Log in

View Full Version : Is the Gay Agenda Part of a Communist Plot? - Trotskyism and



Ghost Writer
22nd July 2003, 12:22
“The charges of communism made from a religious, a philosophical and generally, from a ideological standpoint are not deserving a serious examination.” – Karl Marx

The fact of the matter is that the gay movement cares nothing about the sanctity of marriage or the traditions that accompany them. Strike that, actually they do. However, not in the ways that you might suspect.

During a time when Joseph McCarthy was questioning communists before the House Un-American Activities Committee, another radical movement was growing out of the same ideological fodder that fueled the Bolsheviks in Russia to commit massive democide, and participate in an orchestrated campaign to terrorize the general population. An oppressive terrorist state larger and more destructive than Nazi Germany emerged as a result. Fearing the same fate as Czarist Russia a conservative movement was born in the United States to defend our nation against the anarchy that ensued after the rise of the Reds. Unfortunately, they missed a less popular offshoot of Marxist ideology.

During the Second Red Scare a political movement known as the gay agenda was developed. The founder of the political organization known as Mattachine Society, Harry Hay, was a member of the Communist Party from 1933 to 1951 (http://www.indegayforum.org/authors/varnell/varnell100.html). However, he was asked to leave because the Communist Party thought he drew unneeded attention to a party that was being hunted down for behavior disloyal to the United States. Even still, he was declared a lifelong friend of the party and retained his sympathies to Stalinist Russia. To further expand upon the radical nature of Harry Hay, he was a huge supporter of NAMBLA. Not only that but he virtually invented the very idea that gays have historically been oppressed in the United States, a notion that lacks a preponderance of evidence, yet seems to be widely accepted by a population under attack by liberal elements. This supposed minority status has been the underpinning mantra used to advance the gay agenda.

Is this relationship between the gay movement and communism a fluke? Is there significant evidence to suggest that today's movement remains tied to communist ideology? What about the links between the gay political interest groups associated with pedophilia?

It is no coincidence that groups like Gay Liberation Front, and Earth Liberation Front were named "in solidarity" with the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam, at a time the United States was at war with the Vietcong. The fact that the Gay Liberation Front has a version of its own Manifesto is testament to their Marxists leanings. This organization's mission is entirely consistent with communist teachings aimed at uprooting the status quo and eroding the institutions that conserve what is considered by them to be a oppressive system. Marx specifically targeted the institution of marriage and viewed families as an extension of capitalist hierarchy. By infiltrating and destroying every factor that generates a country's traditions, you could then reshape the future of that nation, write your own truth, and manipulate the perceptions of man.

Marxism is the hallmark of the relativist perspective, and is the underlying reason why leftists refuse to make value judgments about anything except those organizations and institutions that do have clearly defined codes outlying ethical practices, hence communism's hatred for religious institutions.

Traditionally religion has laid the framework for marriage and family. Thus, an excellent way to weaken the religious establishment is to attack some of the important traditions that have historically been associated with the church, thereby reducing the incentive for people to congregate towards those socializing organizations. However, this socialization must be replaced by something. To a Marxist there is no better alternative to religion than party affiliation, or a fanatical ideology. In effect, their plan is to destroy the largest competitor in the domain of the human perspective. For an ideology that ridicules monopolistic behavior, communists would like nothing more than to have unfettered access to all modes of influencing the political culture of an entire society. Which leads us to the link between the gay agenda and the public school system.

It is no accident that the same Marxists who hide behind the label of homosexuality are not only attacking the institutions of marriage and the family, but they are infiltrating our school system in order to do this. The introduction of the Gay Liberation Front's manifesto states:

"We can use our righteous anger to uproot the present oppressive system with its decaying and constricting ideology, and how we, together with other oppressed groups, can start to form a new order, and a liberated lifestyle, from the alternatives which we offer."

Obviously, this is an organization willing to employ the same violent methods of their Stalinist and Nazi predecessors.

