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

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

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

Change the National 9 - 11 Memorial and Museum

Immediately after 9 -11 New York Mayor Giuliani rejected Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal’s money because it came with an insult to America.  Bin Talal is currently funding the Ground Zero Victory Mosque.[i]  And now a worse insult!  Bin Talal is helping to write the National 9 – 11 Memorial and Museum at Ground Zero!  

Less then a month after 9 – 11, at an early 9 – 11 memorial event, bin Talal attempted to give Giuliani $10 million for disaster relief.  But bin Talal simultaneously suggested that we look at our American policies that justified the attack including our support for Israel. 

Giuliani rejected the assertion that good justifications existed for the 9 – 11 attacks and refused the money.  America’s mayor said, "To suggest that there's a justification for [the terrorist attacks] only invites this happening in the future.  It is highly irresponsible and very, very dangerous.”[ii]

Though rebuked by Giuliani, bin Talal did not give up promoting his dangerous ideas.  Six years later the prince started funding Georgetown’s Middle Eastern studies program.[iii]  And now, members of Georgetown’s Middle Eastern studies department are serving as advisors in writing the history section of our National 9 -11 Memorial and Museum.[iv]  

Involvement of Georgetown’s department that the offensive bin Talal funds, does not necessarily prove malfeasance.  But the confirmed involvement of Princeton’s Near Eastern Studies department, with their pro-Islamic colleague Amaney Jamal, brings additional discomfort.[v]  And, what Alice Greenwald, Executive Vice-President for Programs of the National 9 – 11 Museum and Memorial, told us at a Manhattan Community Board meeting merits grave concern. 

While the National 9-11 Memorial properly eulogizes the tragic loss of life on September 11^th, it will only dedicate a small part of one of three history rooms to the question of “Who did this and why.”[vi]  Ms. Greenwald told the Community Board that her Middle Eastern advisors had told her not to use the word “Islam.”  Instead, she explained, they will use the word “Islamist” specifically to distance the connection of the 9 – 11 attacks with Islam.[vii] 

Besides the dearth of time dedicated to why we were attacked, the exhibit’s timeline greatly concerns this western culturist historian.  The one solitary documentary film in the exhibit will explore the roots of Al Qaeda.  Ultimately, we must worry that the film being prepared will only tie the 9 - 11 attack to the American funding of Afghani fighters.  Thus, as Bin Falal would have it, the exhibit will lay the root causes for 9 – 11 at the feet of America.

A wider timeline would note that Islam has been attacking the West for nearly 1400 years.  Islam took Spain for seven hundred years.  And after Islam destroyed the Christian Byzantine Empire, it gave Constantinople its current name, Istanbul.   Islam might even have taken the rest of Europe had it not been repelled in the Battle of Vienna on September 11^th, 1683.[viii]  Despite what Bin Talal might say, our struggle with Islam did not start with the 1948 founding of Israel and it did not start with America's support of Al Qaeda in the late 1970s. 

According to Ms. Greenwald, the National 9 – 11 Memorial will also chronicle “previous terrorist attacks, on U.S. targets on the U.S.S. Cole and the African Embassy bombings.”  But instead of just focusing on the U.S., a map showing the global scope of the over 15,000 Islamic terrorist acts since 9 – 11 would create a different impression.  A focus on Islamic jihad in Europe, Pakistan, the Philippines, Thailand or India would undercut Bin Talal’s idea that Islam only targets America for its crimes.

The National 9 – 11 Memorial and Museum needs to openly tell us which scholars in these Middle Eastern departments will be advising them.  Furthermore, we western culturists request that pro-western scholars, such as Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, Ms. Brigitte Gabriel of ACT! For America, Mrs. Wafa Sultan, or Congressman Allen West to help write the Memorial's history section.  It would be a dangerous shame if our national memory of 9 – 11 was given to employees of the man who insulted us on 9 – 11 and is building the Mosque at Ground Zero.

Please watch the video preview of the National 9 - 11 Memorial and Museum given by Alice Greenwald at the top of the video section of www.culturism.us.  Join our facebook site, "Western Historians Must Write the 9 - 11 Memorial at GZ," and help spread the word.  

