Attack the System
Categories: Uncategorized
Editors
-
academiccompositionab
-
Empowerment Equalizer
-
SSaragian
-
Antony Sammeroff
-
Ann Sterzinger
-
Rodney
-
RJ
-
busterjames
-
cainusmaxus
-
Craig FitzGerald
-
David Heleniak
-
Caity & Dan Greene
-
keirmartland
-
Keith Preston
-
Bill the Butcher
-
ljp711
-
MRDA
-
Jack Donovan
-
Rachel Haywire
-
comrade hermit
-
Michael
-
Vince
-
robertstark2014
-
Noonan
-
S E Pearson
-
Rachel Haywire
-
Nexus X Humectress
Different continent, but here’s an interesting article regarding home grown homophobia in Africa meeting American style, politicized homophobia. The result is death penalties for gays.
http://www.economist.com/world/international/displayStory.cfm?story_id=16219402&source=hptextfeature
————-
“Africa must seem an exciting place for evangelical Christians from places like America,” says Marc Epprecht, a Canadian academic who studies homosexuality in Africa. “They can make much bigger gains in their culture wars there than they can in their own countries.” Their ideas have found fertile ground.
————
Jonathan Bowden was saying in his interview with Tom Sunic that the Anglican Church in England survives only because of the participation of African and other immigrants, who tend to be more socially conservative on matters like homosexuality. The liberal coalition will self-cannibalize in the long run.
http://reasonradionetwork.com/?p=8155
I have noticed the ENR is far more lenient on homosexuality than the American bourgeoise right, as examplified by Bowden’s affiliation with Clarke, while steering clear of pc authoritarianism.
This is because the former realizes that homosexuality has always been an ingrained part of Western Civilization (i.e. ancient Greece & Rome, the masculinist movement), with many queers making important contributions (i.e. again, Da Vinci, Michaleangelo, Whitman, Wilde, etc.) Whereas the latter mistakenly views it as a subversive alein force bent on destroying the West.
Bowden’s statement is curious in that exposes the true nature of the left-they’re more than willing to tolerate social conservatism from third world immigrants but those same views are seen as unacceptable when coming from westerners. This shows that they’re fondness for immigration is rooted more in pre-rational aesthetic preferences than in any reasoned approach to society and culture.
Overall, I’m glad to see more and more homosexuals involved in this movement as it will indicate to the left that their victomological coalition is bound to lose, founded as it is on a number of misguided assumptions. Actually, I’m beggining to think that their “coalition” really exists only as a delusion in their minds, given the hostility I encounter among various ethnic minorities for another, and for homosexuals.
One of the two tribes I’m descended from runs its society as a conservative theocracy. As a result, its one of the few tribes that has maintained a stable population, preserved its language and culture, and has remained relevant for its members in the modern age. Liberals everywhere are baffled. Of course, one crucial element that keeps power in check is that anyone who doesn’t like the way things are can move a few miles down the road onto American soil. Additionally, social cohesion is enforced through cultural norms instead of violence. Pretty fucking bad ass, if you ask me. And a model to follow moving forward.
Just down the road is an extraordinarily liberal community, where a queer Indian can be as gay as he wants to be and still remain close to family on the reservation.
It sounds as if your tribe has the sort of cultural setup future communities need to adopt for purposes of autonomy and survival. I’ve long persisted that liberalism erodes neccessary social order and renders self-government impossible. A social envieronment of atomized individuals with permissive lifestyles needs to regulated and controlled by an invasive managerial state or else chaos and disorder would hold sway. With organic social ties, however, that state is unnesseccary. The problem now is…how do we restore and revitalize those bonds?
The latter are not mistaken in their view at all. That’s exactly what the Magnus Hirschfeld-inspired “gay rights” movement is up to.
You’re failing to distinguish between homosexuality as a private sexual activity and homosexuality as a political movement. I don’t think Da Vinci would’ve contributed much of anything worthwhile to Western Civilization if his life had revolved around “pride parades” and inhaling poppers at the neighborhood bathhouse as it would today.
The “gay rights” movement depends entirely upon Federal power to shove its coercive, anti-majority agenda down everyone else’s throats. Isn’t state coercion what you lefties claim to be against?
Clarification: by “lefties” I mean anarchists. Most people on the left do believe in state coercion.
This essay by the late ENR figure Alisdair Clarke, who was also a gay man, discusses some of these distinctions:
http://aryanfuturism.blogspot.com/search?q=shockwaves
Igor,
I am not a leftie. I am a regionalist and a mutualist, but I am not a “leftist.” And yes I was making that ever crucial distinction between homosexuality as private practice and homosexuality as political cause. My point was that the former has been an ever-present part of Western Civilization that did not seek to undermine it, while the latter is an inorganic invention of New Left culture hijackers who have consciously co-opted the last two generations of queers to promote their sinister agenda. This is what Alisdaire Clarke explained so eloquently in his article, “PARIS SHOCKWAVES.”