It is no coincidence that the Nazi Party had a active campaign to undermine the family through the educational system with programs like the Hitler Youth, and the gay movement has also sought to use the school system as a way of initializing social and political change. The difference here lies in the fact that socialists in the United States had to hide and develop less visible ways of engaging in active revolution, while the Soviets and the Nazis had already demonstrated their political power through wide-scale repression and terror campaigns. However, both movements understand the importance of an alliance with academia. Both movements use the schools as a component of their massive propaganda machines. Ultimately, the goal in both cases is to pervert minds and socially engineer the next generation of citizens with a dominating ideology. In the case of the gay agenda, it is being done to uproot modern capitalism, and destroy American values without the need for a violent revolution that would clearly fail, at this point. However, once our institutions, values, mores, and customs have been weathered significantly, an environment will persist allowing the violent extermination of political dissidents.

We have already seen the beginning of the tyranny associated with such liberal movements being born of the gay agenda. Stalin used Trotskyism as justification for the forced removal of those who were hostile to his regime. Hitler conducted an operation known as the Night of the Long Knives to root out party members seen as security risks because they did not support his ideas, to gain the allegiance of the German Army, and to establish the supremacy of the S.S.. After Hitler gained absolute power he used it to further destroy church members, and other dissidents. Similarly, we have seen the creation of a term similar to Trotskyite, and laws that have the same chilling effect as Hitler’s broad powers that allowed for him to silence his opposition. Anyone disagreeing with any aspect of the gay agenda is dubbed homophobic, and could face public humiliation. This is a particularly useful tool for a political interest group seeking political influence or possible power, as it reduces the overall criticism directed toward any of their proposals. In a sense, people fear the label, and avoid engaging in the kind of objective analysis important when dealing with any political interest. Furthermore, in some areas they have actually legislated against free speech by defining certain religious passages and criticism of the movement, at large, as "hate-speech".

This type of behavior goes against the principles and democratic ideals that gay interests claim to value. Discourse and ridicule ought to be the tools applied when deciding things in an open society. Legislating speech is the work of fascists, tyrants, and despots and should not be used by a group aiming to further the social landscape. All those seeking political influence should be scrutinized since the stakes remain very high. Thus, it is my belief that Marxists have found a rather useful mask that will allow for them to advance their cause, enabling them to silence their opposition by effectively labeling them bigots.

I often question how many gay rights activists are actually gay, since most of the gay people I know adamantly disagree with the agenda being promoted by those who claim to represent them. This is not a problem exclusive to the "gay rights movement". It is also a problem for the black community and their supposed leadership, as it remains a problem not easily addressed by a democratic government where the power of interest groups is not easily checked. It remains particularly dangerous when that interest group strategically silences any and all opposition. That's the type of thing that dangerous one-party cadre systems are made out of.

(Edited by Ghost Writer at 12:24 pm on July 22, 2003)

Xprewatik RED
22nd July 2003, 12:35
Stupid American.....

Ghost Writer
22nd July 2003, 12:37
That's all you got?!

Sabocat
22nd July 2003, 12:39
....'First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I said nothing. Then they came for the Social Democrats, but I was not a Social Democrat, so I did nothing. Then came the trade unionists, but I was not a trade unionist. And then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did little. Then when they came for me, there was no one left to stand up for me.'

Pastor Niemöller

Xprewatik RED
22nd July 2003, 12:46
What is there to say?
You accuse gays of trying to desecrate your society..
underminding who someone is.... they just want to live their lives...
Who cares about your man-made-god....
Your post is so stupid I just can't believe someone could believe this krap.....

Dirty Commie
22nd July 2003, 14:41
I think he just has the brainwashed homophobic ideals that most amerikkkans are brought up with. Why does he care if someone falls in love with a member of the same sex? In a free country, wouldn't anyone be able to marry whoever they want, why does some one who claims to hold such freedom loving ideals not support something that is obviously a basic human right?

And of course (I'm not trying to start a flame war, but I have to do this), you type this as you drool over a picture of your sister.

Invader Zim
22nd July 2003, 14:54
Quote: from Xprewatik RED on 12:35 pm on July 22, 2003
Stupid American.....


Xprewatik RED you are: -

http://www.student.smsu.edu/s/san232s/hardfunnypics/masterofobvious.jpg

The guy has consistantly shown himself to have the same brain power as a 9 year old, perhaps with a slightly higher spelling age...

