Homosexuality and the right wing discussion

[Michael22]

I recently had a discussion with someone who said that a lot of Nazi's were homosexual and that a lot of concentration camps were run by homosexuals. He said that the SS preferred homosexuals to be in charge because they were more cruel and better at bullying. He also said that because homosexuals are not interested in women or children, they make the perfect people to be completely loyal to an extremist ideology or party and care less about the consequences of those not matching up as well (because they will be mainly women and children, or straight men).

Whilst this is very provocative and I think it might be bullshit, I think he was referring a minority in the gay community because there are many gay people who are comrades on the left.

However it got me thinking that about whether there is something innately "homosexual" about being elitist and undemocratic. For example, buggery is common in elite public schools, as a way of bullying younger borders, and the worship of the strong man is very homosexual with the idea of conquering peoples appealing to homoerotic fantasies. The uncaring Darwinism on the right wing is remarkably similar to fascism because it is elitist and undemocratic, and many homosexuals are adherents to this liberal strand of the right wing rather than the paternalistic conservatism, similar to the way many homosexuals are adherents to fascism. Homosexual men who have no connection to women and children (i.e the vulnerable) and therefore make the perfect tough, mobile businessman or the ultimate loyal fascist because they have no ties to the rest of society and therefore elitist, undemocratic ideologies like fascism or uncaring conservatism make perfect sense to homosexuals because they are completely cleansed of anything paternalistic, feminine, caring, anything "pandering" to those not in the exclusively male homosexual world.

Is it productive to have an open discussion about homosexuality and whether it is important to the communist struggle or is it the case that communists have more in common with Christian patriarchs, homophobic muslims who we unite with to fight against debt and imperialism, than a right wing in Europe that is increasingly gay friendly and a record number of Conservative MP's are openly homosexual? What is the significance of homosexuality to the left and why were so many fascists gay?

[Queen Mab]

What the fuck? Did you take the ramblings of some insane bigot as fact?

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

Homosexuality was de facto punishable by death in the Nazi regime (and the subsequent Bonn regime retained the Nazi laws against homosexuality); "salt of the Earth" homophobes and homophobes who try to conceal themselves, such as the OP, have no place in the communist movement and should be drummed out immediately. Communists stand for the end of all special oppression, not some workerist jacking off to an early twentieth century fantasy about what the working class is like.

[Quail]

I don't have a lot of time at the moment to do anything, but my first response to this post was, What the fuck?

The significance of homosexuality to the left is that LGB people are an oppressed group and their liberation is an essential part of the class struggle if we want to create a free and equal society.

[tallguy]

Homosexuality is synonymous with elitism?

Complete bollocks.

The only people who get hung up about what consenting adults decide to sexually do with their own and with each other's bodies are religious representatives (particularly the monotheistic ones) and state representatives. Both of which (surprise surprise) are in the business of controlling and coercing other people. And, if you are in the business of controlling and coercing people, where better to do so than via their primary behaviours.

[Michael22]

I don't have a lot of time at the moment to do anything, but my first response to this post was, What the fuck?

The significance of homosexuality to the left is that LGB people are an oppressed group and their liberation is an essential part of the class struggle if we want to create a free and equal society.

Homosexuals have equal rights in Europe. Some homosexual Conservatives have been scapegoating immigrants and blaming them for the housing crisis in Europe and for example some have used the equal marriage issue to attack Muslims and Christian African's for being "homophobic" and "anti-British"

In one case, a homosexual MP publicly goaded a disabled man in the street for not having a job. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2469411/Tory-MP-Daniel-Kawczynski-tells-legged-drug-addict-Get-job-Its-hard-Ive-struggled-too.html

Many white privileged, middle class homosexuals who have remained rich after the recession have scapegoated poor immigrants for economic problems and as shown above, mocked the disabled.

Many homosexuals are comrades on the left but at the same time materially gay rights groups are very powerful and effective, possibly because homosexual men who don't have families have a lot more time to devote to their career as well as campaigning for their rights.

