Categorized | Culturism

Guest Post by Dr. John Press: Culturism, the Tea Party, and Foreign Policy

Editor’s Note: One of the greatest benefits to attending an event like CPAC is the wealth of people one meets. One of the more interesting people I met at the three day conference was Dr. John Press. We attended a blogger “meet and greet” sponsored by Campaign for Liberty. Dr. Press is a culturist and a History of Education Curriculum Designer at Empire State College SUNY and Adjunct Professor, Vaughn Aeronautics College. He has a blog on Culturism and is the author of  “Culturism: A Word, A Value, Our Future.” has more information about culturism.

Dr. Press has written another very interesting article and has allowed me to share his thoughts. This article examines the Ron Paul foreign policy of “just leave” and contrasts it to the Sarah Palin Democracy building ideas, and the better alternative of a culturism approach. This is really good stuff!

Please visit his blog for his many excellent posts.

Policy Statement # 1

Culturism, the Tea Party, and Foreign Policy

By Dr. John K. Press

Brooklyn Tea Party

The Tea Party is in danger of being torn between the Ron Paul’s constrictive and Sarah Palin’s expansive foreign policy wings.   Culturism can help us move past both of these hurdles.

Culturism is the opposite of multiculturalism.  Culturism is defined as “the philosophy which holds that majority cultures have a right to define, protect, and promote themselves domestically.”  This philosophy supports sovereignty.

On foreign policy culturism provides a third path between Palin and Paul.  From a culturist point of view, both sides are misled by avoiding the subject of culture.

Paul’s view that Jihad is a backlash against an expansive foreign policy ignores culture.  Islam is an expansive theocratic thought-system that has been at war with the West for 1400 years.  Withdrawing our troops from the Middle East and apologizing for America’s behavior will not win us friends and allies in that region.

Palin’s Neo-Con friends take the view hat we can turn Muslim nations into believers in western values.  This also ignores culture.  Islam is fundamentally hostile to the solely western values of freedom of speech, any separation of church and state, women’s rights, and democracy.  From a culturist perspective, nation building in that region is doomed to failure.

Two foreign examples will outline culturist foreign policy towards Islam.

Using Iran as an example, culturists believe that we need to militarily destroy their nuclear weapons making ability.  Culturism believes in cultural sovereignty, but nuclear weapons are not a part of Iran’s traditional majority culture and they are developing these weapons to attack western nations.  We cannot allow them to have nuclear weapons. Yet, after destroying their weapons building infrastructure, we should not try to rebuild their civic and political infrastructure with the hopes of turning them into an America-loving democracy.

Afghanistan hit us by harboring the terrorists that did such tremendous damage on 9 – 11 that we have a right and duty to inflict pain upon them in self-defense; thus teaching them -and the world  – a lesson.  The perpetrators’ being killed cannot be so pretty, but the al Qaeda forces attacked us and we must be done, that is war.  But after we inflict pain in Afghanistan and kill those who attacked us, culturists insist that we let Afghanistan be the nation it wants to be, even though we realize they will not uphold western values or be strong western ally.

From a Tea Party consistent vantage, wanting smaller government and expanding American dominion to an entire other hemisphere lacks consistency.  “Smaller” and “world” government are near opposites.  And every penny put into the Afghani economy, does not go into ours.

Thus the culturist point of view combines the hawk message of protecting the US with the anti-expansionist view of the doves by including cultural information.   If a nation harbors terrorist that hurt us, we must inflict serious pain on them and then leave.  This policy is fiscally conservative.  This policy protects us from terrorism.  This policy is compatible with smaller government.  This culturist foreign policy should be the Tea Party position.

About Dr. John Press

Dr. John Kenneth Press is the author of "Culturism: A Word, A Value, Our Future." He most recently designed curriculum for Empire State in the area of the History of Education. Dr. Press spent 8 years teaching history, psychology, and philosophy at the high school level. He has written four book-length manuscripts including culturism, and studied furiously his entire life.

2 Responses to “Guest Post by Dr. John Press: Culturism, the Tea Party, and Foreign Policy”

  1. P White says:

    John Press of the Brooklyn Tea Party is a shill for Zionism. I don’t buy the basic premise of Culturism. It’s an ideology that claims the supposed majority culture–whatever the Culturists define as the majority culture–has the right to further entrench itself by force. The US Constitution doesn’t privilege cultures any more than it does religions or political parties. Nor does it authorize wars against or on behalf of other countries who in effect operate on Culturist principles (Iran, Israel).


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge

Tom White Says:

Nothing is more conservative than a republican wanting to get their majority back. And nothing is more liberal than a republican WITH a majority.

Sign up for Virginia Right Once Daily Email Digest

No Spam - ever! We send a daily email with the posts of the previous day. Unsubscribe at any time.
* = required field

Follow Us Anywhere!