Skip to content

Chorus of Reform Voices in GOP Take On John Press and His “Dangerous Collective”

October 18, 2010

Upon seeing this photo, one GOP Activist says "George Washington is currently rolling in his own grave."

Our email bag was full from this weekend.

Readers from across the city and state have been commenting about our coverage of the so called Brooklyn Tea Party and its controversial overlord John Press, a Manhattanite who has allegedly expressed his views on White Nationalist websites.

We here at Atlas have been critical of Dr. Press and his organization in the past. Now, besides our fellow readers and members of the media, another voice can be added to the growing chorus that has been critical of this “dangerous collective.”

We were alerted to local Republican activist Roy Antoun‘s piece posted with the Interest of the State online community.

Here is an excerpt:

Dr. John Press is the Brooklyn Tea Party President…

[Dr. Press] wrote a book about a theory that he invented called, “culturalism.” According to Dr. Press, “Culturism holds that majority cultures have a right to protect, promote and guide themselves. All non-western cultures are culturist. We have a right to be culturist as well.”

Dr. Press also released this video:

There are many flaws in Dr. Press’s theory and judgment. The very first thing he mentions is what is supposed to be the core of the Tea Party: fiscal “conservativism.” I think what he meant to say was fiscal “conservatism.” He kind of added his own “v” in there somewhere. I find the “fiscal conservatism” of the Tea Party quite troubling. Fiscal conservatism within itself is a theory that should be practiced and theoretically upholds the values and policies of free market capitalism. Nevertheless, John Press proposes some valid points of fiscal responsibility (Notice how I interchanged fiscal “conservatism” with fiscal “responsibility.” That’s because government is inherently reckless and doing something to curtail government intervention in the economy is what I generally regard as a good thing).

1) First he says that government spending should be frozen. Yes, it really should. A reckless government tends to spend a lot of tax payer dollars on things that tax payers never use. And yes, a lot of government money taken from your wallet goes to “national defense” which, for some reason, means 800 military bases in countries like Italy, France, Germany, England, and Japan just to name a few. So, yes, I think it’s time to remove those bases because they are indeed costing the U.S. a lot of money.

2) Next he proposes to stop government hiring. Again, this is generally a good thing. Government hiring means two things: (A) Government requires more taxation to pay for government-instituted jobs and (B) Government hiring means a larger bureaucracy where nothing ever gets accomplished.

3) Lastly, he proposes to lower government spending by 5% every year. Why stop 5? Why not 10? 50%? The problem I have with many “conservatives” in this country and especially Brooklyn is that they talk a lot about stopping the growth of government when in practice all they can actually do is limit its growth. Cutting government spending by 5% is slow and archaic. Where did this number come from? Five percent is an arbitrary, low number if Americans want to see any substantial limit in government. Let’s start with the “defense” budget and lower some taxes…

The next main point Dr. Press asserts are what he calls, “culturalist” pledges. Let’s assess culturalism first. As Dr. Press mentioned, culturalism “holds that majority cultures have a right to protect, promote and guide themselves. All non-western cultures are culturist. We have a right to be culturist as well.” What is a majority culture? Does that mean might makes right? Does that mean 51% of a population is all it takes to establish what is or isn’t permissible in a culture? No. Especially when this “culturalist pledge” seeks to institutionalize itself governmentally. In all pragmatic, realistic purposes, yes, might inevitably makes right. Meaning, if I carry a bigger stick, I decide what the rules are. However, this is not the case in the American Republic.

American republicanism is founded upon the concept of limited government; however this limited government has a fundamental, vital function which is to protect the minority in law. What exactly is the government protecting? Rights. Where do rights come from? I have no idea.“Rights” are man-made ideas created at man’s convenience. And I specify “man” because men have, historically, judged what are and what aren’t permissible rights. In the United States, we have three basic rights: the right to life, liberty, and property (sometimes, the right to pursue happiness but that’s usually not the case). Where’s the right to a woman’s body? Or the right for women to take leave from work when pregnant? I’m not saying that these propositions should be institutionalized by law; however, what I am saying is that rights are generally a masculine invention. Some like to argue that “(G)(g)od(s)” gave man these natural rights; however, I’d like to ask how one exactly knows what rights God gave to us? I don’t remember a Mount Sinai event in history where God wrote down human and/ or natural rights on stone tables that explicitly stated what our rights truly are. Given this case, rights are still man-made creations designed for man’s convenience. For example, I’d like you to Google “Japanese internment camps 1945.” Just when American citizens needed their rights the most, the government took them away. Again, rights are at the mercy of man’s convenience. Why is it that some states in Europe declared the internet a human right and this is not the case in the U.S.? As you can tell, I’m a skeptic. The American Republic was supposed to be different, however. The American Republic was supposed to uphold the rights of the minority in hopes to create a better, more convenient society.