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

Isn't this the same homophobic troll who periodically posts about evil liberal decadent homosexuals being mean to paternalistic homophobic Christians? Alexander Something?

[The Feral Underclass]

Homosexuals have equal rights in Europe. Some homosexual Conservatives have been scapegoating immigrants and blaming them for the housing crisis in Europe and for example some have used the equal marriage issue to attack Muslims and Christian African's for being "homophobic" and "anti-British"

In one case, a homosexual MP publicly goaded a disabled man in the street for not having a job. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2469411/Tory-MP-Daniel-Kawczynski-tells-legged-drug-addict-Get-job-Its-hard-Ive-struggled-too.html

Many white privileged, middle class homosexuals who have remained rich after the recession have scapegoated poor immigrants for economic problems and as shown above, mocked the disabled.

Many homosexuals are comrades on the left but at the same time materially gay rights groups are very powerful and effective, possibly because homosexual men who don't have families have a lot more time to devote to their career as well as campaigning for their rights.

Straight people are also conservative and are also middle classed and privileged who also attack disabled people and immigrants.

What's your point?

[Tim Cornelis]

This insane drivel stems from this book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pink_Swastika

[Michael22]

Homosexuality is synonymous with elitism?

Complete bollocks.



I notice a defensive tone in your reply, pleading even.

I am not asserting or recommending anything. I am merely having a constructive destruction. I am not enlightened on this subject. Rather than dismissing something as bollocks it is more constructive is it not to explain why that is.

[The Feral Underclass]

This insane drivel stems from this book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pink_Swastika

There are certain practical truths in that book, but the thesis and conclusions of it are obviously ridiculous.

[Michael22]

Straight people are also conservative and are also middle classed and privileged who also attack disabled people and immigrants.

What's your point?

Straight people cannot inspire guilt in the working class by claiming to be "victims" of anything. I think it is callous and manipulative for white, middle class homosexual men living in luxury to inspire homophobic guilt in muslim and African immigrants, which is what some attempted to do over the equal marriage debate, which Muslims opposed.

[Quail]

Michael22 - a quick reminder that we don't tolerate homophobia on Revleft. I'm going to write a response and give you a chance to clarify your views.


I recently had a discussion with someone who said that a lot of Nazi's were homosexual and that a lot of concentration camps were run by homosexuals. He said that the SS preferred homosexuals to be in charge because they were more cruel and better at bullying. He also said that because homosexuals are not interested in women or children, they make the perfect people to be completely loyal to an extremist ideology or party and care less about the consequences of those not matching up as well (because they will be mainly women and children, or straight men).

Whilst this is very provocative and I think it might be bullshit, I think he was referring a minority in the gay community because there are many gay people who are comrades on the left.
The Nazis persecuted and murdered a significant number of homosexuals. The bolded statement is not only extremely homophobic, but also complete bullshit. It would seem to imply that homosexuals have less empathy than other people - why would a gay man care any less about children and other people suffering? Human beings are perfectly capable of caring for people they have no interest in pursuing a relationship with and children that aren't their own and it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise.


However it got me thinking that about whether there is something innately "homosexual" about being elitist and undemocratic. For example, buggery is common in elite public schools, as a way of bullying younger borders, and the worship of the strong man is very homosexual with the idea of conquering peoples appealing to homoerotic fantasies. The uncaring Darwinism on the right wing is remarkably similar to fascism because it is elitist and undemocratic, and many homosexuals are adherents to this liberal strand of the right wing rather than the paternalistic conservatism, similar to the way many homosexuals are adherents to fascism. Homosexual men who have no connection to women and children (i.e the vulnerable) and therefore make the perfect tough, mobile businessman or the ultimate loyal fascist because they have no ties to the rest of society and therefore elitist, undemocratic ideologies like fascism or uncaring conservatism make perfect sense to homosexuals because they are completely cleansed of anything paternalistic, feminine, caring, anything "pandering" to those not in the exclusively male homosexual world.
There's actually so much wrong with this I don't even know where to begin.
1. If sexual acts are used as a way of bullying people who are perceived to have lower status, they're not consensual and I would argue that has more to do with power than sex.
2. There may be conservative homosexuals, and even fascist homosexuals but I fail to see the connection between homosexuality and elitism. There are also a disproportionate number of LGBT people in the anarchist movement, but I haven't drawn the conclusion that there is something inherently "homosexual" about anarchism, because that makes no sense and doesn't logically follow.
3. Homosexual men do have connections to women and children - their families, friends and children - and their community in general and I don't understand why anyone would think otherwise.
4. Women are not "the vulnerable".
5. Why is it impossible for homosexual men to be caring or "feminine"?