My ultimate point is that yes I acknowledge the deleterious effects of the current “gay rights” agenda but this stems from the PC Left’s appropriation of the gay subculture for its own purposes, not from the essence of homosexuality itself. So, as you have illustrated, would-be Davinci’s are reduced to unknowing footsoldiers for the destruction of the civilization they owe their existence to.
The implication this has is that queers need play that role; rather, they can reject leftist brainwashing and grooming (i.e. the manufactured “gay identity”) and cross over to our side. Queerness has existed (and prospered) peacefully within Western Civilization for centuries without posing an existensial threat to it; we can and should restore that state of affiars. The earliest stages of this are already transpiring, as can be seen in the excellent work produced by Clarke and his American equivalent, James J O’ Meara.
That being said, I must say I heartily concur with your assessment of the “gay rights” movement as it currently exists. It is indeed a sham movement seeking to impose the misguided desires of a minority upon the majority through federal coercion.
The left cares next to nothing about individual liberty at this point, seeking to erect a totalitarian state for the supposed benefit of the upwardly mobile sectors of their favored victim groups…and they do so using touchy feely multi-culti “social justice” rhetoric. Hence, restricting other’s freedom of association via “antidiscrimination laws”, freedom of speech via “hate speech” laws, criminalizing thoughts via “hate crime” laws, and socially conditioning the masses through “sensitivity training” and “teaching tolerance” courses is all just, virtuous, and absolutely neccessary for societal “progress.” I am an embittered opponent of all this precisely because it involves state coercion. I am not an Infoshopper turncoat who claims to oppose “the state” in the abstract, while simultaneously supporting the continued existence of every bloated managerial beauracracy in the country. That is precisely why they and their ilk will never succeed in toppling the U.S. regime, as their victimological dream coalition consists largely of people who merely want to harness the tools of coercion and use them for their own purposes, not destroy them.
Very well said, Quagmire. Those are the points I was trying to make in this essay from a couple years ago:
http://attackthesystem.com/should-libertarianism-be-cultural-leftism-without-the-state/
Oh, I’m not so sure about that. In ways they are being used for others’ agendas, but some of what they’re after distinctly serves their own interests, such as lowering age of consent laws, getting homosexuals admitted as Boy Scout leaders, or fobbing off the cost of AIDS research on the average Joe. It follows naturally that when you put a bunch of people together who share a common identity and hostility towards the majority culture, they’re going to start vying for political power, regardless of whether they’re being used for another group’s purposes or not. It’s hard to tell who’s using who in the rainbow coalition these days. I’ve noted a number of incidents in the last few years that make me wonder if homosexuals aren’t as powerful as the jews (for example, Borat was required to pre-screen his last movie to a representative of a homosexual organization before it would be released). In other words, queers aren’t being USED by the PC left, they are an indispensable and formative PART of it.
Note that Da Vinci existed in a time in which he had to remain “in the closet.” Let queers out of the closet and you’re asking for trouble.
How so?
To the extent that it “prospered,” it would’ve had to have done so underground, since homosexuality has for most of Western history, including recent history, been illegal or otherwise proscribed or stigmatized.
Ha, the Greeks! Well, I think that’s been overstated. Classics departments are full of homosexuals and rewriting history to serve their group agenda is a favorite pastime of theirs. Just ask the professional queer who recently claimed, without any real evidence, that Abraham Lincoln was a rearender.
It just never stops with these people. Every major historical figure was a closeted homosexual according to them.
I don’t believe that the average Greek parent would’ve been all that pleased to see his child being used as a sex toy by rich pedophiles. This was only accepted because in a society in which slavery was the norm and homosexuals had obviously amassed a great deal of wealth and power, they didn’t have much of a choice. That Bangkok is a magnet for pedophiles from around the world doesn’t mean the average Thai approves of pedophilia, any more than Weimar Berlin’s teeming lesbian scene meant that the average German approved of homosexuality.
Sure, homosexuality was sometimes tolerated and even encouraged within certain warrior castes, in the West as much as other cultures (like Japan), but I would argue that it served a specific and very different purpose from the pure hedonism we’re seeing today (which shouldn’t be taken as an endorsement on my part). I don’t imagine using homosexuality as a tool to turn soldiers into more effective killing machines is what anti-statists have in mind.
Well, I can’t argue with that. Most of the anger I harbor towards homosexuals at this time has little to do with what they do in the bedroom (what consenting adults do behind closed doors is generally not my concern), it has to do with the points you mention. The “gay rights” movement isn’t really after “rights,” it’s after privileges. It wants to transform the greater culture to suit its purposes. Its modus operandi is precisely the same as that used so successfully by the jews, which is surely no accident, its grandaddy being Magnus Hirschfeld, the same jew who coined the term “racist.”
Queers have imitated the jewish M.O. right down to using pink triangles as a reference to the holocaust and calling their critics “homophobes,” a word which has an identical function to “anti-Semite.”
If the Federal government ever collapses (which I’m sure it will), it’s going to be a very painful time for those minorities which sought to use its power to force their agenda on an unwilling majority. Most homosexuals, however, aren’t able or willing to see this. It’s all in the “here and now” for them.
