Saturday, December 13, 2014

Ferguson: The Culturist Road Not Taken

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

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

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

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

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



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

Thursday, December 11, 2014

Culturist Lakers' Heartbreak


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

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

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

www.culturism.us

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Culturism: The Culturist Review

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

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

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

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

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

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


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