their uncivilized natural violent behavior. We need progress. When the West dies we'll miss rights. Take up the mantle and create a brave new world from the application of your potential with me. That is the Enlightenment cry.
Thanks so much for the discussion. I wish others were reading it. I think it is important. John
I like your analysis John. The idea that if one is of a black race, then they are permanently incapable of assimilation within a culture is disturbing. This is racism if nothing else. In Australia, the aboriginal community that has most difficulty with integration are the ones that cling to an ideal of their culture of the past which bears no resemblance to their current lifestyle/situation. There is endless talk of cultural identity, the threat of losing indigenous languages and traditions. It is these notions that hinder and hold back the aboriginals from becoming part of the mainstream society. In contrast, other aboriginals that have cast off their "aboriginality" have integrated quite successfully into Australian mainstream society. The aboriginal communities that are either incapable or unwilling to cast off their heritage are doomed to exist in limbo, a sub- community within an mainstream society. The aboriginals who live in reservations live in dire poverty and are plagued with poverty, poor health, poor nutrition, alcoholism, unemployment child abuse, domestic violence. And worse, they blame it all on the western society that came to dominate their land. There is no lack of examples of communities that exist on the fringe who take no responsibility for their dire straits and blame other cultures for their demise. The Palestinians for example.
I thought that culturism was an effort to have people identify with their history/cultural traditions. If so, how come when African-Americans practice culturism they are accused of being "brainwashed"? Do you expect African-Americans to pretend that they landed at Plymouth Rock, or Ellis Island, or pretend that the horrors of slavery never existed, or that Jim Crow never existed? When these horrors are part of your history instead of the nice story of the Pilgrims, the Founding Fathers, the pioneers, etc., you are inevitably going to feel alienation. I think that the idea that we will all see the pilgrims, George Washington, etc., as "our" history is impossible simply because it is false. You argue that the alienation felt by African-Americans and other minorities is the result of their being brainwashed by multiculturalism. I think that you have this backwards and that multiculturalism is the result of the alienation, not the other way around.
Just a couple of corrections: I don't believe that equal opportunity and democracy is "alien" and impossible to embrace due to one's race.
I don't believe in racial / cultural essentialism. You're the one who said "I condemn Muslim presence in America because we are essentially different."
Despite these differences, I think we agree on much more then we disagree.
Empedocles, I wonder when African Americans turn their backs on education, if they are identifying with their cultural heritage of the noble African savage?
Lexcen,
So good to get your perspective. I know too little about the Aboriginals. But the situation sounds parallel. The difference is, again, attitude. Those who join mainstream society thrive. Those who take the "noble savage" strong group identity, all allegiance to the West is suicide route end up very sad.
The proof is somewhat in the pudding. Apparently they are allowed to hunt and can even use modern technology. Am I right? If their aboriginal ways were so fantastic, they could purely avoid electricity and be quasi-nomads. But that route will not do. The truth is Native American culture was quite violent and superstitious.
The bad anthropology of multiculturalism leads to sad results with our "aboriginals" too. The opposition to modern life leads to similar reservations. In black culture, education is called "acting white" and being for "the man." This failure to look forward makes life sad and oppositional. Better take pride in what "your people" have contributed to the modern western world. It is waaaaay healthier.
The extremes of multiculturalism hurt minorities. They chop off fluidity of identity. They can divide us. They undermine our ability to teach values based on positive contributions to western freedoms. Culturism allows for cultural exploration, but, at the end of the day, gives you and all of us positive options.
Empedocles,
I know that we agree on a lot because you have taken the words right out of my mouth many times. But I think you misunderstand culturism. It is the opposite of multiculturalism. Check www.culturism.us for details.
The reason those who are oppositional to the West are delusional is because, despite rights violations I'll discuss below, western civilization has been a HUGE BOON to all of us benefactors. Life pre-west was violent, hierarchical and superstitious. Poor people in the West mostly have homes, running water and electricity. Before the West nearly everyone starved. To think Western civilization is the reason for your problems is to be delusional.
Yes, slavery happened. But the West is not unique for having slavery. We are unique for stopping it. The slavery, BTW, of North America was very mild compared to Islamic slavery and Latin American slavery. Indigenous African slavery is under explored. Native American slavery was brutal. The West, particularly protestant nations used Enlightenment ideals to get us past that.
