The Pink Hammer and Sickle

The Pink Watchmen on the Walls

Lack of evidence? A nicety like that needn’t be an obstacle to a man of Scott Lively’s calibre – nor has it been up to now.

Take the unification of Italy, for instance. The Neapolitan Luigi Settembrini, who participated in the Risorgimento movement, was homosexual and wrote a homoerotic novel called Neoplatonici.

The Pink Shamrock? Well, how about the Irish patriot Sir Roger Casement, who was a “notorious homosexual”? (It’s strange, but I never hear anyone described as a “notorious heterosexual”.)

What of Welsh Nationalism? The Plaid Cymru party has at present three members in the Parliament at Westminster. Only one of them, I believe, is homosexual, but it is to be noted that each of them has voted for every gay-friendly measure that the U.K. Parliament has passed, from equalization of the age of consent to the introduction of civil partnerships, so that proves that Plaid Cymru must be a front for the homosexual agenda. (Again, strange: I can’t find a copy of the “gay agenda” or the “homosexual agenda” anywhere. It’s certainly not on the shelves at W.H. Smith’s, and although a search on the Amazon web-site brings up several books about it, the agenda itself seems unobtainable. Perhaps it’s a “classified document” covered by the Official Secrets Act.)

And then there’s the French Revolution. Jean-Jacques-Régis de Cambacérès, first Duke of Parma, was a supporter of the French Revolution and he was also a “notorious homosexual”. As a lawyer he worked on much of the legislation of the revolutionary period, and he eventually became Minister of Justice. It is to be noted that the National Constituent Assembly abolished the law against “sodomy” when it revised French criminal law in 1791, and that the Penal Code of 1810, which dealt with sexual crimes and which was imposed on many other European countries as a result of Napoleon’s conquests, did not mention homosexual behaviour as such. Obviously the whole thing was a plot to homosexualize Europe.

Simple, isn’t it? All that you need to do is to find some incidental facts and to blow them up into matters of huge significance. (Any inconvenient facts can be misrepresented, subtly distorted or simply ignored.) You can then weave a fantastic web of ahistorical trash around them.

Warren, on what you said about Nietzsche… I remember reading once that he had a story of unrequited love with Lou Salome, the Russian-born psychoanalyst. There she is. She was very cute and apparently a very bright woman too (Rilke fell for her too..). Her rejection seem to have dealt a major blow to Nietsche’s already faltering state of health. I might be wrong about this, but I think he wrote in a letter to one of his few friends that he was suffering ‘like a god’. Leaving grandiosity aside, it seems he had a strong motivation to pursue her and regret her.

On the Nietzsche subject, it always happens that some are trying to stick labels or to appropriate some ideas for different ideological means (like the affair his sister had with the Nazi regime). More recently, a guy wrote a book trying to paint Nietzsche’s biography in rainbow colours…

It may say more about the culture wars that are going on right now and here than about the philosopher’s leanings.