Is it productive to have an open discussion about homosexuality and whether it is important to the communist struggle or is it the case that communists have more in common with Christian patriarchs, homophobic muslims who we unite with to fight against debt and imperialism, than a right wing in Europe that is increasingly gay friendly and a record number of Conservative MP's are openly homosexual? What is the significance of homosexuality to the left and why were so many fascists gay?
As I said before, people with homosexual desires are an oppressed group in patriarchal capitalist society, so as communists it is an essential part of the class struggle to fight homophobia and heteronormativity. I would not ally myself with groups of people who wish to perpetuate the oppression of LGBT people.

[Tim Cornelis]

There are certain practical truths in that book

That's the problem. It gives credibility to such nonsense in the eyes of the ignorant. Conspiracy theorists mix utter nonsense with (scientific) facts as well.

[The Feral Underclass]

I am not asserting or recommending anything. I am merely having a constructive destruction. I am not enlightened on this subject. Rather than dismissing something as bollocks it is more constructive is it not to explain why that is.

On what basis do you imagine anyone on this forum is obligated to give your questions any serious consideration?

We reject in their entirety the premise in which your questions are asked and therefore have no reason to give any attention to the questions themselves.

[The Feral Underclass]

Straight people cannot inspire guilt in the working class by claiming to be "victims" of anything. I think it is callous and manipulative for white, middle class homosexual men living in luxury to inspire homophobic guilt in muslim and African immigrants, which is what some attempted to do over the equal marriage debate, which Muslims opposed.

What has their sexuality got to do with anything? So if a straight person was doing it, it would be okay? The issue for you isn't that they are privileged and middle class and are attacking Muslims and immigrants, it's that they are doing that while being a homosexual?

[Michael22]

What has their sexuality got to do with anything? So if a straight person was doing it, it would be okay? The issue for you isn't that they are privileged and middle class and are attacking Muslims and immigrants, it's that they are doing that while being a homosexual?

No my point, as I said before, is that straight people cannot inspire guilt in the working class whereas some middle class gay rights advocates are inspiring guilt at the same time as scapegoating working class Africans and Muslims which is a more callous form of manipulation rather than just scapegoating someone. This is a bad thing, is it not?

[Quail]

Racism is unacceptable regardless of who it comes from. But then so is homophobia. So I don't quite see your point.

[The Feral Underclass]

No my point, as I said before, is that straight people cannot inspire guilt in the working class

What about straight black people or straight Jews? Or straight gay rights advocates?


whereas some middle class gay rights advocates are inspiring guilt at the same time as scapegoating working class Africans and Muslims which is a more callous form of manipulation rather than just scapegoating someone. This is a bad thing, is it not?

You still haven't explained to me what this has to do with their sexuality? What quantifiable difference does this equation make when the individual is having sex exclusively with members of their own sex? What does being a homosexual specifically have to do with this little construct of yours? Are you saying that these gay rights advocates are making working class Africans and Muslims feel guilty about their homophobia?

[Michael22]

What about straight black people or straight Jews?



You still haven't explained to me what this has to do with their sexuality? What quantifiable difference does this equation make when the individual is having sex exclusively with members of their own sex? What does being a homosexual specifically have to do with this little construct of yours? Are you saying that these gay rights advocates are making working class Africans and Muslims feel guilty because their homophobes?

