Add to Technorati Favorites

Sunday, October 23, 2011

Open Letter to Pastorius and the Infidel Blogger's Alliance

Infidel Blogger's Alliance, your globalist, open border, neo-con, and yes – multicultural – ways have failed!  As a contributor, I therefore beg you to change the Infidel Blogger’s Alliance Declaration of Principles.  On the upper right of the permanent IBA page we see the following words:

THE PARALLEL GOVERNMENT 
OF THE ENTIRE WORLD
All of us, every single man, woman, and child on the face of the Earth were born with the same inalienable rights; to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, if the governments of the world can't get that through their thick skulls, then, regime change will be necessary.

By postulating universal values, you ignore the importance of cultural diversity.  You claim that every person in the world holds the same values and only bad governments holds them back. You sound like a multiculturalist as you tell us that all cultures believe in the same values deep down. If that were true, every Muslim who immigrated to the West would embrace the love of liberty everyone, apparently, wants.
How are those open borders based on universality workin’ out for ya?

Your globalist values back our “everyone is an American deep down” foreign policy.  With this ideal we have sunk blood and treasure in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan. “Regime change” for democracy in the Muslim world proves the importance of cultural diversity. Thirty years of imposed tolerance in Egypt and it is primed for fundamentalism.
How is that “breaking skulls” to make Muslim nations leftist workin’ out for ya?

Expensive regime change is bankrupting our nation. And when the West goes broke, “human rights” and the universals you believe in will die. China nor the Organization of Islam Conference will protect them. Why are we quoting the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights anyway? To protect “human rights” we have to protect the West with border laws based on our selfish needs.
How is that membership in the U.N. workin’ out for ya?

Rather than universals, the West must embrace its cultural uniqueness. The easiest way to defeat multicultural globalists is to spread ideas that convey the opposite: “Culturism” and “Culturist.”  So here is our new Masthead.  Vote or contribute now!!

PROTECT THE WEST!
The West has a special vision and a right to protect it. We are not an Islamic nation; we are not a world nation; ours is a Judeo-Christian-Enlightenment nation. Embracing culturism, every non-Western nation from China to Mexico to Saudi Arabia acknowledges their traditional majority culture and designs their border laws accordingly.  We too have a right to be culturist.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Sex, Horror, and Enlightenment

E. Michael Jones, of Culture Wars magazine, writes fascinating conspiracy histories.  They show how sexual liberation has been used to undermine our population’s self-control and make them more pliable subjects.  The tawdry details in his escapades through the sexual madness of Kinsey and the Marquis d’ Sade always entertain.

In Monsters from the ID he locates the origins of Horror films and porno in the Enlightenment.  The Enlightenment, in getting rid of God, leaves only pleasure and pain to guide our morals. In this vacuum, figures like Sade see nothing wrong with cruelty.  When people leave the natural family structure, and pleasure guides men, porn arrives.

Mary Shelly’s was ensnared by Percy Shelly and Lord Byron’s incest  laden escapades.  Her mother, the author of the Vindication of the Rights of Women, had also been abandoned with child in the midst of the French Revolution.  It was within the motif of crossing the boundaries that Shelly wrote Frankenstein.

Frankenstein’s picks up where God is abandoned; he gives life.  Science in the absence of man creates a monster.  This monster represents the nightmares that happen when we take God out of the pictures.  He is a child of lightening, science, and madmen; a product of Enlightenment ethics.

Last night I saw Mozart's Don Giovanni at the Met.  Though Mr. Jones does not reference the opera, it perfectly illustrates his point.  Don Giovanni loves 1000s of women.  He relentlessly lies to get them, mocks love and even kills.  His deceits, as Sade’s, are boundless.  To restore order, a ghost of a victim needs to reappear and take him to hell.

Jones’ claim that porn comes out of a pure pleasure / pain moral landscape, was always a bit elusive.  And, as my deeming him a “conspiracy historian” implies, I have not entirely bought his argument.  But Don Giovanni is a horror opera.  The Ghost in a form of a statue that kills the lead, is as frightening as Freddie Kruger.  As such, the opera provided powerful evidence for and illustration of Jones’ thesis.

www.culturism.us

Friday, October 7, 2011

An Open Letter to Mr. Lawrence Auster

Mr. Lawrence Auster publishes the blog View From the Right.  Recently, he stated his basic credo in an article entitled “Why the Truth About Black Dysfunction is So Important.”  As he has many followers, I think it important that I challenge his racist position with a culturist one.  While I applaud his dedication, his racist suppositions set back our shared desire to defeat multiculturalism.

Mr. Auster's writing focuses on the out of proportion level of violent crimes committed by Black people.  And, he documents the double standard in reporting such crimes well.  He argues that the Western belief in racial equality, leads us to conclude that all differences in attainment and violence must reflect white racism.  This guilt over inequality leads us to “denial of the truth of Black anti-White violence, denial of the tyrannical murderous reality of Islam, and unquestioning acceptance of the mass Third-World immigration” destroying our nation.