Can black people identify with the progress of America? Black people have contributed so much to America, including its achievement of racial justice, that they should be proud. Look, I'm genetically Jewish. Western civ has poured loads of crap on Jews. Still, I am proud to be called a westerner. Socrates is my hero. Washington and Voltaire and Locke and Bentham and William James and even Jesus. . . are my heroes. I love western civilization.
The alternative is what Lex pointed out for aboriginals. Sad indeed. I hope black people look back on their role in creating America with lots and lots of pride. From Crispus Attucks to MLK, black people have contributed heaps. This does not mean, we do not tell about slavery or Jim Crow. But we must put it in context and show that it has been a long struggle to overcome that blacks have really helped in. AND, blacks have not only suffered in America. Many, many, many have always prospered and still do.
I am glad to hear you do not believe in the essentialism that makes your parents' past or race your destiny. I would hope that all wish to be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. I hope that your profession, philosophy and dreams define you as much as your ties to "your people" (whomever they may be).
Now to the final point . . . Yes, I see the Islamic culture as fundamentally at odds with the West. Beyond my opinion, this has been historically true. That said, the vast majority of muslims in the West will lead uneventful lives. But a small vocal minority can cause major damage. Terrorists and pressure groups use multiculturalism to erase our history and our ability to defend ourselves. We (meaning the West) are under no universal obligation to allow indiscriminate immigration.
Culturism takes culture seriously. Some cultural heritages are, again, harder to meld with Western ways than others. I stress individualism, but know that culture has an impact. Here are a litany of examples.
Jews have had a profound leftist impact on the West. THat is not genetic, it is cultural. Still, terrorism and the destruction of the West and imposing theology are not part of the equation. Mexican culture has a historic antipathy towards America's control of the Southwest. This is best combated by telling the truth about culture and the West, by encouraging a rational and individualistic approach to life and history. We in the West must push our side or lose it. We must understand cultural dynamics. Koreans work hard and have no historic beef with us and never threaten to undermine our values. They make great immigrants - if you're looking for immigrants. Again, you want to make them realize ASAP, that the kids are Americans and should identify with it. They'll still kick butt in school for a couple of generations due to residual cultural impact.
Look at culture realistically. That is part of culturism. But if you are going to tie everyones' identity to the glories of their separate culture, you make folks oppositional to progress. In the case of blacks, Mexicans and Islam you can actually foster hatred towards the West. In the case of blacks, since they have nowhere else to go, it just undercuts achievement. In the case of Mexicans, it could cause secession and undermines our ability to talk about achievement oriented values. In the case of Islam it encourages terrorism. In the case of Koreans, it creates minor alienation.
In all cases, it is better to teach people that we are all Americans and contributing to the realizations and progress the West has fought for with bitter struggle. It unites us. It teaches us to protect and appreciate ourselves. It allows us to teach progressive values. The only downside is that it teaches that some cultures are a bit backwards. Guess what?? From a western standpoint, THEY ARE!!! Lots of babies and no education is a western no - no. It is fine in other nations. But here, we have a culture to teach. It is required for us to sustain rights, democracy, freedom of speech and progressive values for ourselves.
SORRY FOR WRITING SOOOOO DARN much!!!
Culturist John www.culturism.us
Wow John,
You are so into it, so darned sweet about life, and embrace all people.
So how why can you relate to yeagley, he is so racists and anti-liberal, anti-Indian, anti-female and very, very, very anti-Black, though he claims he loves the Jewish People, and of course ann coulter! He also claims the White Anglo Protestants are the saviors of American, had no help from the Natives.......won't give the Natives any credit, though they saved his white ancestors from starvation their first winter. The rest is history!!!!
He won't allow the true Indian History to be told on his supposidly Indian forum, in fact no Indians are allowed to post! The reason being, they have constuctive critism.
I am amazed at your interest in this racist, yeagley! You sound too good to be true, though I feel you are very sincere! Its so good to know there are real people like you out there.
I will be anxious to see how he responds to you.
Anonymous, I haven't seen any replies from Yeagley. From what you say, perhaps I embraced him too quickly. I thought he stood for some of the points of view you are advocating.
To be sure I am a big fan of Protestantism - though not one myself. I also think that Native American culture had many problems we should not romanticize. Than again, most traditional cultures have serious problems we should not overly romanticize. But, yes, the presence of Native Americans, the presence of the West, the freedom from civilization the Native Americans represented, the presence of difference itself and the escape Native Americans offered, helped us create a free culture.
Thanks for the comment, Culturist John
PS If you see a response from yeagley to me, please let me know.
Post a Comment