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,
[ii] Collins, Laura, Daily Mail, Who was the real Michael Brown, . . . 11/27/14,

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.

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.

Saturday, November 22, 2014

Culturist Suicide

The following is a reprint from American Thinker: Please join the discussion there:

With Obama’s promised amnesty for illegal people, America has committed culturist suicide.  Culturism is the belief that a traditional majority culture has the right and duty to protect, promote, and promulgate itself.  This mission is now lost beyond hope.  And this is fatal to America, because cultural diversity is real and important.

Obama claims that his amnesty will impact only 5 million people.  How will they check that?  Who will check that?  Believe me, fraud will be rampant and we do not have the resources or will to check it.  And, this news will – as did Obama’s earlier promise not to deport children – create an enormous spike in illegals.  We no longer have a southern border.

As a culturist, I hold that America had a traditional majority culture that made it great.  Mexicans are not Americans.  They have a different language, holidays, and heroes. Multiculturalism claims we never had a core culture; the US is just as Islamic, Pilipino, etc., as it is Protestant European.  No.  We had a traditional majority culture, and the new immigrants are not of it.

Culturism believes in assimilation.  When minorities are pressured to assimilate, over time, they will.  But this means schools must push majority culture pride.  When large swaths of the nation are Latino, when multiculturalists push Spanish and Latino pride, we will assimilate to them, not the reverse; the majority culture will be replaced. 

Cultural history matters.  The U.S. and Mexico had a war over the U.S.’s southwestern territory.  Mexicans are extremely proud culturists.  Thus, “re-conquering the land” and “we didn’t cross the border; the border crossed us” sentiments will thrive.  Even if these ever-present sentiments don’t predominate during peacetime, they will undermine all attempts as assimilation.

So the cultural composition of America has been forever changed.  Does this matter?  Might the overwhelming of America’s traditional culture be not just a matter of aesthetics?  It matters, because cultural diversity is real.  Mexican culture – their high birth rates and low educational motivation – leads inexorably to third-world economic realities.  We will increasingly become a third-world nation.

Britain, Australia, and Europe must resist multiculturalism.  Practice culturism.  Teach pride in your heritage.  Cut off immigration from hostile and poor-performing cultures.  Maintain your traditional majority cultures.  America no longer exists.  In the mission of keeping Western civilization going, you’re now on your own.

Monday, September 15, 2014


We need to shout it from the rooftops, we need to spread this phrase: SEAL WESTERN BORDERS AND GET OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST NOW!

Were it not for Muslims living in the West, ISIS’s surge in the Middle East would present no possible physical danger for us in the West.   This is a fact.  The only danger ISIS poses in western lands comes from domestic Muslim sympathizers.  As such, we should continue to monitor especially suspicious Muslims in the West.  But, with such monitoring in place, Middle Eastern civil wars have nothing to do with our domestic safety; western troops have no reason to be there.

Having open borders directly impacts our safety and solvency.   Muslim immigration increases the potential for blowback from our meddling in the Middle East.  Furthermore, allowing impoverished, uneducated people, with foreign (even antagonistic) values and languages, into our nations strains our economic solvency and national cultural integrity.  To protect western nations, (and lives), we must stop immigration from third world nations and, especially, Muslim nations.

President Obama wants to arm the rebels fighting Syria’s government, bomb ISIS and defend Iraq’s government. The Middle East is violent and tribal, (cultural diversity is real), sending them weapons will not change this. Furthermore, the rebels fighting Syria’s government (alongside ISIS) are Muslim warriors.  We need to understand that the West and the Islamic world are distinct and at odds.  We have no business backing sides in their tribal conflicts or arming their warriors.

I am not saying if a nation backs a terrorist act in our lands we shouldn’t react.  We should attack with the intent of inflicting pain and death sufficient to deter any such future attacks.  But, after that mission, we must come home and seal our borders. There can be no doubt that this is the best strategy to deter and prevent future attacks on our soil. Likewise, there can be no doubt that the globalist-humanitarian position of fighting in the Middle East and keeping our borders open is much more dangerous for us. 

We need adopt the culturist view that the geo-political divide in the world is between the West and the Muslim world.  From this perspective, we have neither a globalist-humanitarian obligation to let Muslims immigrate to our continents, nor an obligation to back factions in their tribal wars; we only have an obligation to safeguard ourselves.  To signal such a paradigm shift, and to protect the West, we must SEAL WESTERN BORDERS AND GET OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST NOW.

