Might it worth getting Hari to comment on Fischer’s declared ‘support’ for him?

I believe that Fischer is, for his own ends, actually wilfully misunderstanding Hari’s thesis. Like you, I’m convinced that Hari’s ‘historical analysis’ is, to put it mildly, seriously defective, but Hari is not, in my view, ultimately presenting the idea that ‘homosexuality’ leads to fascism (an idea so beloved by the Fischers and Livelys of this world) – rather he is warning gay people who might, for whatever reason, be tempted by fascist ideas to avoid them. That much I can agree with.

Might it worth getting Hari to comment on Fischer’s declared ‘support’ for him?

I believe that Fischer is, for his own ends, actually wilfully misunderstanding Hari’s thesis. Like you, I’m convinced that Hari’s ‘historical analysis’ is, to put it mildly, seriously defective, but Hari is not, in my view, ultimately presenting the idea that ‘homosexuality’ leads to fascism (an idea so beloved by the Fischers and Livelys of this world) – rather he is warning gay people who might, for whatever reason, be tempted by fascist ideas to avoid them. That much I can agree with.

Only by ignoring all of these movements and then falsely labeling gay non-fascists as fascists (e.g., Pim Fortuyn) can the discredited, plagiarist and fabulist Johann Hari make his case. Small wonder that he has been approvingly cited on Scott Lively’s blog for some years.

The truth is that gay political views are reasonably well known through national and local polling. Most are center-left, a decent minority are libertarian right. A tiny fraction are far left. And a small fraction of one percent might be found on the far right.