Oh well. You make your bed, you lie in it.
Typo: “lowering age of consent laws” should’ve read “lowering age of consent”
Igor,
You are confusing the organized gay rights movement, a relatively successful beast that thrives off state and corporate funding and comprises only a small percentage of the overall gay population, with the average queer. The former does not in all instances represent the latter. You also make the mistake of equating male homosexuality with pedophilia, even though the vast majority of gay men stick to their own age bracket. Pedophilia is largely discouraged in the gay community, as can be evidenced by NAMBLA’s consistent rejection from Gay Pride parades.
Secondly, the revisionist “outings” of key historical figures are done by marginal groups and only a few among the diehard PC faithful take them seriously. And while you are correct that homosexuality was chiefly an underground phenomen during those bygone eras you miss my point enitrely that it functioned as such while posing no existential threat to the greater culture. Also, painting gay sexuality as by de facto hedonism is only partially accurate; while unchecked promiscuity certainly exists in those quarters it can also be found in roughly the same amount in straight circles.
Ultimately, the “gay agenda” was devised expressly for the purpose of wrecking civilizational havoc by New Left social engineers…and the militant gays you wax spiteful about are the products of that agenda. If we were to remove the PC brainwashing, they would not be the enemies they are at present. That is where the problem mainly lies, not in homosexuality itself, and you apparently fail to grasp this.
However, I must say I concur with your weariness of the “homophobe” slur being tossed around in such a haphazard fashion, and your opposition to the use of public funds to subsidize AIDS research. I highly reccomend reading the work of Justin Raimondo, a gay paleolibertarian from the Rockwell camp who regularly lambastes the authoritarian excesses of the “gay rights” crusaders.
@ Quagmire
Thanks for your input. After being culturally and economically broken by the state, the other tribe I am descended from is relearning that it is a independent nation of peoples. Which is exciting, because it has 20,000+ members spread across dozens of clans that used to operate as independent political entities. I’m culturally and socially closer to this tribe and am trying to help foster resilient, localized economies of old with modern technology. Also hoping to one day be able to take an intraclan dispute to the clan elder for resolution instead of local law enforcement. Man, that’ll be the day!
You might be interested to know that I’ve encountered many left anarchists who have tried to convince me that American Indians were all communists and that we should return to their flavor of anarcho-communism. Pfft! I much prefer the form of anarchism promoted here, and think that it can be applied to nearly every American Indian tribe.
Thank you anonion. The white left will court you to no end whether you want them to or not. They blindly assume anyone with a membership in one of the groups they seek to co-opt will naturally embrace their views.
Igor writes: “I don’t think Da Vinci would’ve contributed much of anything worthwhile to Western Civilization if his life had revolved around “pride parades” and inhaling poppers at the neighborhood bathhouse as it would today.”
Indeed. The problem with the “X was gay” meme is that it assumes, and is intended to support, the fake, Leftist “gay” identity [as A. Clarke outlined so well]. Thus, if told “Alexander the G. was ‘gay’,” one imagines him swanning around in a pink toga and talking like the Romans in Life of Brian [“Thenturian!].
The real effect is to make the very concept of achievement, from the arts to science to even the military, to be something for ‘fags.’ [Notice how the standard reflexive criticism of a movie like 300, even or especially from PC types, is “homoerotic”?]
Also, all these arguments fall apart by imposing a modern notion of “homosexuality” on societies [i.e., all of mankind until the 19th Century West] that had entirely different ways of ordering sexual behavior. The Greeks practiced kidnapping and pederasty, which is not only illegal here but horrifying to “mainstream gay rights organizations,” while the Greeks would have put to death two bearded men in hot pants kissing in a pride parade.
The President of Iran was perfectly correct: there are no “homosexuals” in Iran, and never have been.
This leads me to recommend a soon-to-be published book, Behind the Veil of Vice, by John R. Bradley. The last chapter deals with homosexuality, and it’s pretty eye-opening; for one thing, he seems to have arrived, independently, at the same ‘gay/homosexual’ distinction A. Clarke and myself have been emphasizing. Homosexual activity, structured in various acceptable ways, is simply a part of life, rather than some act of political protest. Boys are presumed to have sex with each other, women being off limits, and some continue to have the taste for it as men, and that’s that. As long as no one talks about it, no one has any problem with it; there is no record of mass persecutions by the state.
As always, the trouble starts when the Westerner arrives with his Judeo-christian notions. First homosexuality becomes a ‘sin’ and a ‘crime’ [note, only among the Westernized elites, not the Islamic masses] then others start demanding ‘liberation,’ pride parades and demands for “marriage equality” lead to moral panics and crackdowns, and the chaos of Western society is reproduced.
“Homophobia” and “Gay Liberation” are modern Western notions that exist only as a pair. They are a one-two punch designed to tear apart traditional societies, requiring the “benevolent” intervention of some self-styled ‘elite.’