Monday, June 23, 2014

This Must Be the Place – The Culturist Review

‘This Must Be The Place, a film by Paolo Sorrentino, shows how the shock of the holocaust infantilized Western culture and its citizens.  As jihadis presents us with images that make the holocaust photos look tame, the West must again contend man’s dark side.  Watching this film and ISIS videos can help the West grow up.

Sean Penn does a superb acting job as an aged 1980s rock star, Cheyenne, who has never changed his 80s look, even though he hasn’t performed for 20 years.  Coming too late to his estranged father’s deathbed, Cheyenne takes up his newly departed father’s hunt for his Auschwitz tormenter.   The gorgeous and poetic chase leads him through a beautifully, nostalgically, portrayed American landscapes and homes.    

Cheyenne has not spoken to his father in 30 years.  And at one point, he says, “not having had children has really screwed me up.”  The NAZI he is hunting is also estranged from his son.  And, a boy Cheyenne bonds with during his NAZI quest, appears to have lost his father in one of America’s Middle East wars.  The absence of fathers is – to put it lightly – a theme.

And, now my editorial begins . . . It has always amazed me that the 1960s generation followed on the heels of the WW II generation.  One generation stared down evil.  The next tried to convince us that bad guys were only an illusion to be overcome by love.  The hippies’ dream has led to our multicultural nightmare, wherein all cultures, no matter how NAZI-like, are considered idyllic and to be embraced with love and kindness.

Cheyenne didn’t speak to his father for 30 years because his father rejected his goth make-up.  Though not in the film, I have tried to imagine this holocaust survivor staring at his 1980s son playing at evil.  It would have stirred emotions and been hard to take seriously.  As in punk, the fifteen-year-old goth would be trying to acknowledge the evil their hippie parents ignored. But punk and goth lyrics aimed at imagined suburban kid horrors.

My analysis gets vindicated when Cheyenne meets a tough-looking, heavily-tattooed man in a bar, who is really just a nice guy.  Cheyenne asks drolly, when informed that his new acquaintance is a tattoo artist, “Have you noticed how nobody works anymore and everybody does something artistic?” Yes.  I have noticed both grown children playing tough guys littering western cities and the avoidance of responsibility.

Both Cheyenne’s father and the caught NAZI, lament having their “lightheartedness” and childhoods stolen from them by WW II.  Now in a Freudian transfer, our multicultural generation just wants happy depictions of all cultures.  In our post-holocaust world only being a victim has merit.  In such a world, being dominant and macho can only be a crime.  It is a formula for emasculation.  An absence of manliness.

After confronting his father’s NAZI guard Cheyenne grows up.  Today, a new generation is seeing evil first-hand in jihadis’ tiny youtube videos. Perhaps the jihadis’ cruelty will end the West’s childlike multicultural fantasy.

Sunday, June 22, 2014


There has been a surge of ISIS terror in Iraq.  We are told that this group’s killing is creating a humanitarian disaster; that we must intervene.   But this is not a humanitarian disaster, it is an Islamic disaster.  The West is not Islamic.  We need to distance ourselves from this action, not get involved.

 From a humanitarian perspective, western nations must stop the blood shed in Iraq because generic people – global citizens - are in need of protection. The humanitarian, globalist, multicultural vision, sees all people as essentially the same and on the same side geopolitically. Culturism believes in a ‘clash of civilization’ model.  In this clash, western nations are not on the same side as Islamic nations - we are antagonists. Rather than a ‘humanitarian’ obligation to aid or arm our enemies, we have a culturist obligation to protect ourselves.

 To keep the West out of the Iraqi conflict, we need to replace ‘humanitarianism,’ with culturism.  When people declare themselves globalists, tell them that you are NOT a ‘global citizen;’ you’re a western culturist; a citizen of your western nations, part of the family of nations that believes in freedom of speech, the relative separation of church and state, democracy, individualism, and women’s rights.  Recognizing that we belong to the western side is the first step to dismantling globalists’ ‘humanitarian’ calls to arm Muslims.   

