- HUMAN RIGHTS v. CULTURIST WESTERN RIGHTS -
Culturist Epistemology
Culture is not metaphysical; ultimately, it exists in heads and institutions. You need land to grow food in order to support the heads in which culture exists. With no food, no heads; with no heads, no culture. When a Muslim immigrates, the very space he occupies is a Muslim space. When your town has a Hindu temple, that space is necessarily no longer a Western space. No 'western essence' permeates Muslim no-go zones; that space is no longer western.
If the West falls, neither China nor Iran will promote 'human rights;' 'human rights' will cease to exist. To protect so - called 'human rights' we must protect western territory and solvency.
Accordingly, it is best to call so-called 'human rights,' 'western rights.' This will remind us that when we defend the West we defend the only culture that promotes rights. That's why, truly, western culturism is the new liberalism.
Offensive Culturist Word Use
Cultural diversity being real dooms attempts to militarily force Muslim nations to adopt Western values and institutions. Therefore, (when not punishing them for terrorist acts), culturism advocates keeping our military out of Muslim nations.
But, verbally, we can weaken Muslim governments by degrading their values in comparison with the 'western rights' model. For example, we should ruthlessly mock Iran's theocratic government and backwards women's rights agenda.
Yet, Iran is not our concern. Reifying western pride and identity is the real goal of mocking Islam's overall stupid brutality. Cultural identity is usually bolstered via contrast with a hated other. Islam is, particularly, suited to make the West look distinct and noble.
While culturism involves battles for land, might and economies that can sustain heads, ultimately culturists must battle for the cultural assumptions in those heads.
Culturist Rights and Refugees
We often hear that 'individual rights' trump 'culturist rights;' That is, if we enforce our immigration laws, a teen and her illegal mother might be separated. Individual rights do not automatically trump the West's culturist right to have a border.
Muslim nations don't take in Christian refugees. China takes no refugees. Just like the Asian and Muslim realms, the West has culturist rights. So-called, 'human rights' do not trump the West's culturist right to sovereignty.
The culturist programming of youth is not difficult. Changing adultÕs views is nearly impossible. Culture is made up of populations who identify with it. Rejecting the millions of incoming 'refugees,' because they harbor hostile ideology, is a defensible policy position.
All Muslim 'refugees' must be preemptively directed to a nation state in the Islamic world.
End Foreign Mosque Funding
The foreign funding of mosques in the West must be stopped. To do this, philosophically, we must reject multiculturalism and embrace the culturist idea that the West has a unique civilization to protect and that Islam is the West's traditional enemy.
To make this legal, we can note that the separation of Church and State says nothing of Mosque and State.
More realistically, in America, the Foreign Agent Registration Act allows us to register foreign agents' and stop their funds from being used for domestic propaganda. To apply this law, we must classify Islam as the political ideology of an enemy, which it is.
Ending the foreign funding of mosques does not prohibit local citizens from funding and building their own mosques.
Western rights belong to westerners individually and collectively: our Constitutional guarantee of free speech does not grant Saudi Arabia the right to build mosques in the West. Our not being able to build churches in Saudi Arabia confirms that 'culturist rights' do exist.
Conclusion
China's racist immigration laws protect their national identity. Saudi Arabia's culturist immigration laws protect theirs. The West is not a culturally neutral 'human' globalist space. The West has a specific culture and the right to have culturist laws that protect our culture.
The phrase 'human rights' is most frequently used in order to corrode western sovereignty. To win the rhetorical battle we must correctly call so-called, 'human rights' what they are: 'western rights.'