Sunday, March 22, 2009

Culturist Liberals Unite!!

Gays, feminists and the liberal intelligentsia should adopt “culturism” as their motto. There is a misconception that culturism is only a “right-wing” philosophy. And culturism does advocate immigration restriction and does seek to unify western citizens around an appreciation for western values. But culturism does this in order to secure the West. And western values include the acceptance of a relatively large separation of church and state as well as rights for gays and women. If you believe in these liberal values, you should support the West, call yourself a “culturist” and back the agenda of culturism.

Western civilization’s trajectory has sent it in the direction of protecting vulnerable groups such as women, gays and atheists. The Greeks fought two wars against the Persians in order to resist theocratic tyranny. Plato wanted society run by “philosopher – Kings,” but he held that women could occupy these positions. Jesus made the least among us sacrosanct. Martin Luther King died for the rights of Americans of African descent. And his Civil Rights efforts, in turn, inspired the gay liberation and women’s liberation movements. Just as liberals do, Culturism celebrates this progression.

Has the West been perfect? No. But herein we find a huge, giant and extremely large failure in the liberal perspective. Liberal academics tend to judge the West against abstract ideals of perfection. In Universities’ gay, lesbian, straight and transsexual as well as women’s studies departments, examine how sexual and gender roles get imagined and implemented. This is fascinating and important work. But the very fact that we explore such ideas shows the West’s extreme liberalism. In the real world, we can only make choices between different levels of limitations. No total freedom exists. Decrying the West because it does not deliver unbounded identity choices ironically leads liberals to identify with illiberal Islamic tyrants.

Gay rights activists and liberals might say "We don't have rights here!" Again, they search for ideals and miss the real. In Islamic nations homosexuals are hung. No rights movements are allowed in China. Women’s’ opportunities in Africa and Latin America pale in comparison to ours. In contrast to the alternate systems in the world, we represent liberal values and freedoms. An academic might say, third world oppression only reflects our having created a world of economic stratification. Again, we must deal with the real illiberal world, not postulated paradisiacal states. All societies have always had stratification; outside of the West no nations have been liberal. The West has flaws. But, after dismantling the West for not giving you all the rights you demand, regardless of public opinion, you'll become nostalgic about the right not to be hung for organizing.

Multiculturalism is based in idealistic and unrealistic thought. It holds that deep down all cultures are liberal. But in the real world, as Obama is finding in his “negotiations” with Iran, disagreement, diversity and evil exist. In this world, we must choose between existing options. Geopolitically, since they are in conflict, you can either side with Islam or the West. Standing up for liberal values requires standing up for western culture and its sovereignty. Multicultural academics that support Islamic immigration to the West imperil women’s rights and gay lives. Consistency demands that western academics, above all others, scrutinize our nations for flaws. Consistency also demands that liberal academics do not support those who would undermine our freedom of speech and thought. At the end of the day, the existence of liberalism requires a solvent West. To protect the rights of gays and women, all liberal academics should become fervent western culturists.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Liberals run around in circles when thinking about multiculturalism. I can see steam coming out of their ears from the mental strain :) All their chanting for "cultural diversity" again and again crashes against the reality of actual cultural practices of the world, practices they would find abhorent. On the one hand, their so-called diversity runs the risk of being in practice the most stringent of monocultures. For example, Japan is an extremely sexist society. I doubt any self-described multiculturalists would want sexist cultures included in their list of acceptable cultures. The same goes for female genital mutilation practiced in Africa, or forcing women to wear the burka or headscarf in the middle east. And forget about historical cultures. Most of the cultural practices of the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, middle ages Europe, ante-bellum southern US, and just about any other historical society would be found abhorrent. Plus, most multiculturalists I know never cease to rail at the "souless homogenized suburbs" or rural redneck hicks. Just face it, to liberals, so-called multiculturalism is really a early 21st century, western, urban, upper-middle class monoculturalism. (It mostly amounts to urban hipsters and yuppies desiring many choices of restaurants.) So much for diversity. The other horn of the dilemma is to allow true diversity and end up tolerating anti-Semitism, homophobia, sexism, racism, and environmental destruction. Something has to give eventually.

Unknown said...

Empedocles, nice analysis. I agree.

One way to have diversity and tolerance is to teach this as a unique feature of the West. Another is by not allowing the immigration of those from misogynist anti-gay ill liberal cultures. That would be a pro-western culturist platform. Another way is to clearly not allow Sharia law or culturally relative legal arguments into our judicial system.