 Culturism will also help us avoid having to take in refugees from the Iraqi conflict. Multiculturalists tell us that western nations are culturally neutral space.  Iraqi Muslims are just as western as anyone else.  This is not true. Iraqis come from the Muslim world.  The West is not a part of that sphere. Iraqis speak a non-western language, have non-western heroes, and hold values antithetical to ours. If Muslim refugees need asylum, let an Islamic nation take them in.

 This ‘humanitarian’ crisis actually provides us with a golden opportunity to defeat multiculturalism.  When multiculturalists tell us to ‘celebrate diversity;’ we can point to ISIS’s terrorist campaign. Diversity includes cultures that celebrate beheading.  Cultural diversity includes cultures that honor beheading people.  We don’t want to celebrate that.  So we are not ‘celebrating diversity,’ we are honoring our own values.  As we use the example of ISIS to wake people up from the multiculturalists’ attempt to blind us to the importance, the real extent, of cultural diversity.

 In fact, the ISIS crisis even gives us an opportunity to defeat the globalist ideal of ‘humanitarianism’ and ‘human rights,’ because it demonstrates that these are western concepts. If the West falls, Iraq will not champion ‘human rights’ in the world.  They are fighting for Islamic domination.  China doesn’t believe in ‘human rights,’ free speech, democracy and such. If we want to protect so-called  ‘humanitarian’ virtues, we must realize that they are only western virtues and protect the West.  Giving Muslims funding or letting them into our country undermines our ability to defend our western rights-based values. 

 To keep us from sending aid to Iraq or allowing refugees into the West, we must replace the globalist, multiculturalist, humanitarian ideologies with a culturist one The barbarian behavior of ISIS gives us an opportunity to spread culturist doctrine.  You can do so by using the words ‘culturism’ and ‘culturist’ in your conversations.  Take action; do so today.

Friday, June 13, 2014

The Magic Mountain - The Culturist Review

Thomas Mann’s The Magic Mountain is a classic of Western Literature.  Starting just before World War I, it follows a middle class bourgeois, Hans Castrop, to a tuberculosis sanitarium on the top of a mountain (hence the title).  His intended 3 – week visit to his cousin, turns into a seven-year internal odyssey among the sick.  

The Magic Mountain is written as a bildungsroman – a genre wherein the main character develops his character via experience and help from guides. In this version, an advocate of Enlightenment values Settembrini and the Nietzscheian Naphta fight over Hans’ soul. 

Settembrini is working on an Encyclopedia of suffering in order to help expunge suffering from the world; Naphta dreams of returning to Middle Ages values in which people knew their place and accepted suffering and shortcomings as a part of life.  Settembrini’s dreams are based on science and progress; Naphta’s require and celebrate a bit of violence and oppression to keep man in order.

And this battle for Hans’ soul reflects that battles over the Weimar Republic that Mann faced as he wrote the Magic Mountain.  Many bought Naphta’s appeal to save Germany via order during the inter-war period; they killed communists by the 100s and spawned the Third Reich.  In turn, the Weimar Republic called for calm and appealed to Settembrini’s enlightened ‘republican’ (small r) values.

Hans’ never really buys either proponents’ position.  He liked Settembrini’s Enlightenment ideals, but found them shallow and dull.  And though he admires how easily Naphta destroys Settembrini in arguments, he understands that Naphta is a misanthropist and a monster. 

In an exciting climax, the two intellectuals agree to a duel.  As a pacifist, Settembrini fires into the air. Naphta then calls him a coward, and commits suicide.  The intellectual battles over, Hans languishes, nowhere in thought, far removed from society, on top of that mountain.

Eventually, Hans leaves this sanitarium, to go back to the real world.  He leaves arid thought to engage in life’s day – to –day struggles.  Ironically, as World War I is on, he actually returns to the front lines of a thoughtless battle.  We hope - as the book is a bildungsromans – that he is improved.  Perhaps with irony, the narrator tells us that he hopes love will bloom from this carnage.

As a culturist, I understand the pull between the rational and the irrational.  In Mann’s sanitarium, wherein bourgeois slowly rot, in the face of Islamic aggression and ghetto culture, we do nothing out of fear of being called ‘racist.’  I hope the term ‘culturist’ can allow us to have reasonable discussions about negative impacts of cultural diversity, sans the ‘r’ word.

But, as a culturist, I study cultural dynamics.  I know that dry reasoned debates do not wake people up as much as the English Defense League smashing the offices of pro-immigration politicians offices would.  So I too am torn between Settembrini’s placid debate and the evil attraction of Naphta.