Given that rights are essentially fabricated, Dr. Press’s assertion is nothing more than a validation of my claim. Now he’s inventing a new right that “majority cultures” have to protect, promote, and guide themselves. Not only are majority cultures dangerous to the American Republic, but nowhere in the Constitution do I see this particular right. I believe in the notion of a sovereign state; however, I don’t believe that the domestic sovereignty of a state should come at the expense of the minority, given the laws that are supposed to govern the state (and by minority, I am not referring to ethnic minorities; rather, I’m alluding to numerical minorities in any given vote or action). That doesn’t quite give the minority voters the liberty (an American right!) to fend for themselves if we’re following Dr. Press’s logic.

Culturalism is a retardation of basic American values. It reverses the promotion of the individual and, instead, promotes group think. His theory relies on collectivism, a socialist style of thinking that undermines individual thought for the sake of what Dr. Press regards as a fabricated right. The language alone tells us that he is, in fact, a collectivist. He uses the word “themselves” quite carefully to illustrate this collectivist thinking. How can the Tea Party function through collectivism if the basic premise of the movement is to promote individual responsibility through smaller government? The Tea Party as proposed by Dr. Press is a paradox…

Not much more needs to be said about Dr. Press’s contradictory stances on domestic and international affairs. His very existence is evidence that “rights” in the United States are fabricated to man’s convenience. However, what makes Dr. Press’s argument dangerous to the republican fabric is that his fabricated “culturalist right” contradicts the few rights American agreed were basic and fundamental during the country’s founding.

Do not call yourself a Culturalist. Do not use the word Culturalism.

Be an American. An Individual. A Free Thinker.

 

That was just a portion of what was written. Mr. Antoun expresses an interesting perspective, and you should read the entirety of his piece here.

Antoun’s piece came out at a time when we received a surprising number of emails from upstate and local Tea Party activists and other readers saying that they are ashamed of what Dr. Press and his organization represent.

One writer said: “I’ve never seen anything that makes me more concerned about the Tea Party. This guy John Press is just plain scary.” Another email said,”This is why the GOP can’t win anything in Brooklyn. It’s people like John Kenneth Press who scare away decent people.”

We are all in agreement. Dr. Press must be monitored, confronted and openly challenged.

We here at Atlas will continue to do that.

About these ads
12 Comments
  1. Is there a connection between the John K. Press "Culturism" Chant and The Brooklyn GOP-JIUA "Real American" Rant permalink
    October 19, 2010 12:02 am

    JKP tries hard to distinguish his “philosophy” from racist or race-based theories. Nonetheless, he seems to dip into some very dangerous well springs in his discussions of things like Wagnerian Opera and Whiteness Studies.

    In any case, one has to wonder whether Eaton’s Brooklyn GOP alliance or dalliance with the likes of Mr/Dr. Press may have a causal link to the Brooklyn GOP-JIUA blog’s recent adoption of an Un-American sounding slogan like “Welcome to a Real American Blog, A place for Real Americans”.

    Before anybody accuses anybody of engaging in any kind of “guilt by association”, remember it was Press and Eaton’s Brooklyn GOP that announced the association of the Brooklyn GOP and the Brooklyn Tea Party, as well as the sponsorship of common gatherings.

  2. No Name Republicans permalink
    October 19, 2010 6:51 am

    Looks like the State Republicans are worse than Eaton.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/10/18/2010-10-18_elephants_trample_ny_gop.html

  3. No Name Republicans permalink
    October 19, 2010 7:04 am

    Missed the debate? Watch it on NY1

    http://www.ny1.com/content/127353/story

  4. Would Eaton's Tea Party Ally Say Nicole Malliotakis is "White"? permalink
    October 19, 2010 7:19 pm

    The question begs (don’t yuh luv it) – AAA’s October 19, 2010 bit of fluf in TJIUA, “Former Assemblyman Matthew Mirones And Former Assembly Candidate Anthony Xanthakis Endorse Nicole Malliotakis For State Assembly” makes one wonder whether these good Republicans know what they’re hooking-up-with in Brooklyn?