John Press, Ph.D.
President - Brooklyn Tea Party
pressjohn@hotmail.com
www.brooklynteaparty.org
www.culturism.us

---

[i] John Cook, “News Corp’s number-two shareholder funded ‘terror mosque’ planner,” August 30, 2010, http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100820/bs_yblog_upshot/news-corps-number-two-shareholder-funded-terror-mosque-planner

[ii] CNN, “Giuliani rejects $10 million from Saudi prince,” October 11, 2001, http://articles.cnn.com/2001-10-11/us/rec.giuliani.prince_1_saudi-prince-alwaleed-bin-israeli-withdrawal-criminal-attack?_s=PM:US

[iii] Korade, Matt, “Saudi Giving at the Heart of a Great Debate over Middle East Studies,” Congressional Quarterly, April 11, 2008,  http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/5046

[iv] Alice Greenwald told the author of this article this after a Community Board One meeting, 12/13/2010, 6 pm, in New York City. 

[v] Larcom, Geoff, Princeton Professor Breaks Down Perceptions of Muslim-Americans in U.S. [on Amaney Jamal]
 Focus EMU Online (Eastern Michigan University News)
February 2, 2010, http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/9085

[vi] See the footage of the 9 – 11 Memorial and Museum presented to the Community Board One at www.youtube.com

[vii] Alice Greenwald told the author this during the question and answer session following the 12/13/10 Community Board One meeting in which the national 9 – 11 Memorial and Museum plans were presented. 

[viii] The Battle Of Vienna, wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna

Preview the 9 - 11 Memorial Video

Culturist Brooklyn Tea Party Agenda Request

Culturism is the Ultimate Form of Liberalism

www.culturism.us

The Brooklyn Tea Party Rallies !!

         The Brooklyn TEA Party rallied this last Sunday.  Here is some coverage.  

         Two corrections!  Though at Kosher Hut, we meet in Gravesend, not Midwood at 2 pm each Sunday.  Also, I count more than 40 assembled and we kept the numbers fluctuating like this for over three hours!  

           Regardless, it is a very prettypicture.

          The whole, article with expandable photos, can be found by clicking HERE ! - 

NYC Candidates' Forum - Culturist Perspective

Brooklyn Tea Party leader Culturist John Narrates this NYC Candidates' Forum.

www.culturism.us

Why is Culturist John Such a Jerk??

          Pamela Geller asked that people bring flags rather than political signs to her 9 - 11 protest against the Ground Zero mosque.  In fact, she originally said she'd confiscate anything other than flags.  Furthermore, she said terrible things about the August 22nd Anti-Mosque rally at Ground Zero.  And, I want to bring a sign that says, "Stopping Sharia in America is Culturist not Racist."  

       I respect Pamela.  She is a relentless anti-Jihadist and I have seen her at a million rallies.  But at none of those events were we in the audience told what to say.  I have a gut reaction against all who would stifle the voice of the public.  But respecting Pamela, I assume there must be some good served by not letting the people vent their spleen as they see fit.

       If I get it, Pamela argues that it is more sensitive to 9 - 11 families to bring flags.  I think crowds battling the enemy head-on with signs that say "No Sharia Here" will do more to lift 9 - 11 families' feelings than indulging in vague patriotic platitudes.  To me, identifying the enemy and saying "never again" respects the victims.  I know at least some 9 - 11 families feel the same way.

       So when Pamela's people ask me to put away my sign, should I?  Is there something I am missing?  Am I being a jerk?  I think this rally should represent the same defiance of Sharia than all the others.  Perhaps that defiance will come from the speakers.  Perhaps there is strategic point I am missing.  I plan on bringing my sign.  Should I?  Would my bringing a sign prove that I am a big jerk?

The Culturist Foreign Agents Registration Act and the Ground Zero Mosque

Culturist Media Strategy for Fighting the Ground Zero Mosque

www.culturism.us

Michael Bloomberg’s Deadly Multiculturalism and Culturism

Michael Bloomberg, the Mayor of New York who backs the Ground Zero mosque, is a perfect multiculturalist.  As such he sees blindness to cultural diversity as a virtue.  And so, to prove himself meritorious, he jettisoned all discretion and hosted an Islamic holiday celebration with the mosque's backers.  This is extremely dangerous.  We need culturist politicians who take diversity seriously.

In their blanket attempts to get us to “celebrate diversity” multiculturalists refuse to acknowledge that cultures can have bad sides.  This position commits them to being blind to the possibility of conflict between cultures.  In a very Age-of-Aquarius hippy way, they say if we all just celebrate each other no conflict, values-based or actual, need exist on the planet. 

According to multiculturalist philosophy, if Bloomberg acknowledged any negative cultural characteristics, he’d have to call himself “racist” or “intolerant.” In the real world, culturists note, diversity includes disgusting behaviors that we cannot tolerate, let alone celebrate.  Does Bloomberg celebrate the strict dress codes and theocratic despotism in Islamic nations?  To wiggle out of this conundrum he has to claim that such practices, like Jihad and Sharia, are just perversions of the true, peaceful, and liberal Islam. 

Multiculturalists must constantly whitewash diversity to show they are not racist.  In fact, multiculturalism reflects a proper level of American sensitivity over denying the civil rights of black Americans.  But, race and culture are different.  And avoiding discussing culture frankly in order to avoid being called a racist blinds you to potentially lethal considerations.  Fighting Islam is not racist, it is culturist.

Bloomberg’s multicultural blindness turns deadly when he feels a need to prove he makes no distinctions between any cultures   In his ultimate act of multiculturalism he actually celebrated Islam with people publicly sworn to replacing our Constitution with oppressive Sharia law.  As such, Bloomberg and his multiculturalist friends are promoting violence against the West. This is not only treasonous, it is deadly.  The Ground Zero mosque will inspire jihadis all over the world.  When the first terror attack comes at the hands of a visitor to the mosque, Bloomberg and multiculturalism will have blood on their hands. 

The Constitution does not provide Saudi’s and other foreign Islamic states the right to build triumphal monuments to the advance of Islam and Sharia in America.  We need culturist leaders that show the Muslim world that we know about their aggression and will protect liberal western values.  Our safety and rights depend on replacing multicultural politicians like Bloomberg with culturists.

John Press, Ph.D.

President – The Brooklyn Tea Party

www.culturism.us

VIDEO of AUGUST 22nd CULTURIST ANTI 9 - 11 MOSQUE RALLY

Progressives and Tea Party Activists Should Join Together

I am the President of a Tea Party chapter and my doctorate in history focused on the Progressive era.  As such, I can tell you that modern progressives belong in the Tea Party.  Furthermore, the Tea Party has a lot to learn from the progressives.

            Glen Beck is only half right.  Leaning heavily on Jonah Goldberg’s excellent book, Liberal Fascism, he argues that progressive government programs inexorably lead to totalitarianism.  This may be correct.  The fallacy comes from not recognizing that historical progressives themselves wrestled with the question of how they could have government programs without undermining local community participation.  What Beck does not acknowledge is that progressives themselves were very worried that a tyranny of Washington experts could exclude the voice of the common man.

            Tea Party participants often make the fatal error of considering the opposite of big government to be Laissez Faire individualism.  They demand zero government and to be left alone.  As Alexis De Tocqueville documented in his amazing 1830 classic, Democracy in America, before progressivism local control and heavy levels of civic participation, not unmolested individualism, defined America. The opposite of big government is local citizen participation, not anarchistic individualism.

            Prior to the industrial revolution small ‘island communities,’ as the historian Robert Wiebe called them, dotted America’s landscape.  In these communities you knew the mayor, the teacher, and everyone’s business. But the emerging large transnational industrial interests could not be regulated by town halls.  And ma and pa could not be participants in national affairs.  As De Tocqueville before them, progressives largely defined America as the land of political participation and worried that the masses would become passive.

The progressives’ concern for local participation is evident in their implementing the initiative process.  This got the common man a voice in State politics and weakened powerful politicians.  To foster local control progressives fought for the direct election of Senators.  They worried about cronyism between big powers and powerful men.  The progressives also got women the vote in order to get more Americans involved in political affairs.  While they wanted national systems, progressives also counterbalance distance from the powers that be with increased channels for democratic participation.

