The left’s cultural imperialism: A rebuttal
This is a rebuttal of Howard Sierer’s comments in his opinion piece “The Left’s cultural imperialism.”
He begins his article with this statement, “Imperialism is the policy or ideology of extending a nation’s rule over foreign nations…”
That is an accurate definition, although it is a bit misleading as he is applying the term within a single country, the United States, rather than to different countries as indicated by his following statement: “Today’s left-wing cultural imperialists seek to impose their culture and their secular religion on a ‘sullen’ American public whom they arrogantly see as ‘half devil and half child.’”
Apparently, he considers our American right-wing population to represent a foreign country. I disagree with that divisive interpretation as it is not an accurate portrayal of our population and does not help bring people together. Also, it is often past and present right-wing cultural imperialists who seek to impose their dogmatic political and religious views on an American public whom they arrogantly see as atheistic devils who are going straight to hell.
His use of the term “secular religion” is also interesting, and in context he seems to imply it has a negative connotation. One definition is “A secular religion is a communal belief system that often rejects or neglects the metaphysical aspects of the supernatural, commonly associated with traditional religion, instead placing typical religious qualities in earthly entities.” So just as with supernatural religions, a secular religion can be positive or negative depending on what the belief system is and how it is applied. For example, a religious person may have a belief in God, and an irreligious person may have a belief in the scientific method. A person’s belief in one system is just as valid as another person’s belief in the other system.
Who exactly is this “sullen American public” that the left is presumably attempting to impose upon? Are they ”sullen” white supremacists such as the Proud Boys? Perhaps they are “sullen” extreme, right-wing evangelicals such as the Westborough Baptist Church members. Maybe they are the right-wing “sullen” racists and bigots within our population. Actually, I do not think these “sullen” Americans represent our country’s historical values.
He then proceeds to discuss what have become three hot-button topics for those with a tribal mentality who have a fearful view of anything or anyone who appears different: gender flexibility, same-sex marriage, and the good-old standby of abortion. What I see from his comments is what has come to represent a traditional regressive and repressive rant about immorality and sin. This is a pattern of behavior much more associated with the extreme right rather than the left.
Gender flexibility
In his piece, Sierer writes, “Gender flexibility — the ability to choose one’s gender at will — is a tenet of liberal imperialist dogma to which all Americans must genuflect. Despite its biological nonsense, liberal imperialists demand that we all see gender as a personal choice.”
Is gender flexibility “biological nonsense”? No sir, it is not nonsense. Actually, there are biological XX (female) and XY (male) differences but also chromosomal abnormalities such as XXY (Klinefelter syndrome or hermaphroditism), XO (Turner syndrome), and other abnormal variations that affect human sex characteristics and other physical and mental conditions.
A person’s choice to become a cross-dresser, a transsexual or a lady-boy or to undergo sexual reassignment surgery is also a function of that person’s psychological as well as biological makeup! Regardless, it is a person’s choice to make. Sierer states that “liberal imperialists demand that we all see gender as a personal choice.” That is inaccurate. Your so called “demand” is actually to simply allow these people to make their choices and live their lives without fear of being rejected or stigmatized. Isn’t that the Christian way? It is called toleration for those that have differing views or lifestyles.
He claims to be worried that transgender people will go into women’s restrooms and molest your daughters. Yet based on reported news, this concern is misplaced. Rather, the real concern would be to protect your young daughters (and sons) from inappropriate behavior by the clergy, evangelicals, athletic coaches, and some politicians and teachers.
He points out a developing situation where transgender males join traditionally all-female sports teams and who because of their superior strength are creating havoc in various sports. Here is a suggestion.: Why not form a third group for sports? We have all-male teams and all-female teams, so let’s form all-transgender teams. That would be a positive step towards solving a problem as opposed to just lashing out.
Since he earlier mentioned “biological nonsense,” I can point out that homosexuality and bisexuality are recognized and are not uncommon biological and social practices in most primate groups, other mammal groups, and some birds (documented in over 450 species of animals worldwide). In the United States, nearly four percent of the adult human population identifies as LGBTQ (about 13 million people).
Same-sex marriage
As noted in his article, “Same-sex marriage, a liberal legislative victory won in the Supreme Court rather than Congress, is another avenue of cultural imperialism. One third of Americans oppose same-sex marriage while many others are willing to ‘live and let live.’”
Is this another example of leftist cultural imperialism? I think not. Rather, it is an example of allowing all Americans the right to marry whomever they wish. In no way, shape, or form does this infringe on religious rights of an individual if he is not involved in such a relationship. The decision by SCOTUS affirms the equal rights of gay or transgendered American citizens to join in a civil ceremony, known as marriage.
Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who was appointed by Ronald Reagan, wrote the majority decision for the court. “Marriage is a keystone of our social order,” Justice Kennedy said, adding that the plaintiffs in the case were seeking “equal dignity in the eyes of the law.” This is called toleration.
Actually, by his own statistic, two thirds of our population is ok with same-sex marriage. Is he trying to imply that the Supreme Court decision is somehow an imperialistic attack on that one third of our population? I hardly think so, as it simply offers people the freedom to practice their own biological sexuality, and this is simply not imposing on others. On the other hand, right-wing attempts to restrict this right to marry is actually an example of imposing their cultural imperialistic views onto someone else’s rights.
According to the Bill of Rights and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, LGBTQ people are allowed the same rights as straight people to marry and divorce. Some religious people consider such a marriage to be a sin. Adultery and divorce are also considered a sin by many religions. The baker Sierer mentions who was dragged into court for refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding on religious grounds presumably has no problem baking a cake for a couple who have been married and divorced multiple times with multiple partners and want to get married again.