    Based on John K. Press’ circumlocutions in his 2/11/08 article, “Culturism and Whiteness” it is not clear that Mr. Press would view Ms. Malliotakis, and Messrs. Mirones and Xanthakis as truly “white” based upon certain definitions in “White Studies”. Although Mr. Press does seem somewhat critical of the “racist” aspect of such a definition of “whiteness”, he seems somewhat forgiving of its culturist viewpoint as opposed to a multiculurist one. Clearly other works of his suggest that the are certain culturist components of “whiteness” that would be more identifiable as Northern European than say cultural things that are Italian or Greek or Middle Eastern, which are merely accepted as “white”. Judging from what we’ve read so far, I’m sure Mr. Press would view the background of Janele Hyer-Spencer as much whiter, from a culturist perspective than he would the background of Nicole Malliotakis.

    John K. Press is Brooklyn GOP Chairman Craig Eaton’s ally as the so-called president of the so-called Brooklyn Tea Party. It is against the background of this alliance, viewed with some common sense, that we must interpret the meaning of Eaton’s recent GOP hate blog’s slogan about being the blog for “real Americans”. That’s the kind of stuff that has led some of us to tag Eaton and his crowd as fundamentally “Un-American” like members of the KKK and other right-wing extremists like “Aryan Nation” and “The Brotherhood”. They use various excuses, but they are really race conscious inciters (Just look at and listen to Press at the Voorhies mosque demonstrations).

    Is that the kind of stuff with which “Real Republicans” want to be associated?

    • CRAIG EATON'S HATEBLOG QUOTES Crypto-RACIST JOHN K. PRESS IN LATEST UN-AMERICAN RANT, this time it's against Jonathan Judge as well as Congressman McMahon. permalink
      November 2, 2010 12:56 am

      TJIUA’s recent posting of AAA’s 11/1/10 “Latest Article Highlights A United Brooklyn GOP, While Extremists Anti-Republicans Stand For Democrats” quoted the crypto-racist culturist, Brooklyn Tea Party President John K. Press, to show that some independent Republicans, most notably Jonathan J. Judge, were “extremists”. The whole thing is preposterous and would be laughable if it weren’t so despicable.

      Well, what else is to be expected from Un-American scumbags, such as Craig Eaton, Russell Gallo, Clorinda Annarrummo and Stephen Marsesca,* who allow TJIUA to keep repeating its obnoxious reference to their candidate for congress as “a real American”, with the concomitant implication that our current Congressman Michael McMahon is not. That’s not the kind of thing real Americans do, but it’s very close to what the Nazi, Joseph Goebbels would do in his propaganda campaigns for Maria Schicklgruber’s grandson.

      For the uninformed, Craig Eaton devoted a portion of his 11/1/10 pre-election day effort to a vicious attack on Jonathan Judge, including the quote from Mr. JK Press. If AAA’s attack on Judge doesn’t prove that JJ strikes terror into the collective heart of Eaton’s Brooklyn Establishment then nothing will.
      ______________________________

      * These members of the Brooklyn GOP leadership had previously been called upon to recant their patently Un-American posture, but they have failed to do so. This article demonstrates their willingness to throw gasoline into the fire.

  5. John Galt permalink*
    October 23, 2010 12:15 pm

    We are currently in the process of reviewing various comments placed on our blog and confirming their authenticity. This comes after having had situations in which individuals have impersonated others in the past here on Atlas. We hope to have them restored by this evening. Thank you.

    • Gerry permalink
      October 23, 2010 12:27 pm

      Hey, John.

      I noticed someone claiming to be John Press commenting this morning. It featured the usual crazy talk I expect from him. I assume that’s who you are referring to.

      If I recall correctly, however, “he” never addressed any of the criticism your blog, other blogs and the media have had about his organization. It’s more of the same “pound pavement” nonsense that came from irrelevant figures like Gene B. Don’t they realize that many of us commenting are indeed donating to campaigns and pounding pavement? Are these people so stupid that they think we can’t support local political groups and pound keyboards as well?

      Talk about not walking and chewing gum at the same time.