However Norman even I cannot see how, even you being as stupid as you are, you can possibly think that communism is even remotly homophobic, you name me one leftist on this site who is homophobic.

sc4r
22nd July 2003, 19:47
I think he is actually saying communists are homophiles not homophobes AK47.

I also think he thinks that people actually wade through the verose tosh he posts. I doubt many do more than a quick skim (if that)

You see Norm when your oppening 5 paragraphs show that there was once a man who was both Gay and a Communist and try to use that to show some nefarious link between the two ideas it is positively yawn making. It has the same intellectual value as 'COOMIES ARE GAY' but takes a lot longer to read.

CompadreGuerrillera
22nd July 2003, 19:54
IS THIS A COMMIE PLOT??

you are officially a loser. Shutup, and come back with something more than this.

You are pathetic, my advise: Get a Life

go to www.buyaclue.com

dopediana
22nd July 2003, 20:10
that's so full of shizzat it doesn't even merit a counterargument because i don't want to get carpal tunnels syndrome wasting my time.

CompadreGuerrillera
22nd July 2003, 21:21
lol ur so right amaryllis, i suggest someone close this topic, its worthless shit.

Urban Rubble
23rd July 2003, 05:35
You know, Ghost Writer usually posts some well thought out stuff. I don't agree with most of what he says, but I know that the man is not an idiot.

The he goes and posts this.

That was a really stupid post Ghost, I could sit here and write out a lengthy rebuttal, but frankly I just think this is retarted.

Good Bye.

apathy maybe
23rd July 2003, 06:41
Gay people are not gay because they choose to be (or at least the majority aren't) but because they had an overdose of one or another hormones in the womb.
Communism is caused by people thinking about things in an intelligent maner and coming to logical conclusions.
Different things caused by different things.
And I must admit that I didn't read more then the first 4 paragraphs.

Ghost Writer
23rd July 2003, 08:07
"That was a really stupid post Ghost, I could sit here and write out a lengthy rebuttal, but frankly I just think this is retarted."

Well, then do it. As it stands, nobody has shown me were I have gone wrong. You are not denying the fact that the gay agenda is tied to the radical left wing, are you? There is plenty of evidence to support this fact.

I think that you, like most people who have been exposed to the language of the radical gay left have this notion that it is somehow bigotted to so much as question the motives behind their agenda. Think about this from a standpoint of political interest. If you were trying to limit the amount of opposition to your platform, this radical left wing group has done an extraordinary job. In this endeavor they have been successful, and deserve due credit for a purely ingenious strategy.

However, there are people, like me, that understand the value of discourse in an open society, and will not allow any political interest to go unchallenged. Those seeking any sort of political gain should be scrutinized thoroughly, since the stakes are rather high. We have seen what happens when a political movement goes unchecked.

I am not naive enough to believe that the assault that we have seen on our language, culture, institutions, government, and history is anything other than a liberal movement meant to replace our traditional icons and perspective with symbols and an ideology of their own. Unfortunately for those behind this, there are many students of history who understand the significance of such actions and will work to prevent the sort of treachory necessarily associated the rapid liberalism espoused by the gay agenda.

Of course, a fellow communist plotter would deny the charges that I make, for the gay movement has been one of your most successful wings offering you the victory that so many other groups have failed to bring. They are your strongest ally. No wonder you would embrace them.

(Edited by Ghost Writer at 8:09 am on July 23, 2003)

Xprewatik RED
23rd July 2003, 10:12
Ghost Writer in Western Europe and Canada gay people can marry and nothing fundametal has changed. There is no revolutuion and we are no closer to revolution than the previous day....... You just are racist.... gays have existed way before Communism and all they have ever wanted is equal rights ....equal right promised under democracy....
You stand in the way of evolution Ghost Writer...
clinging to old beliefs....for your life....
I have never hated gays even BEFORE I was remotely marxist.....

Ghost Writer
23rd July 2003, 11:31
"gays have existed way before Communism "

Obviously. However, gay marriage has never existed prior to now. Why do you suppose this is true? Why don't you think that the Greeks and Romans allowed for gay marriage, even though they were "gay friendly"?