Abortion
Sierer writes that “Abortion has reared its ugly head again as a topical example of liberal cultural imperialism.”
In which alternate universe does this statement apply? Ever since Roe v. Wade, it has been right-wing imperialists who have brought up this topic time and time again, trying to impose their will against a majority of Americans.
Most abortions are legally required to be performed before 24 weeks of fetal development, when a human fetus (it is not yet a baby) cannot live outside of a uterus. Furthermore, if so called “sullen” right-wing people are so morally against abortion, why do they not strongly support or demand comprehensive sex education in schools and easy access to contraceptives? After all, both are proven methods of preventing pregnancy and therefore decreasing the number of abortions. By not considering or supporting these two methods of contraception, the strident right-wing argument against abortion has a hollow ring to it.
Sierer writes that “The fact that half of all Americans oppose abortion in most instances and have strong moral and religious beliefs behind that opposition is of no standing with cultural imperialists.”
He is playing a little loose with numbers in that statement. According to one Washington Post-ABC News poll, “As of 2018, public support for legal abortion remains as high as it has been in two decades of polling. Currently, 58% say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 37% say it should be illegal in all or most cases.”
So it is just the opposite from what he has written. It is the right wing that is actively attempting to impose its imperialistic values on a majority of Americans with little regard for their feelings or views. Humans are biologically able to have sex at any time, not just during a female’s time of ovulation. Apparently, for religious moral beliefs, right-wing people want humans to stop having premarital sex (“just say no”) or to have marital sex only for attempts at procreation. In most cultures, that is an impossible wish. Do these people expect that women who get pregnant will not have abortions even if they are illegal, as they were previous to 1973?
Further comments
Sierer writes, “Cultural imperialists have no use for what most of us would call traditional cultural and moral standards.”
That statement cuts both ways. There have been traditional cultural standards such as slavery, segregation, and Jim Crow laws, and lack of women’s voting rights, to name a few. So I would agree that modern left-wing imperialists have no use for these supposed traditional cultural and moral standards.
In contrast, how about civil rights for all, toleration of differing lifestyles, and acceptance of differing religious practices, to name a few cultural and moral standards supported by the Bill of Rights and the Civil Rights Act of 1964? It seems that today’s right-wing imperialists have no use for these cultural and moral standards.
Sierer writes, “Like imperialists of old, they use all the tools at their disposal to impose their preferred lifestyle and culture on the nation, often by judicial fiat rather than the ballot box.”
Indeed, political and religious imperialists of old often created repressive, dogmatic societies and attempted to rule by fear, intimidation, and brutality; repressed any new ideas or concepts; and allowed neither voting rights or an open judicial system. I would suggest that such imperialists represent only a small minority of left- or right-wing extremists today, and this does not apply to the majority of American society.
Sierer writes that “The left champions racial and ethnic diversity yet vehemently opposes cultural and religious diversity, instead demanding uniformity of thought. See a dichotomy here?”
I think he has this backwards. It is the extreme conservative right-wing that favors rejection of scientific evidence and rigid adherence to religion. Recent evidence supports this irrational view.
They oppose cultural and religious diversity and dislike rational thought processes. They do not support allowing minorities, gays, and other traditionally oppressed minority groups to have equal freedoms.
Historically, it is mainly repressive imperialistic totalitarians who suppress people’s rights and force them to comply with political, religious, or persecutory dogma. They like to target religious groups and minority groups such as blacks, Hispanics, gays, and the handicapped as the core reason for all of their nation’s problems and thereby justify their persecution and extermination, just as today the extreme right-wing tries to blame Mexicans and other Hispanics for all of our apparent woes.
In closing, I note that most of Howard Sierer’s opinion pieces written for The Independent have a strong divisive tone. He brings up what he considers to be problems with progressive left-leaning ideas and people but does not offer any suggestions or solutions for bringing the left and right together. This seems to be a pattern of both ideologies but recently seems to have been taken to an extreme by various right-wing sources.
Conservative right-wing fearmongering diatribes used in print, video, broadcasting, or social media seem to have blossomed within the past 2.5 years. Such diatribes are often characterized by misstatement or misrepresentation of factual information (anti-science climate change denial), sometimes outright lying, and even by generating or perpetuating conspiracy theories (Birtherism, Parkland School shooting; Las Vegas massacre, etc.). Fearmongering also often takes the form of projection of one’s values and ideas onto others.
The viewpoints expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Independent.
How to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or letter to the editor to The Independent
Do you have something to say? Want your voice to be heard by thousands of readers? Send The Independent your letter to the editor or guest opinion piece. All submissions will be considered for publication by our editorial staff. If your letter or editorial is accepted, it will run on suindependent.com, and we’ll promote it through all of our social media channels. We may even decide to include it in our monthly print edition. Just follow our simple submission guidelines and make your voice heard:
—Submissions should be between 300 and 1,500 words.
—Submissions must be sent to editor@infowest.com as a .doc, .docx, .txt, or .rtf file.
—The subject line of the email containing your submission should read “Letter to the editor.”
—Attach your name to both the email and the document file (we don’t run anonymous letters).
—If you have a photo or image you’d like us to use and it’s in .jpg format, at least 1200 X 754 pixels large, and your intellectual property (you own the copyright), feel free to attach it as well, though we reserve the right to choose a different image.
—If you are on Twitter and would like a shout-out when your piece or letter is published, include that in your correspondence and we’ll give you a mention at the time of publication.
Articles related to “The Left’s cultural imperialism: A rebuttal”
Encyclopedia Britannica publishes 1,000-volume “Encyclopedia of Pronouns”