Black people are victims of white privelege and capitalism. Similarly, Jews have been scapegoated in Europe when the economy is in trouble.

Many Nazi's were homosexual. There were no secret Jewish Nazis, Jewish fascists or black fascists. Fascism was an Aryan European thing and many fascists were homosexual.

[The Feral Underclass]

Black people are victims of white privelege and capitalism. Similarly, Jews have been scapegoated in Europe when the economy is in trouble.

And gay people are victims of heterosexist privilege...You're not making yourself any clearer. Perhaps you should address my questions directly...


Many Nazi's were homosexual.

So were many Jews.


There were no secret Jewish Nazis, Jewish fascists or black fascists. Fascism was an Aryan European thing and many fascists were homosexual.

Many people were homosexuals. It stands to reason that some of them were fascists. So what?

[#FF0000]

There were no secret Jewish Nazis, Jewish fascists or black fascists.

Yes there were.

[Michael22]

And gay people are victims of heterosexist privilege...


This grieves me.


Many people were homosexuals. It stands to reason that some of them were fascists. So what?

Many fascists were homosexual, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-strange-strange-story_b_136697.html.

My question, as I outlined in the original post is whether there is perhaps a link between elitism and homosexuality.

[The Feral Underclass]

This grieves me.

I don't really give a fuck.


Many fascists were homosexual, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-strange-strange-story_b_136697.html.

Yes, you keep saying that. Even if what you say is true, there are also many homosexuals who are not fascists, so this point you keep raising as if it were evidence is fundamentally flawed on its own terms.


My question, as I outlined in the original post is whether there is perhaps a link between elitism and homosexuality.

And the answer is no.

[Quail]

This grieves me.
Why?


My question, as I outlined in the original post is whether there is perhaps a link between elitism and homosexuality.
You ignored my post addressing the OP so I'm not entirely convinced you are here for sincere discussion.

[tallguy]

I notice a defensive tone in your reply, pleading even.

I am not asserting or recommending anything. I am merely having a constructive destruction. I am not enlightened on this subject. Rather than dismissing something as bollocks it is more constructive is it not to explain why that is.
The only tone I wish to convey, mister, is one of derision and contempt. As I said, the only people pathologically concerned with which particular hole consenting adults choose to put their todgers into are religious nutters or an overbearing state.

By the sound of your tone, I am guessing the former.

[Michael22]

I feel your response to the OP is a straw man and is very defensive in tone. You fail to engage with the evidence that many fascists are gay and misinterpret my argument as a homophobic and then defend positions I never argued for, as if I was recommending homophobia when I am not homophobic, I was starting a constructive discussion about the relationship between homosexuality and elitism.

When there is objective proof that so many European fascists were overwhelmingly gay there is a relationship, is there not?

[The Feral Underclass]

Can we just ban this troll and have done with it?

[tallguy]

I feel your response to the OP is a straw man and is very defensive in tone. You fail to engage with the evidence that many fascists are gay and misinterpret my argument as a homophobic and then defend positions I never argued for, as if I was recommending homophobia when I am not homophobic, I was starting a constructive discussion about the relationship between homosexuality and elitism.

When there is objective proof that so many European fascists were overwhelmingly gay there is a relationship, is there not?You have provided no proof whatsoever that European fascists were overwhelmingly gay. You have simply asserted it and then built a putrid pile of rhetoric on top of that assertion. You are going to have to disguise your bigotry a lot better than that mate, before you think you can come on a forum like this and get way with your pathetic shite.

And no, I'm not gay. I don't even really give a toss about gay issues either, to be honest. I just don't like bigots. And, I detest religious bigots.

[Quail]

Can we just ban this troll and have done with it?

Yup.

Banned Micheal22 for homophobia.

I was waiting to see if they would change their opinion but they seem like a lost cause.

[Sasha]

I think this whole thread could have been limited to one reply;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_triangle

Troll banned, Thread closed...