"Ghost Writer in Western Europe and Canada gay people can marry and nothing fundametal has changed. There is no revolutuion and we are no closer to revolution than the previous day"

I disagree. We are seeing a rapid erosion of Western civilization. Be proud you live in possibly the most destructive age of man, and sit back willing to do nothing but marvel at the social "advances" you think are being made. What we are seeing is the death of the great societies brought to us by the Romans and the Greeks.

"You just are racist"

There you go using the typical tactic of Stalinists, Nazis, and those in the gay agenda, by labeling those who disagree with your version of society as racists. Once again, I invite you to provide evidence that gay people constitute a race of people, moron. If disagreeing with someone's views is sufficient enough reason to label them racists, you are a racist by those standards. By using the term in such an arbitrary way you undercut the true meaning of the word.

"I have never hated gays even BEFORE I was remotely marxist"

I don't hate gays either. I reserve my hate for radical leftists, which by the way, I would note hire while in a position to offer employment. I guess that leaves you ought of a job.

Dirty Commie
23rd July 2003, 13:17
Why do you so disgustingly oppose homosexuals? What is wired into your loosly connected two dozen (or less) brain cells that makes you fear those who don't agree with your fascist ideals? You're argument is based on the fact that many gays happen to be liberal? so what? Many straight people are conservative, so does that mean that the republican party is a massive heterosexual plot? If I were to stoop your first grade "logic" (if the word can used when you're name is involved) thwan I would have to say heterosexuals have a massive plot to make the world a conservative dystopia.

I think that wanker need sto be banned for this.

honest intellectual
24th July 2003, 00:39
Not only that but he virtually invented the very idea that gays have historically been oppressed in the United States, a notion that lacks a preponderance of evidence, yet seems to be widely accepted by a population under attack by liberal elements. This supposed minority status has been the underpinning mantra used to advance the gay agenda.

Homosexuality was illegal in parts of America until a few weeks ago. You can't say that the oppression of homosexuals is a fiction.

The fact that the Gay Liberation Front has a version of its own Manifesto is testament to their Marxists leanings.

What?

This organization's mission is entirely consistent with communist teachings aimed at uprooting the status quo and eroding the institutions that conserve what is considered by them to be a oppressive system.

No. You equate the Gay Liberation front with Marxism because they're both opposed to the status quo. that's like saying that purple is the same as green because they're both not blue.

"We can use our righteous anger to uproot the present oppressive system with its decaying and constricting ideology, and how we, together with other oppressed groups, can start to form a new order, and a liberated lifestyle, from the alternatives which we offer."

Obviously, this is an organization willing to employ the same violent methods of their Stalinist and Nazi predecessors.

There is no evidence to suggest that. You can't say they're wililing to use totalitarian methods because they use the words 'anger' and 'uproot' in their manifesto

This type of behavior goes against the principles and democratic ideals that gay interests claim to value. Discourse and ridicule ought to be the tools applied when deciding things in an open society. Legislating speech is the work of fascists, tyrants, and despots and should not be used by a group aiming to further the social landscape. All those seeking political influence should be scrutinized since the stakes remain very high.

Isn't 'ridicule' what calling someone homophobic is about? And the political tactics of tyrants and totalitarianists are mostly coercion, violence and intimidation, none of which (to my knowledge) have ever ever been used by the GLF

Rastafari
24th July 2003, 01:14
This is quite possibly the funniest thing I have ever seen on this site. Please tell me this is a joke, as the "Reverend" Jerry Falwell could never devise shit as bullish as this.

Hell, though, I wish the Socialist movement in the US had the numbers the homosexuals did...5-10% of the population could really change things here.

canikickit
24th July 2003, 01:26
During a time when Joseph McCarthy was questioning communists before the House Un-American Activities Committee

A time when freedm of association and expression was curtailed. Even the term "un-American activity" reeks of the type of orthodoxy you claim to find repugnant, Norm.

During the Second Red Scare a political movement known as the gay agenda was developed.

When was the first, Norm (I presume the second was circa the McCarthy era)?