            My dissertation focused on Frances Kellor’s quest for participatory democracy.  As the head of national Americanization efforts, rather than creed, she sought to get immigrants involved in local politics.  For her, such participation was the sin qua non of being an American.  She got Roosevelt’s Progressive Party to create local activist chapters to guide national policy.  And, she wanted civilian training camps, like Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, to foster civic engagement in the populace.  All of these projects sought to foster the participation she saw in the island community she grew up in.

            Progressives, your heritage demands that you celebrate and attempt to foster local political participation.   As it is the greatest popular movement in recent times, you should laud the political activism of the Tea Party members and join them in their activism.  Tea Party folk should recognize that smaller government equals local government. Rather than simply seeking to be left alone, we must strive to run our communities locally.  That means an interest in civic organizations as well as straight politics.  We all, as Americans, must become engaged in our communities again.

            For such a revolution to happen, both sides must change their mindsets.  Liberals cannot continue to call all those who wish to lower the deficit ‘racist.’  This does not foster the civic participation your progressive forefathers sought.  And my Tea Party brethren, instead of simply fighting government, you must demand local control of programs.  We need, for example, to quadruple the tax exemption for giving to local charities.  And, whether you agree or disagree on the specific programs, please do welcome your progressive fellow-citizens’ help in striving to take care of our communities locally.

           

           www.culturism.us 

Proposed Brooklyn Tea Party Candidate Pledges

On September 12^th, the Brooklyn Tea Party will be holding a rally at the 69^th Street Pier.  We are actively seeking speakers and would greatly appreciate any recommendations and leads you provide.  I am currently pursuing representatives of The Club for Growth and Citizens Against Government Waste.

            Many candidates we have had speak to our group previously, as well as others, would like to speak at our rally.  However, to separate those we would like to give publicity to from those who would just use our credibility, I propose their acceptance of pledges be a prerequisite. 

            Below are six suggested pledges I would like to require of candidates who wish to speak at our rally.  Please feel free to criticize these and suggest others.

           Personally, I would like to add a commitment to use the words "culturism" and "culturist" to counterbalance multiculturalism and disarm the constant abuse of the word ‘racist’ by those who do not wish to discuss the negative aspects of diversity.

            Your feedback on the culturism suggestion, the pledges, and possible speakers is greatly needed and appreciated.  Thank you.

Pledges for Brooklyn Tea Party Candidates:

                1)         - Whereas the reduction of our deficit will require sacrifice;

1)             Pledge to propose legislation to cut all government salaries by 20%. 

                2)         -Whereas stimulus plans and the associated borrowing undermine our national solvency and character;

2)             Pledge to fight to have the unspent stimulus monies applied directly to the reduction of our debt and vote against any further exceptions to the Pay-As-You-Go Budget Rule.

    3)         - Whereas civic participation is weakened by national initiatives and strengthened by local community participation;

3)             Pledge to triple the tax deduction for local charitable giving.

   4)          - Whereas we have national sovereignty, are at war with Islam, and no international right exists for foreign nations to build mosques in our nation;

4)             Pledge to fight the building of the 9 – 11 mosque.

   5)          - Whereas the stability of our nation rests on the reduction of the debt and we must also ask for sacrifice from the off-spring of the greatest generation;

5)             Pledge to propose legislation to take social security and medicare away from those making over 225,000 dollars a year upon their retirement.

   6)             - Whereas unemployment is well above 10% and our nation cannot assimilate unlimited numbers of peoples from foreign cultures;

6)              Pledge to build a fence along our southern border and denounce attacks on Arizona’s laws.

Two Culturist American Thinker Articles !!

Hey All,

    I have two articles posted on American Thinker.  Click the titles in the paragraphs below to read them!  Then go click and comment.  PLEASE !!

   The first is called "George Washington -- The Culturist Father of our Country."  It analyzes his farewell address to make the point that he was a culturist.  And he was!  On national morality, unity, and foreign policy, he thinks in our traditional culturist mode.

    The second one concerns is called, "Culturists Oppose Another Mosque in Brooklyn."  It shows how the opposition to the Voorhies mosque looks like the South when black people were not welcomed into neighborhoods or schools.  But rather than racist, this is culturist!  We cannot let the fear of racism blind us to the importance of culture.