As a culturist I agree with many of his premises and goals.  Blaming all inequality on the West has caused our guilt and embrace of multiculturalism.  Multiculturalism does cause us to ignore the perils of Islamic immigration and take the blame for the educational and economic achievement gaps between Whites and Asians and other minorities.  But Auster’s racist premise destroys his usefulness.
By replacing his racist view with a culturist view – by swapping out genetic determinism for a cultural explanation – he can actually help right out nation.  His view offends nearly everyone who reads them and exasperates social divides.

Mr. Auster wonders why people chaffe at his “endlessly repeated stories” of “black criminality and failure.”  It is because the vast majority of Black people are wonderful law abiding and productive citizens.  I am certainly not alone in having many Black colleagues with fabulous work ethics whom I respect and Black friends who I love.  As such, his constant smear can only infuriate and alienate the majority of us who have such relationships.

The dysfunction in Black culture, that which leads to crime, is cultural.  It only occurs in certain pockets of the population.  The Black population was not as violent in the 1950s or before that.  In fact, the Black marriage rate was higher than the current rate for Whites in the 1950s.  Crime and divorce are not genetic.  These changes since the 1950s were not caused by genetic mutations.

As people cannot change their genetic make-up, Mr. Auster's racial lens cannot effect any good policy outcomes.  On the other hand, a culturist lens can allow us to have necessary discussions about the cultural roots of social maladies.  The problem now is that our society calls all judgmental distinctions between ethnic groups "racist."  Therefore, as Mr. Auster is, all who discuss such disparities are immediately and completely marginalized.

From a cultural vantage point, we can discuss the dangers of Islam.  With this vantage point we can work to strengthen both Black and White cultures (the falling off of White culture is missed nearly all of Auster's analyses).  And, the overt cultural reference of the word culturist, can help distinguish this hopeful and helpful analysis from the futile and divisive racist one.  Furthermore, the ubiquity of the word multiculturalism can help its opposite, culturism, spread quickly.  I am culturist, not racist.  And, while I appreciate his goal of defeating multiculturalism, Mr. Auster's racist analysis undermines our progress.

 www.culturism.us

Sunday, October 2, 2011

Ken Burns' Prohibition Doc and Culturist Corruption


This Ken Burn's documentary ad has appeared all over NYC.  The tag line "How did a nation founded on rights ever go so wrong?" has deep problems.  Here are some questions / debates it invites.

"A nation founded on rights?"  When does Mr. Burns date the founding of our nation?  Many people confuse the founding of our government with the founding of the nation.  Okay, technically we were colonies beforehand.  But, our national character started well before.

I like to date the founding of our nation with either 1607 or 1620.  The Puritans, who landed in 1620, did not set up a system based on rights.  They came here to found a nation purer than any before.  If you were a drunk, the community would lessen your status.  And, they could even take you children away or publicly punish you.

Jamestown started in 1607.  They had a bit of individualism going.  But they quickly discovered, as the Puritans already knew, that individuals are dependent on the community. If people did not stand guard or work, they would be killed by starvation and hostile indians.  Our nation, was not 'founded on rights.

Well what if you take the 1776 date?  Still, 'rights' did not trump all. Many colonies had official religions.  And, the Founding Fathers did not set up a system of anarchy wherein no one had any limits and everyone had a protected right to be anti-social.  We, again, impact each other.  A democracy or republic is not a system of government if it means the community can never define itself or regulate accordingly.

Prohibition had good attributes.  Perhaps a bit of a spike of crime and corruption, now apparently to be sensationalized by Burns, happened.  But drunkenness went down.  Hospital visits due to alcohol, such as poisoning and drunk driving, went down.  Wife battering went down.  Men spending all their family's proceeds went down.  I am certain deaths from drunk driving went down.

Ken Burn's ad shows that he is a terrible historian.  The ad already announces that he will only engage Prohibition as a nightmare. Real historians debate.    But with 'rights' based thought, all impositions become evil.  Responsibility is restraint.  Everyone has a right and the people can make no rules.

If Burns studied history, he'd note that a law such as Prohibition could only happen in a Puritan-based culture.  That would lead him to see that our nation was not simply founded in 1776.  He might read their writing wherein they say that license without responsibility doesn't lead to liberty; it leads to national suicide. But like most modern historians he probably considers the Puritans "so wrong" too for having violated rights.

We need to reclaim our sense of public good when creating values.  We need to recognize the truths the Puritans told us and not just justify our anti-social mores with 'rights talk.'  We cannot simply subsidize irresponsible behavior due to rights.  We need to proudly reinsert our cultural heritage into our legal system.  One must inform the other.

www.culturism.us