The political correctness police should understand that by using Settembrini’s “universal” (not) “global” (not) Enlightenment values to stifle any sense of western pride, they are preparing the way for a backlash of Naphta’s irrational violence.  As such, we culturists need to safely develop national pride and discussions of cultural diversity.  Otherwise, as with Hans, we will have no option but to cower on a mountain top or join in mass carnage.

Sunday, June 1, 2014

A Culturist Challenge to Black Men

I am struck by a paradox: 

In the National Basketball Association (NBA) we laud the competitive grit of black players.  Seven points down with two minutes left?  Blacks don’t give up!  Down 3 to 1 in the series?  Believe! FIGHT!  You can do it!!!

The paradox comes from comparing the Blacks’ never-say-die fighting attitude in the NBA to their constant victimization in social depictions.  High crime rates?  Blacks are victims of poverty.  Poor school performance?   Blacks are victims of hidden racism.  Just hints of name-calling, apparently, causes black men to fold off the court. 

To illustrate the paradox, in 1950, Nat “Sweetwater” Clifton became the first black person to sign an NBA contract.  You never hear black people say, “We cannot compete in basketball because we were kept out of the NBA until 1949.”  But, we hear, “We can’t compete because we were kept out of white schools until the early 1960s,” all the time. 

Instead of toughness, on and off the court we get constant cry-baby reactions from blacks. “Waaaa!” They cry, “He used the N-Word!  Waaaa!   And we reply, “Oh. We feel your terrible pain widdle one. Do you want the government to punish the bad man who hurt your widdle feelings?  Can you stop crying now?  Is the ouchy better?”

Instead our reaction should be, “Shut the F up and grow a pair!!!! As on the court, don’t dwell on the unfair call from the last play. Stop crying get back to competing!!!! MAN UP!!!  And, while we’re on the subject blacks commit insane amounts of crime, parent irresponsibly, suck at school, and rely on the government to feed them way.  

The whining reply to the prior statements, “Mommy he was waaaaycist.” It is a sad little trick.  The above facts are not racist, they are culturist.  They’re not statements about your genes; they refer to how much of your culture sucks off the court.  These are not irrational bad calls, they are totally accurate depictions in the weakness of your off-court game.

So man-up black man! The Asians are dunking on you in the game of life. Hell, even the Latinos are stealing your balls! Don’t cry because I mentioned it.  Drink some testosterone, put on your big boy pants and start playing off the court with as much grit as you do on it.

John Kenneth Press, Ph.D.

Thursday, May 15, 2014


Ali G. is the proto-typical 'whigger,' (a white pretending he is an inner-city black gangster
 type): tough and swaggering. He is also a comic creation of Sacha Baron Cohen. The 
comedian mocks society by playing this part to a tee and enjoying the fact that no one is 
brave enough to call him on it. But, one great culturist did: the late American editorialist, 
Andy Rooney.

The heroic culturist moment starts when Ali G asks Rooney, "Does you think the media has changed since you first got in it?" Rooney corrects him, "'Does you think the media has changed?' Do you think the media has changed?" Rooney confronts this Ebonics bastardization of our language head-on, insisting on adherence to basic rules of English grammar.
When Ali G. attributes the linguistic error to a difference between the British and American vernacular, Rooney snidely refutes his attempt at relativism saying, "The English language is very clear. I have fifty books on the English language if you'd like to borrow one." Rather than pander or ignore Ali G's destruction of language, Rooney refutes and rejects it, saying, "I can't waste my time."
This may seem like a small act of defiance. But, in fact, it conforms well to the 'broken windows' technique that drastically reduced crime in New York City. That is, by not allowing small crimes to go unpunished, by locking people up for small infractions, you dissuade people from even contemplating undertaking larger crimes. Every time we fail to confront whigger gangsters' small improprieties, we enable the downfall of western civilization.
Proving the aged American culturist was over the target when he confronted Ali G., the comic accused Rooney of "racialism." We all know that any assertion of linguistic or behavior standards is met with this defiant, but empty, accusation. Having none of it, Rooney informed him that the word is "racist;" and promptly left. This confrontation revealed Ali G. as the foolish, overgrown infant that he is – small and pouty.
Liberalism's cowardly failure to judge a person for poor English, being degenerate, or even criminality, emboldens anti-social behavior. Our governments need to stop supporting people who have babies with no means of paying for them; our schools must fail those who can only write in Ebonics. We must affirm that we have a language with standards and that culture matters.
But, before our institutions will take up the torch – as uncomfortable as it is – culturists must individually emulate Rooney's confrontation of Ali G. If a person has ghetto English, confront them on it. Otherwise, you must know that Baron Cohen's joke is on you.

Interview with Me, JKP, About Culturism

Sunday, May 11, 2014

To Whom Does the "our" in #BringBackOurGirls Refer?

This week America's First Lady, Michelle Obama, joined the ever growing #Bring Back Our Girls campaign that aims to rescue kidnapped Nigerian girls. The culturist instinct is to say 'NO!' to intervention in any part of the world that isn't western. But, this is somewhat dependent on to whom the 'our' in #Bring Back Our Girls refers.

The girls being kidnapped are largely Christian. Their abductors are Muslims. If the pronoun 'our' in #Bring Back Our Girls refers to saving 'our' Christian girls from Muslims, I might have some enthusiasm for this cause. If Mrs Obama wishes to go on a crusade saving Christians worldwide, I would have some sympathy – maybe even enthusiasm – for the project. But, since the West has eschewed any culturist Clash of Civilizationsconsciousness for decades, I doubt that is what the pronoun stands for. 

Rather, I would assume that the 'our' refers to the global 'our' of the "we are the world," "all people are on the same side" variety. The appeal is to a globalist 'our' vision wherein we are responsible for all people around the world with no reference to culture or opposition to us. This is the thinking that got us to create a Muslim stronghold in Kosovo, has us sending billions to Afghanistan and Iraq, and facilitates mass Muslim immigration into the West. 

We are not all the same. We are not all on the same side. We have our 'ours,' they have theirs. The little jihadis-in-training Palestinian boys are not 'our' boys. They are 'our' enemies. I don't want to give scholarships to deserving Saudi Arabian students. The Saudis support terrorism and the destruction of the West. I want to help our children, but not my enemy's children. This is basic culturist logic.

Even if the 'our' in #Bring Back Our Girls refers to the Nigerian girls as 'ours' because they are Christians, I am dubious about saving them. Nigeria is not a core western nation. If we want to save 'our' girls I suggest we start by pursuing and severely prosecuting Muslim 'grooming' gangs who target British girls for gang rape and prostitution. Britain is a core western nation. Rescuing grooming gang victims would keep our money in the West, and promote culturist thinking at home.John K. Press, Ph.D. Namseoul University