    PLEASE GO THERE AND COMMENT!!  I hope to show that an interest in culturism exists!!

    That is one activist step you can take today.  We need to challenge multiculturalism.  Floating an alternative word is a way to do so quickly and efficaciously at very low cost.

     THANKS, John
    www.culturism.us

DIVISION WITHIN THE TEA PARTY ??!!

Acrimony within the Tea Party and important issues came from an article profiling me in the NYC Daily News. While the Daily News reporter originally contacted me due to my being the President of the Brooklyn Tea Party, the conversation quickly swung to my political passion: culturism. In this context we also discussed the Brooklyn Tea Party’s rally to stop the mosque at Ground Zero of the 9 – 11 attacks.


When I went to another Tea Party Chapter meeting to network and see how they run their meetings, the flack began. “That F’in idiot John Press” one member was exclaiming loudly in conversation when I entered the meeting. Shocked because I thought I had brought some good publicity to the Tea Party! When I finally calmed the movement leader down, I found he had some valid and interesting reasons to criticize me.

Many members have worked very hard to make the “Tea Party brand.” Being smeared as racists (the leaders who chastised me was black), fringe truthers concerned with Obama’s birth certificate, and dangerous militia folk, made people skittish about joining the Tea Party. Party strategists have, therefore, worked to make Tea Party membership only indicate a devotion to fiscal conservativism and upset over our nation's out-of-control borrowing. Eventually, we may be able to diversify into other areas of concern, the Chapter President explained, but to continue in a growth mode, making people think the Tea Party denounces Mosques scrambles the message and makes folks skittish about joining. Many national leaders believe we should never deviate from our main point.

Though he has valid points several responses come to mind. First of all, while it may not play strongly nationally, in Brooklyn people are hot under the collar over this mosque. And a large coalition already exists to stop another one being built in Brooklyn. Our ultimate local aim is to elect legitimately conservative candidates. Certain parts of Brooklyn have large pools of underrepresented and abused conservative citizens who would get active for legit candidates. And, if we wish to find legit candidates, an even stronger litmus test than whether or not they will go on record as favoring not overspending, is whether or not they will go on record opposing a mosque at ground zero and in Brooklyn. We will accrue passionate activists as well as politicians with integrity if we make stopping the mosque one of our areas of focus.

I wrote a policy paper about immigration being a Tea Party issue. Illegal immigration costs our states billions per year. Among other things, immigration is a fiscal issue. Can't immigration be a Tea Party issue?  And what about foreign policy?  I wrote another policy paper about the Tea Party using culturism to mediate the isolationism of Ron Paul and the expansionist view of Sarah Palin. Both claim Tea Party credibility despite their divergent stances. Culturism argues that we take cultural diversity seriously. Culturists agree with Ron Paul about avoiding nation building. But we culturists do so because cultural diversity dooms such efforts. So we agree with Palin that we must recognize our cultural enemies. Culturism argues that we strike our enemies hard, if we must, but then return home. The immigration issue and the culturist stance of avoiding nation building both seem intimately connected with the Tea Party message of smaller government and saving money. Are we not allowed to discuss such issues?

I asked the hostile Tea Party leader if he’d back an open-borders, pro-mosque, fiscal conservative. Having ample experience in politics, he gave me a great answer. He told me of a time where he had worked alongside an avowed socialist on the issue of driver’s licenses for illegal aliens. Politics make strange bedfellows. In the case of backing a candidate with whom many of us would disagree, he said we should never endorse candidates as such, we should endorse their economic policy. I told my disagreeing comrade that I thought that we would get more growth by taking a stance with Arizona than ignoring it. He disagreed. When I told him I thought we would soon need to choose to either side with Palin and her expansionist policies or Paul’s isolationist stance, he agreed. But, he added, the time for that decision had not yet come. To grow the movement to where it will have an impact we need numbers and that means we must stay on message.

