Culturism: A Word, A Value, Our Future

Dymphnaon February 7, 2017 at 9:41 am said:

In the end, “Multiculturism” is a dead letter. A more fruitful concept, one that has worked in the past before the deliberately destructive neo-marxists gained ascendancy, is “culturism“.

About ten years ago, John Press wrote a provocative book on the subject; it gained some attention but not nearly enough:

http://amzn.to/2ljsbsL

Culturism: A Word, A Value, Our Future

From the Amazon page:

Culturism is the opposite of multiculturalism. Rather than stress our diversity, culturism asks that we stress our unity. To do so we must protect and promote our traditional majority western culture. Outside of the West, all nations have always had culturist policies. China, Saudi Arabia, and Mexico are current practitioners of culturism.
Unlike multiculturalists, culturists take cultural diversity seriously. If we were to take culture seriously we would: avoid wars designed to make Islamic nations progressive, have rational border laws, understand that racial profiling is really culturist profiling, know that the achievement gap reflects cultural results rather than society’s racism, and be able to discuss the importance of diversity without multiculturalists easily smearing us as racist.

Racism is irrational and evil. But because cultural diversity is real, culturism is rational and necessary.

The book Culturism: A Word, A Value, Our Future explores the many dynamics of traditional culturism in an entertaining fashion. A chapter shows that the U.S. has traditionally been a culturist nation. One chapter shows the difference between the West and the rest. The anthropology chapter explodes the myth of universal human nature. In a chapter on nature, we see that animals are culturist. The psychology chapter shows our natural propensity for group joining and the philosophy chapter reminds us that philosophers have traditionally worked on discussions of political and cultural survival. Culturism should be a unifying theme for our schools’ curriculum.

Above all, Culturism: A Word, A Value, Our Future argues that we need to use and spread the words ‘culturism’ and ‘culturist’ to challenge multiculturalists’ current dominance over public discourse.

————
Interestingly, he uses the English poet, Matthew Arnold, as an exemplar of culturism and has a website devoted to him:

http://www.matthewarnold.us/

Arnold’s best-known poem,”Dover Beach”, is full of powerful images, though many see it as sad, especially the last stanza. In the right light, though, those lines are a testament to love, loyalty, and the bonds of human connection. To me, though, it sums up the relief of being able to lay down the arms of conflict and to accept the limits of being human.(But I suppose my optimistic view of Arnold’s poem lies in my foundational belief in some kind of consciousness past this one):

Ah, love, let us be true
To one another! for the world, which seems
To lie before us like a land of dreams,
So various, so beautiful, so new,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.

The ability to be “true to one another” is the real sticking point of modernity in the West. Arnold takes it down to the atomic level – one on one loyalty is where our honor lies. This is diametrically opposed to the tribal loyalty of the incoming strangers whose cultures have yet to evolve to the point of the personal “I”. That is the fundamental difference underlying all the “confused alarms of struggle and flight”.

In Western culture, despite our experiences of betrayal, we continue to strive for the ideal of personal loyalty. In tribal cultures there is no room for such a concept. We would see our vision of congenial human relationships as the better one…and we would be right.

Marxism (and its retarded little brother, neo-marxism) is thus regressive. The concepts of marxism < --> multiculturalism are essentially tribal. You can’t transplant that patch of skin onto the body of Western thought; it will continue to be rejected as “not-self”.