Wednesday, May 7, 2014


One evening recently, my literature group dove into Seeds, by Sherwood Anderson. This short story explores the Freudian, sexual dynamics within a young woman. Largely raised without a father figure, she craves sex, and yet, simultaneously, is entirely repelled by it. At the end of this article, I will discuss how such art can add to vital culturist discussions.
This young woman who is repelled by sex exudes it in other ways; she routinely keeps the door ajar when showering and lays around the boarding house in seductive poses. Near the end of Anderson’s story, her landlady tries to evict her for this inappropriate behavior.
Facing her imminent eviction, the young woman runs into the room of a poor painter who has a facility for words. Among the men, this painting intellectual had taken the least notice of her. While asking the painter to "take her," she drops to her knees. When the trailing landlady enters the room and sees this, she pulls the wanton woman up to her feet and both women begin berating the painter. This reaction seems counter-intuitive, until we consider Seeds as a Freudian analogy.
Positing Freudian symbolism, I told my literature group that the sex-obsessed woman is the id: that is, the primal sexual drive postulated by Freud; the landlady represents the super-ego (that is, what society demands of you – in this instance keeping your sexual urges contained); and the man, the painter, represents the ego. Our egos are the attempt to balance the two opposed forces, to satisfy our sexual drive within the limits of social propriety.
In the literature group I defended Anderson's main supposition, the idea that unresolved issues from our family upbringing impact who we love and what we do for a living. I know that, in my own case, I have followed in my father's profession of being a professor, partially out of competition. And, my battle for acknowledgement – this very article in fact – in some ways comes from an urge to be acknowledged, to make up for love I lacked as a child.
But, then I took a leap of faith – I postulated that Koreans (I live and work in Korea) have fewer subconscious traumas than westerners. Koreans feel less individual strife as they do what their families and nation tell them to do. Being collectivists, they live with a much stronger sense of super-ego and very repressed ids. My friends disagreed: Korea is very strict around virginity prior to marriage, yes, but it has – as a result – more prostitution than other nations. I cannot confirm that assertion. But, this brings up the idea of psychoanalyzing nations.
Nations have different psychologies. The id has been let loose in the West. We have forgotten that sexual force needs to be controlled and constrained by the super-ego. And this is disastrous. If our young women are all pregnant by seventeen with no sense of social responsibility, their generation will not get educated. This dismissal of the super-ego, calling society's restraints 'artificial,' will lead to the West's end as a first-world civilization. On the other hand, Korea is not making babies. It is turning into a first-world ghost town. Balance is required.
In Anderson's Seeds, the painter offers to marry the sexually driven woman. He sees this as a way to resolve her issues. But, he then realizes that she will still be a mess of untidy subconscious drives (he realizes this because he sees such never-ending drives in himself and realizes marriage will not solve them). He thinks undertaking a marriage in the hopes of quieting the subconscious is dishonest and shallow. Perhaps fearing he'll lose inspiration for his paintings, he abandons the young woman.
I agree that we will never stop the battle between rationality and irrationality – individually or collectively. But, I disagree that this means we throw out institutions such as marriage. In fact, I take our inability to resolve subconscious struggles to mean we can keep marriage without fear of mental sterility. Thus, in fighting over Anderson's short story, my literature group hit upon some fundamental realizations about our selves individually and our society. 
We need to debate the balance (or imbalance) of the id and super-ego in our culture. We need to understand the impact of our considering limitations 'artificial' and 'inauthentic.' Literature groups and engrossing psychoanalytic stories such as Anderson's Seeds can provide a great springboard for such discussions. That's why, as a culturist, I implore you to start a literature group, read Anderson's Seeds, and disseminate cultural psychoanalysis.

Saturday, April 26, 2014


Paul Weston, the leader of the wonderful, aggressive culturist, Liberty GB political party, has been arrested.  The crime?  Reading Winston Churchill quotes concerning Islam.

Please spread the word about this atrocity!

Read more HERE !

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

“The Guardian” Spews Multicultural Slander Internationally

The Guardian’s April 14th, 2014 article, “NarendraModi: Britain can't simply shrug off this Hindu extremist: The UK will alsosuffer if India elects this far-right activist. We must sever our links withhim,” is a hit piece.  Narenda Modi is a Hindu Nationalist.  But that does not make him evil.  We who defend the West should pray for his victory in India’s upcoming Prime Minister election.

Narendra Modi is pro-Hindu and he understands the dangers of Islam.  Does that make him a racist?  Hitler?  No.  It makes him a rational culturist.   If elected he will not put Muslims in gas chambers.  He will, however, guard India’s borders against relentless Islamic immigration designed to re-subjugate India to Islam.  He will enact policies that affirm India’s Hindu identity.

India is run by the multicultural party “Congress.” As part of their multiculturalism, they create special electoral and employment set-asides for minorities (mostly Muslims).  They fund mosques, but not Hindu temples.  And, whenever you mention that Islam is dangerous, they call you “racist” and “communal,” (note that Muslims are not racist or communal if they promote their culture - sound familiar?).  Congress’ relentless multiculturalist policies created the need for Mod’s culturist BJP party.

The Guardian’s hit piece blames Modi for the 2002 Gujarat “pogroms” (actually riots).  Gujarat is a state in India.  These riots started when Muslims chased Hindu Nationalists onto a train and set it on fire killing 58 people.  In the ensuing riots, 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus were killed (wikipedia).   Modi was the Chief Minister of Gujarat at the time and set a curfew the day after the train conflagration.  An official inquest cleared Modi of charges that he aided in the violence.

Here is the deal – Muslims are supposed to be able to set fire to a train full of Hindu Nationalists and nothing is supposed to happen.  Congress blames Modi and the Hindu Nationalists for responding.  No blame goes to the Muslim arsonists who started it. Disgusting.  But, to read the Guardian hit piece, you’d think Modi led the attack; that he set fire to Hindu Nationalists in the train! This sort of evil, pandering “journalism” is just as common in India as it is in Britain – and just as dangerous.