    • Responsible political blogging is not censorship permalink
      October 23, 2010 3:44 pm

      Kudos to the Randy characters who run ASIB. When there is the possibility of mis-identification or impersonation, or other forms of abuse, a responsible moderator should step in.

      If the John K. Press material is legitimately that of the attributed author, ASIB should give it a “stet”. Then, somebody else can ream him a new one, so all of his schitezis can come schiting out even faster.

      TJIUA, that doesn’t ever see the forest for the trees or the trees for the forest, chided ASIB for its “censorship” to which all I can say is [[[[DUE TO THE CONSTRAINTS IMPOSED ON ALL COMMENTATORS CERTIFIED AS "SUITABLE" BY THE MANAGEMENT OF RANDY PROPERTIES, LLC, SA, NA, INC., THE TRUE OWNER AND OPERATOR OF THIS BLOG, aka "Atlas Shrugs in Brooklyn", A PORTION OF THIS COMMENTATOR'S REMARKS HAVE BEEN DELETED]]]].

      Relative to the above point, in Saturday’s TJIUA a deluded JigSawPuzzeled commentator said, “Jonathan Taggart said…’
      Nothing new here to report, after all didn’t Roy say last month he wanted to delete a comment?
      Pathetic.'”

      I don’t really know for sure, but I think that Roy Antoun was at least formally engaged in tongue-in-cheek when he said he wanted a posting negative to the “Ground Zero Mosque” taken down. Obviously, that would have been like so-oh anti-libertarian…. btw, it was my posting that he had been commenting upon. (We were having beers together last Thursday at the Schnitzel Haus and it didn’t even come up, maybe some of the beer, but not the comment).

      In any case, my answer to that poor deluded TJIUA commentator is [[[[ AGAIN DUE TO THE CONSTRAINTS IMPOSED ON ALL COMMENTATORS CERTIFIED AS "SUITABLE" BY THE MANAGEMENT OF RANDY PROPERTIES, LLC, SA, NA, INC., THE TRUE OWNER AND OPERATOR OF THIS BLOG, aka "Atlas Shrugs in Brooklyn", A SECOND PORTION OF THIS COMMENTATOR'S REMARKS HAVE BEEN DELETED (although we have read and discussed both of the remarks and completely agree with them in all respects)]]]].

  6. and those candidates would be? permalink
    October 23, 2010 12:31 pm

    ?????

    • Gerry permalink
      October 23, 2010 12:45 pm

      If you are referring to MY comment above, I have personally donated to Mr. Grimm. I also have supported major statewide candidates for office as well. Then again, none of us have to answer to you/John Press, Craig Eaton or any other establishment hack or nutcase. People such as the aforementioned believe they do not answer to anyone. They believe they can lead us down the road of failure or corrupt our values by promoting hate and schism.

      I’d answer to Valdimir Putin before I answer to John Press lol. The man is a wacko.

      We need serious reform now. And we need to excommunicate John Press from our party immediately.

      (Apparently John Press is now commenting anonymously–shhh!!! lol Just guessing)

  7. The Voice In Jonathan's Head permalink
    October 23, 2010 12:41 pm

    You know that’s funny, I haven’t seen Jonathan Judge donate one dime to a Republican candidate running this year that’s on the ballot still.

    Moshe Muratov, that well ran dry.

    Roy Antoun, he did take money from Democrats though, on top of supporting some odd Libertarian candidate for congress.

    Fabian found time to talk about talking at some bar, rather than open up the allowance money, he has.

    Marco, James, Lucretia, anybody else I am missing?

    They must have all been there “pounding keyboards” into the wind.

    By the way Jonathan could use a piece of gum or two, his breath reeks of cheese, and he still seems lightly buzzed.

    Rant on, Rodents, rant on.

    • Young GOP Kid permalink
      October 23, 2010 12:53 pm

      Many younger Republicans and voters are not enthused by the terrible slate of candidates the GOP has put up this year. Paladino is crazy (who would donate to him?). Donovan is absent from the stage. Marty Golden is taking a leave of absence whenever there’s and important vote in the senate. Joe DioGuardi, I read, is in favor of congestion pricing.

      Grimm is a pretty good guy. But from what I’ve heard, the county isn’t supporting him at all. Just giving him lip service (like they did with Allegretti).

      So youre one to judge.

      By the way, it’s funny how you guys single out Jonathan Judge all the time. Don’t you ever get tired of being so obsessed?

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: