by piercebrownthe3rd

Could the, ‘RIGHT’, be right?  

Cultural Crisis and the Unraveling of the American Social Fabric

Part Four: Too Many Chiefs–Why the “Idea of America” Cannot Survive Multi-”big C” Culturalism

Consider cultural empowerment. It is a term so loaded it literally bristles with essentially martial implications in the contemporary American imagination. It is astonishingly evocative considering its infant status in the American lexicon. This can be traced to what is unconsciously recognized rather than consciously acknowledged about [big-C] Culture, a thing that can be illustrated by using the mathematical principle of association. This principle asserts that if a = b, and b = c, then a = c. Now, consider the following series of associations: if Culture = identity, and 

Identity =  power, then Culture = power. The power of Culture springs from the fact that it dictates behavior by way of identity, for those who accept it. 

Malcolm X is quoted as having said, “Power concedes nothing without a demand.” This statement, while patently obvious, had a galvanizing effect upon certain segments of the black community, and the quest for Culturally-based power began in earnest. Blacks had demands aplenty. But they had come to the disheartening conclusion that any demand made in the absence of power is an empty gesture, despite its justness, legality, or morality. And the primary demand blacks were making of America was unqualified inclusion in the American “family”. It included an explicit demand that whites surrender ideas about black people which limited and debilitated them in their own eyes as well as in the eyes of their fellow citizens. These ideas (stereotypes, prejudices) were largely homespun, but had significant antecedents in the racial chauvinism of Anglo-Saxon Culture. Long frustrated by the failure of philosophical, intellectual, or humane appeals, blacks turned to what amounted to brute force. Afro/Black/African-American (sub)culture would first proclaim its existence as a Culture, then demand from American (i.e. white/Anglo) Culture inclusion from the position of power implicit in the understanding of having a separate, autonomous Culture. This was believed to have the additional benefit of providing a positive self-image and self-legitimizing dynamic for black people, another function of Culture. 

The insistence of blacks upon the existence and legitimacy of a black Culture has come to be generally (and correctly) understood by white people as a bid for power. However, the underlying purpose or intent for the use of that power has been misunderstood not only by whites, but potentially many blacks as well. At this point a critical addition must be added to the aforementioned chain of associations–if power = control, then Culture = control. Consequently, this assumption of power via the insistence upon Culture has been misinterpreted as a bid for control, when it was essentially a tactical ploy for inclusion. This is what the Cultural Empowerment movement has in common with the Modern Civil Rights Movement, which attained something the Civil War itself ultimately failed to do–to create fundamental and lasting (if for some grudging) changes in how whites interacted with blacks. This was a change in Culture, which is about how things are done socially (not necessarily or even primarily institutionally), and ultimately dictates every aspect of the interactive lives of its members. America’s social landscape has not been the same since. The success of blacks in this regard was not lost on others who considered themselves oppressed. Consequently, the modern Civil Rights Movement has become the stated inspiration of and archetype for empowerment groups of women, Hispanics, Asians, homosexuals, and even, ironically, some white power groups. The mantle has been recently taken up by the more forceful bent of the African-American Cultural Empowerment movement. Motivated by the perception of African-Americans possessing greater power than they actually wield, and the concern over being left behind in the scramble [for power], assimilated white ethnics are increasingly mimicking the Culturally assertive example provided by their African-American countrymen. 

However well-intentioned, African-American Cultural empowerment has in critical areas/ways back-fired, and worse, inspired a host of opportunistic and in some cases patently disingenuous clones. 

Consider the following analogy: The setting is Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport. If you are so situated as to have a birds-eye view of all the activity therein, it would appear chaotic. Of course, it is not. There is a fundamental order underlying and dictating the activity of every single individual. The Flight Schedule, you say? No. Not fundamental enough. There is one thing to which even the Flight Schedule is ultimately subject, around which in fact, it is ultimately designed–time. More specifically, Central Standard Time (CST). Every single individual is engaged in an intimate dance with his fellow travelers, directed by the flight schedule but dictated by a concept that each, despite disparate and in some cases unrelated destinations, has in common and more importantly, accepts without question or challenge. One supreme, fundamental way of dealing with the [vagaries] of travel be it locally, nationally, or internationally. Now, consider what would happen if certain individuals, or worse, groups of individuals, were to decide that for them Eastern Standard Time (EST) was a more valid way for them to organize their travel, and insisted upon negotiating the flight schedule accordingly. Now, there is only a one hour difference between CST and EST, and given the [vagaries] of air travel it is almost inevitable that some lucky few EST-ans will make the flights to their desired destinations. However, most will not. Further, let us imagine other groups for whom Pacific Standard Time or Greenwich Mean Time, etc. are considered supreme. And all are trying to board the same flights according to their own [conception of] time. First there would develop pockets of confusion, which would escalate in turn to frustration, anger, and ultimately, action. That action would be driven primarily not by the initial confusion but, significantly, the derivative anger. 

   Anyone who “resides” in O’Hare, for however long, and proposes to take a flight from there, has their “life” directed by the organizing structure which is the flight schedule. They have also surrendered, implicitly, to the underlying “authority” of Central Standard Time. It is the one and only way to acceptably and successfully negotiate the flight schedule and peacefully, co-operatively share O’Hare Airport with all of the others who must also use it. And so it is with society and Culture. Culture is to society what time is to the flight schedule. In the United States any unwillingness to subsume ones native, ancestral, or contrived culture under the American Cultural umbrella is tantamount to a challenge to its authority as well as its sovereignty. 

The essential problem with having a multiplicity of assertive, prideful, empowered Cultures under one roof is that they do not, and by definition cannot, form the foundation for the kind of collective, civilly cooperative action between one another requisite for a safe, effective society. Culture is sovereign, and throughout recorded human history has sought to assert that dominance over any it contacted. And since an arrogant, myopic chauvinism and ethnocentrism are also characteristics of any Culture, confrontation and conflict are more likely than cooperation between different Cultures. Different Cultures imply different ways of doing things, different rules for interaction, different ways of viewing the world and ones place in it. Multiple Cultures mean multiply different ways and rules for interaction–multiple ultimate authorities. Misunderstanding and confrontation are inevitable, chaos, real chaos, a foregone conclusion. One country (i.e. one society) not only implies one Culture, it obligates one Culture by the simple logic that there can be only one boss, one final authority on, how to be acceptably and successfully in that society. For America this obligates that multiple subcultures (or ‘c’ultures) accept the role of influence instead of control. And so it has , historically, until the ascendency of the idea of Multi-Culturalism.  The U.S. has long been multi-cultural, was conceived as such at its birth–myriad “big C” Cultures surrendering their original status, subsumed but also embraced by a new “big-C”–American Culture. Participating in that embrace as a matter of course, American Society.  

Multi-Culturalism = chaos. That is the equation the Right has come up with. If not now then later, if current societal trends persist. They are almost certainly right. 

(*Editors’s Note–It’s later…and now, in fact, matters are worse. See: The Unintended Consequences Spawned by our Culture Wars)

Next: Step Back, Take a Breath–There is Hope for this Grand Social And Cultural Experiment