In fact, Modi is Gujarat’s longest serving Chief Minister ever.  He won three elections after the 2002 riots.  He won because he created great economic growth within the state.  Modi is running on the promise of clearing out corruption and bring growth to India’s economy writ large.  He has done vast outreach to Muslims.  They have voted for him in large numbers in all his elections.   I am not saying his outreach to Muslims is good.  But, the Guardian’s multicultural hit piece is hysterical, dishonest, and intolerant. 

Modi came up through the ranks of the world’s largest culturist organization, the RSS.  This is a Hindu Nationalist educational group, with millions of disciplined members dedicated to the culturist proposition that India is a Hindu nation.  The multiculturalists will not forgive him for that.  Predictably, the Guardian, using a line in a 1938 book, uses his membership in the pro-Hindu group to tie him to Hitler! But, his BJP party is one of the top two parties in India.  He needs Muslim votes.  Modi will fund Hindu temples; but, he will not lead pogroms – he is a politician. 

That said, Modi and his supporters well understand the dangers of Islam. Anti-Jihadists would do well to understand the potential of Hindu Nationalists as allies.  Remember India was conquered, ruled and tyrannized by Muslims for hundreds of years until the British liberated it.  Remember that Islamic terrorism against Hindus is constant in Pakistan and Bangladesh, and it is frequent in India.  Hindus understanding the threat of Islam is why Modi’s BJP party is one of the two largest in India.

Don’t believe the inappropriately named ‘Guardian’ slander. We culturists should all welcome Modi’s election as Prime Minister of India.

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

Culturist Language Policy - Part 1

This is part 1 of 5.  Korea must reject multiculturalism and embrace culturism if it is to survive.

Friday, March 28, 2014

Why Kobe Bryant is my Favorite NBA Player

I love Kobe Bryant because I love the Lakers.  But, whereas some Lakers have made that equation difficult to maintain, Kobe makes it easy.   He has consistently been a patriot, talking on and on about his pride in representing America in the olympics.  As such, I have written about my love for Kobe Bean Bryant before.

But now Kobe, this culturist MVP, has come out against the Miami Stinkers' knee-jerk, race-based support for Trayvon Martin.  Kobe was raised in Italy.  Kobe avoided liberal indoctrination.  Not only is Kobe a great basketball player and exemplar of the Protestant Work Ethic, he is as patriotic as anyone who reads this blog.
Read about Kobe and Trayvon  HERE and cheer!!



Sunday, March 2, 2014

Culturism, Mexicans, and the Ukraine

America has the same situation with Mexicans as the Ukraine has with Russia!  Culturist common sense tells us that borders should, to the extent possible, reflect cultures.  If a nation has many different cultures a civil war is not so likely to start.  But, if a nation hosts two huge cultural groups the potential for conflict is high.  This is especially true if one cultural group belongs to a neighboring nation.

The Ukraine exemplifies the latter, and most dangerous, situation.  The Crimean region of the Ukraine is culturally and linguistically Russian.  They are concentrated along the Russian border.  This is a formula for a civil war that will drag the neighboring nation in.  

America has the very same situation with Mexicans!  They are connected on our southern border with Mexico.  Worse yet, we had a war with Mexico over the same territory, so they think they have a claim to it.  Just as Russians identify more with Russian than Ukraine, Mexicans identify more with Mexico.    This is not racist - Ukrainians and Russians are both “white” - it is culturist.

Mexicans will  naturally feel loyalty towards Mexico.  This is why Mexican majority states will neither introduce nor enforce border laws.  This is why Mexican majority states will never stop the hemorrhaging of remittance dollars back to “their country,” (Over 22 billion in 2011).   In fact, even before a civil war, to have a huge alien group from the bordering nation is to have lost sovereignty over your nation.

In 1953 we had Operation Wetback to push the Mexicans back into Mexico.  That is no longer viable.  We need to enforce border laws, end dual citizenship and stop remittances to force people to choose which country they want to belong to.  And, we need culturist curriculum because multiculturalism teaches one to maintain pride in being “Mexican” by race. Culturist curriculum will teach pride in identifying with America's traditional majority culture and story. These measures will lower the possibility of war.

So, yes, the Ukraine is in anger of having a civil war.  Even if we were to stop Russia from invading, the cultural split means the tension there will never stop.  For that reason, I say there will be more stability if we just let Russia have the Crimean.  But, rather than worry about Ukraine, we should spend our time considering what the culturist laws in play bode for us.