I will bring this debate to the next Brooklyn Tea Party meeting. We will need to decide whether we entirely drop the mosque and immigration issues and just stick with the core theme of fiscal conservatism or not. I will add an argument my erstwhile compatriot did not add. As a new chapter, taking a brand others have crafted and bending it to your will is rude. If you, the reader, have any additional pertinent insights for me to bring to my chapter, please leave a comment and I will do so.

http://www.culturism.us/

Culturism in New York's Daily News

Culturism, Me, and the Tea Party got blended in this Sunday, June 13th article !  

If you are having trouble reading the article, double click the image for a larger version.

www.culturism.us

STOP THE GROUND ZERO MOSQUE WITH FARA AND CULTURISM

      We can stop the mosque at Ground Zero if we exchange the multicultural point of view for a culturist point of view and prosecute the mosque’s primary backer, Imam Rauf, under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

      Passed in 1938, FARA initially focused on “subversive” political propaganda. The purpose of FARA is to insure that the U.S. Government and the people of the United States are informed of the source of information (propaganda) and the identity of persons attempting to influence U.S. public opinion, policy, and laws. Upon registering as a foreign agent, the public has access to the foreign agent’s records concerning the publicity campaigns, lobbying expenditures, funding flows, offices activities and disbursements in support of those activities. In addition, the Act also requires that informational materials (formerly called propaganda) be labeled with a conspicuous statement that the information is disseminated by the agents on behalf of the foreign principal.

     The act was passed in response to German propaganda in the lead-up to World War II. Unfortunately, persons whose activities are of a "purely commercial nature or solely of a religious, scholastic, academic, scientific or fine arts nature are exempt. CAIR Unmasked, an organization dedicated to getting the Council of American – Islamic Relations, registered as a foreign agent, does not think religious status excuses Islamic organizations from compliance with FARA.

     The problematic distinction between religious and political activities in our law stems from our confusing our culture with supposed global culture. We assume a separation of church and state. But this is a very western notion based on Jesus Christ’s order to “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21). Muhammed, the founder of Islam, was both a political, religious leader, and a warlord. Islam has no separation of church and state or mosque and state. In order for us to properly enforce FARA we must recognize that Islam is both a religious and a political system.

     Two pieces of evidence underlay this contention. The first is the existence of Sharia courts. Sharia courts are Islamic religious courts. In Islamic jurisprudence, they decide civil as well as religious disputes. So when advancing Islam, foreign agents are also advancing a legal system. This proves that Islam is inherently political. Secondly, we must know that Islam is an expansive political system. Much like NAZI and Communist systems, we must recognize it as a competing aggressor. As evidence, we should remember that Islam nearly conquered Spain and Eastern Europe. They were only stopped from taking all of Europe by defensive military action. The very existence of the large “Muslim world” is evidence of successful military expansion.

     The proposed mosque at Ground Zero of the 9 – 11 attacks is to be named “Cordoba House.” Cordoba was the capital of Spain under Muslim domination. This is an overt reference to a desire to re-establish hegemony over western lands. The fact that it is at the site of an Islamic attack on our greatest symbols of economic and military might, confirms this assertion. Multiculturalism tells us that we have no core culture. Furthermore its directive to “celebrate diversity” assumes that no cultures are aggressive or un-American or anti-western. We must take a culturist point of view that recognizes cultural diversity and competition. We, the West, have a non-Islamic culture to protect and a right to protect it from aggressors. We need to replace the multicultural point of view with a culturist point of view.

     Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is the head of the effort to build a mosque at Ground Zero. He refuses to say where the $100 million for the mosque’s construction is coming from. We can only speculate that it must derive from Malaysia or Saudi Arabia. Were a brave politician to demand it, we could force him to register Imam Rauf as a foreign agent under FARA. This would mean that his books would be open and he would have to label his mosque as propaganda! Strengthened, FARA could then be used to forbid the mosque and the Saudi’s relentless building of mosques across America. The New York Post reports that the Kuwaiti born Rauf who is based in Malaysia has ties to the flotilla of jihadis that caused conflict with Israel. He provides a fantastic opportunity for a culturist application of FARA.

     We need to reverse our multicultural blindness to cultures in general, we need to take a culturist approach to Islam and recognize it as a hostile political system. From this vantage point we need to get disclosure from the Islamic propagandist Imam Rauf under FARA in order to stop the travesty of a mosque being built at Ground Zero.