To further expand upon the radical nature of Harry Hay, he was a huge supporter of NAMBLA. Not only that but he virtually invented the very idea that gays have historically been oppressed in the United States

Did you make this up, or would you care to show some evidence?
That article you linked to was quite interesting. Harry Hay seems like quite the wierdo, but I hardly think he represents homosexual people. From the article:


Hay may have been wrong about almost everything. But in the end we do not insist that founders have the right answers, not even ask the right questions. We can honor them as founders and leave it at that.

Considering the fact that the article was sourced on a site for gay people, and considering the above quote, I think it is very fair to say that Harry Hay does not represent all gay people. I'd imagine he represents very few, considering I'd never heard of him. "Will and Grace" probably has more influence.

a notion that lacks a preponderance of evidence

What about the fact that they're not allowed to marry? I also think the fact that they are the objects of large amounts of prejudice is be a contributing factor.

What about the links between the gay political interest groups associated with pedophilia?

The links between these gay political groups and what, communism?

The fact that the Gay Liberation Front has a version of its own Manifesto is testament to their Marxists leanings.

Nice rethoric. Do you know what a "manifesto" is? The Declaration of Independence is a manifesto.
What are you saying, what are the contents of their manifesto (I see now that you have quoted some of it below, but the use of the word "manifesto" does not automatically make people commie pukes)?

Marxism is the hallmark of the relativist perspective, and is the underlying reason why leftists refuse to make value judgments about anything except those organizations and institutions that do have clearly defined codes outlying ethical practices, hence communism's hatred for religious institutions.

What do you mean?

To a Marxist there is no better alternative to religion than party affiliation, or a fanatical ideology.

Nicely put, although I do not think this is necessarily true for all who follow Marx's writings.
You don't suggest anything to make me feel that way.
I must say, I believe what you have cited is a large part of the reason for the rise of "great leaders" in the Soviet Union.

"We can use our righteous anger to uproot the present oppressive system with its decaying and constricting ideology, and how we, together with other oppressed groups, can start to form a new order, and a liberated lifestyle, from the alternatives which we offer."

Obviously, this is an organization willing to employ the same violent methods of their Stalinist and Nazi predecessors.


"Anger" is the only word here which actually suggests violence, and that is merely an implication. I'm not convinced by your use of the word "obviously" alone. Perhaps some more quotes from their manifesto?

It is no coincidence that the Nazi Party had a active campaign to undermine the family through the educational system with programs like the Hitler Youth, and the gay movement has also sought to use the school system as a way of initializing social and political change.

Of course it is not a coincidence, Norm. It is because intelligent people will realise that it would be wise to attempt to inform people of what you believe is right at a young age.
It is called the "educational system" for a reason.

With regard to your post as a whole, there is a lot I agree with, I'm just not convinced that their is a "gay agenda", as you put it. As you said, there are many gay people who disagree with these ideals. I'm just not convinced that all these people are Marxists, I'm not convinced that gay people want to uproot American values.

I don't think it is necessary to attempt to tarnish the "gay agenda" with the brush of Marxism, as you have done. Is it not enough to say that some of the things gay people (and gay organisations) are doing, you disagree with? Why do you feel you must label them as "Marxist"? The similarities you have set forth are not convincing, I think all they are are similarities, I don't think it is a conspiracy, a communist plot to overthrow the United States, and everything they represent.

I think a lot of the points you have raised are interesting. The (huge) problem is that you hve not suggested anything which would convince me that their intentions are evil, or wrong.
You yourself have alluded to how you would like to see a change in society, does that make you a Marxist?

Xvall
24th July 2003, 03:45
AK-47. You realize that by claiming that he is 'Master of the obvious', you are stating that he is correct about 'stupid americans'. Look up 'obvious' before you use it next time.

Vinny Rafarino
24th July 2003, 08:44
Well comrade Drake, Ghost Whiner is indeed a stupid American. I believe AK is onto something here.

I think however in this case AK was just waiting for a chance to use that graphic on someone.

You will never beat my Taco Bell Sign AK. Never.

In case you forgot what it looked like comrade;

http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/upload/1tacobellak.jpg

Ghost Writer
24th July 2003, 08:58
You just don't like me because I am better than you. Don't worry, I get that reaction a lot. You are not the first, I have long since learned how to cope with my superiority.

