Comments on: Is Extremism in the Defense of Sodomy No Vice?

By: Forty Years in the Wilderness? | The Occidental Quarterly

Forty Years in the Wilderness? | The Occidental Quarterly — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 16:48:46 +0000

[...] friends within the anarchist milieu, and many bitter enemies as well. In a recent and highly controversial essay, I argued for a “revolution within anarchism.” What I was calling for is the future advent of [...]

By: agalnoraferon

agalnoraferon — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 00:37:34 +0000

When they are hounding you for being a “fascist” for advocating individual liberty it simply shows how ignorant of anarchism they really are.

By: Smithstienberger

Smithstienberger — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 20:31:18 +0000

I have yet to meet a self professed anarchist that didn’t claim some sort of Native American heritage, usually Cherokee. Do I believe the author to be an anti-semite? No, he just doesn’t agree with Israel and US foreign policy, but if push came to publically he’s support them. In all reality the author might as well be a Jew since they seem to be his biggest influence and a driving force in the breakdown of Western Civilization.
The biggest problem I have is the constant use of large words to describe the anarchists problem with the world around them. The real fact of the matter is the problem is “them”. They are usually maladjusted discontent that they blame “whitey” for their own shortcomings. I have yet to see an anarchist try to break down any other system but white. This whole article could be some up a few words which are, “help, I hate what I see in the mirror”.

By: Attack the System » Blog Archive » Forty Years in the Wilderness?

Attack the System » Blog Archive » Forty Years in the Wilderness? — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 16:49:26 +0000

By: Social Memory Complex » On the Preston Affair

Social Memory Complex » On the Preston Affair — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 04:22:59 +0000

[...] coherent, integrated statement on the conversation surrounding Keith Preston’s recent essay, Is Extremism in Defense of Sodomy No Vice?. The delay in consolidating my thoughts into an “official” response has been fortunate; [...]

By: Anna Morgenstern

Anna Morgenstern — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 01:10:37 +0000

Hmm. Actually extremism in defense of Sodomy IS no vice, as long as that extremism is extremism toward decentralist liberty. If there are communities that manage to find a way to keep themselves “queer free” somehow without violent aggression, well ok fine. As long as they let the kids leave. Otherwise we might have to work on some crazy extraction missions

Where I differ with you is the idea that “radical youth” somehow don’t want to be associated with freaky queer people. Actually they probably have more manpower (excuse the pun) than the straight edge hyper-traditionalists. It’s just genetics.
They’re at least 10-15% of the population, basically. That’s a 30-45 million strong army in the USA alone. They’re pretty tame now because they are getting their way, but if they get pushed enough, they will push back. I think they can’t be just shunted out of a future anarchist coalition.

Also from what I’ve seen, transfolk in particular tend to be more sympathetic to anarchist ideals than liberal ones, once they are exposed to them. We don’t want gifts from the overlords, we want to carry guns(almost all MtFs anyway that I’ve spoken to, tend to pretty much pro-gun rights) and be left to our own devices.

I know you’ve had some bad experiences with someone on the sexual fringe, and all I can say is, we’re all different really.

By: On rejecting Keith Preston | No Treason

On rejecting Keith Preston | No Treason — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 10:11:25 +0000

[...] yesterday, I finally got around to giving the offending post by Preston a rigorous examination with a clear mind and a critical [...]

By: News Briefs May 24-30/2009 | www.new-right.org

News Briefs May 24-30/2009 | www.new-right.org — Wed, 27 May 2009 08:23:50 +0000

[...] Is Extremism in the Defense of Sodomy No Vice? A must read… [...]

By: TGGP

TGGP — Sat, 23 May 2009 01:50:11 +0000

Hayek was not Jewish but a lax Catholic.

By: James O'Meara

James O'Meara — Fri, 22 May 2009 15:08:35 +0000

Another excellent essay, of course. I am compelled to add something regarding Dr. Kirk’s remarks at the top. If Dr. Kirk found many homosexuals among his libertarian acquaintances, one might suggest he take a closer look at his own circle.

What, after all, would American post-War “conservatism” have been without J. Edgar Hoover, Roy Cohn, [possibly] Joe McCarthy, Whittaker Chambers, or Cardinal Spellman? And what of William F. Buckley, the leader of them all? Surely not queer, but making his mark with a public persona not really all that different from, say, Truman Capote. Leading, no doubt, to his frequent TV pairing with Gore Vidal, and his hysterical he-man outburst at the Chicago Convention in 1968: “Now listen, you queer, stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I’ll sock you in you goddamn face and you’ll stay plastered.”

The association of homosexuality with The Left is a myth, of course, promoted by the Left itself. As you say, American parties are coalitions of odd groups, and I suspect that a shared ‘anti-communism’ brought together Judeo-Christian homophobes with the sort of homosexuals who would have been part of the Conservative Revolution or even the SA in the 30s. Since the Church was in control, homosexuality had to stay firmly ‘in the closet,’ although [see the names above] it never prevented anyone from taking a leading position in the movement.