Here is a question. How do we get liberals to understand that some cultures are not liberal and that feminism and multiculturalism are at odds? As with culturism, I am sure it is an obvious truth. Iran hangs gays. What more proof that some cultures are illiberal do you need?

Perhaps the myth of the noble savage keeps people from recognizing that it is not just Iran. Of course, comparisons to the noble savage end up, as my blog indicates, condemning all restraints, even those imposed by the "male gaze."

We used to have this problem licked by teaching the western narrative as one towards progressive liberalism. From that POV, it was assumed that all other cultures were lower on the rung of the cultural - evolutionary ladder. SInce multiculturalism we have no basis for judgement or appreciating our accomplishments.

Culturism does not hold that people reason stuff out. We absorb from our culture. Even knowing that gay rights are ziltch in other nations, people condemn us as intolerant and hateful. They still do not see the progress. That is why it seems so imperative to me to teach the old narrative of Civilization and progress in schools again.

This does not need to include false information. It does mean, however, that we have to abandon multiculturalism and accept progress as a reality. Technically, culturism only measures our progress by our having fulfilled our values. But, again, this affirms that the rest of the world does not share our values and they are special.

We need a philosophical revolution that takes us back just pre-1960s. Perhaps another gay hanging will do it. Perhaps we can fight multiculturalism with culturism. Perhaps we need all fronts at once. But it is frustrating peaching the obvious to intransigence.

Thanks, John

Lexcen said...

Here is the latest example of why multi-culturalism is doomed to failure. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25226537-12332,00.html
Muslims do not want to share a multi-faith prayer room at RMIT. They want it exclusively for Muslims. So much for tolerance and understanding of other faiths. So much for tolerance and understanding of other cultures. Muslims have a habit of making demands that are absolute and void of any negotiation.

Unknown said...

Nice article Mr. Lex. I am going to post it at IBA with a link to your site, if you don't mind.

John

Unknown said...

Lex,

For a hot minute, the top story at the Infidel Bloggers Alliance will link to the article you sent me. After that it will be a scroller. It will be interesting to read responses. Its at

http://ibloga.blogspot.com/

Thanks, John

Unknown said...

Empedocles,

I really love your first paragraph. More steam!!

It occurs to me that a comedy could be useful. The son comes in panting, "Mom! The new neighbors have wrapped their wives in bizarre bags."

Mom: That's nice dear we have to love an accept all.

A few iterations later.

Son: Mom, they're stoning an infidel on our lawn.

Mom: That's nice dear, go and tell you father that dinner is ready.

Then, during dinner, we replace the window with a screen projecting Brando's speech in Apocalypse Now about "the horror."

Thanks for the inspiration!

Bloviating Zeppelin said...

Received your book from Amazon. Now I must read it. I'm going to hone in immediately on the chapter relating to culturism v. multiculturism.

BZ

Unknown said...

BZ,

Excellent and glad to hear it. Did you order the 16.95 version?

The multiculturalism v. culturism chapter is fairly able to stand alone. But the rest of the book makes an argument that builds until the policy chapter. But, whatever order in which you read chapters, I look forward to your thoughts and comments.

John

Bloviating Zeppelin said...

CJ: yes, I ordered the trade sized new paperback.

BZ

Ducky's here said...

Well, I'll tell you folks. As a leftist I naturally believe that most human problems are economic at their base. That's virtually by definition.

But study enough art and you realize that the questions the human species has been dealing with for centuries are much more uniform than the right would have us imagine.

Life is large and will not be limited by the blinkered vision of right wing white Anglo/Americans. Just ain't going to happen.

Empedocles said...

Once again, Ducky provides no arguments, merely casts insults, answers no charges, and merely assets. This time around his mere assertion was especially week. I think it's dawning on him that there is a true problem in reconciling multiculturalism with liberalism.

Ducky's here said...

Well of course there's a problem with culturism. It assumes that Western culture is monolithic and homogeneous.
Clearly wrong.

As for insults, if you don't believe the culturist movement is largely white Anglo who see world culture as the U.S./Britain/Israel (but right wing only) vs. the assorted extra people then you've missed the history of America since the Reagan years.

You seem to feel that the west (as I describe the triumvirate) has taken the positive stances you mentioned. It hasn't and the right in those countries has not been responsible for social progress or general economic progress.

Empedocles said...

There's nothing true in what you wrote and you still continue to avoid the real issue of the conflict between the Western values of individual rights and multiculturalism by casting insults and offering nothing more than a holier than thou attitude.