Xprewatik RED
24th July 2003, 12:53
uhuh a minority wants to be recognized by the nation it lives in... how horrible ..oh no... barricade the doors...dont let the gays in they will destroy us..oh no!
run...run....first gay marriges ..next.... nuclear fallout.....
nice logic ghost writer......
(this thread has lowered everyone's IQ thanks to ghost wanker)

Dirty Commie
24th July 2003, 12:55
Now we can match wankers idiocy level, wait, no, I think we still would have to knock off another 95-120 oints, thasn we could stoop to his level.

canikickit
24th July 2003, 15:18
You just don't like me because I am better than you. Don't worry, I get that reaction a lot. You are not the first, I have long since learned how to cope with my superiority.



What a wonderful response.

Felicia
24th July 2003, 15:26
Quote: from Ghost Writer on 8:58 am on July 24, 2003
You just don't like me because I am better than you. Don't worry, I get that reaction a lot. You are not the first, I have long since learned how to cope with my superiority.

hahaha, come off it! No one here things that, believe me. You're just another one of those immature little kiddies, no big deal though, you guys seem to always over estimate your self worth.....superior my land, humph!

Rastafari
24th July 2003, 17:01
haha...in this system where the number of posts measures one's rank, SN and Canikickit would rule us all!!!
Just like in the Planet of the Apes!!!

Ghost Writer
25th July 2003, 03:16
Now we can match wankers idiocy level, wait, no, I think we still would have to knock off another 95-120 oints, thasn we could stoop to his level.

If we subtracted the low end of that range from your IQ, we would get 5. If we took the high end, we would be left with -20. Sorry, to get to my level you would need to add a few dozen to your IQ, filthy communists.

Ghost Writer
25th July 2003, 12:34
Some of the more prominent members of this community have offered some valid criticism of my original post. Therefore, you can count on Part II of "The Gay Agenda" to be posted in the near future. There I will further investigate the counterproductive effects hate crimes legislation has had on democratic peoples throughout the world, and offer further evidence of the gay movement's link to Marxism.

mentalbunny
25th July 2003, 13:02
I don't have time to read everything, and maybe this really belongs in the gay marriage thread, but it's a response to GW about the Ancient Greeks and Romans.

The Greeks especially sexually saw women for reproduction and men for fun. marriage wasn't about showing love, being with someone you care about, etc, it had a purpose and the purpose was kids, money, keeping a secure household, etc. Marrying a man wouldn't have fulfilled these, so there was no point.

Marriage for a long time has been about kids, marriage nearly always has a practical purpose, it's not just about airy-fairy commitment (although the rest of your life is hardly to be sneezed at), now it's about taxes, insurance, etc but before it was a little different, and tradition played a big part in why people got married, because illegitimate kids got a raw deal, etc.

Marriage has evolved as now cohabiting couples can be seen as basically married, religion is not as prominent and there's no shame, for most people, in having kids out of marriage, so some see no reason to get married, and often see it as a disadvantage because if it does go wrong then divorces aren't exactly nice, and maybe the feeling of life-long commitment could put pressure on the relationship.

Another thing, most gays are not left-wing. Leftists support the gay community in asserting their rights because they have suffered under conservative rule, etc. it wuld be the same with any other oppressed group. We may be their ally but I wouldn't say they were ours at all.

canikickit
25th July 2003, 16:29
Some of the more prominent members of this community have offered some valid criticism of my original post. Therefore, you can count on Part II of "The Gay Agenda" to be posted in the near future.

Before you go writing another extravagant essay, why don't you respond to my initial post?

Ghost Writer
25th July 2003, 18:38
Don't worry, I am planning on it. It's just that I have been putting off my work with differential equations to debate this point. I really must get it done now, as I am running out of time. See you guys when I get done. One must have their priorities straight (No pun intended).

Ex Nihilo
25th July 2003, 19:00
According to Tacitus the Germanic tribes punished homosexuality with death.

mentalbunny
25th July 2003, 22:55
And what is the relevance of that, Ex Nihilo?

GW, I'm looking forward to the next installment, keep it busy until I get back from my hols, so I don't have to trawl through the back pages!