I try comment and get another blog to show for it

http://montages.blogspot.com/2004/06/clash-of-civilizations-sending-pink.html Do you remember Pim Fortuyn, a gay Dutch politician who rose to notoriety with his call for a moratorium on immigration and whose political party Lijst Pim Fortuyn received "1.6 million votes and 26 seats in the 150-seat parliament" nine days after Fortuyn's assassination on May 6, 2002? It is common today to automatically associate white gay male politics with the left. From Oscar Wilde, Magnus Hirschfeld, Sergei Eisenstein, Jean Genet, Harry Hay, Michel Foucault, Pier Paolo Pasolini, Guy Hocquenghem, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, John D'Emilio, to Tony Kushner, the finest and queerest of queer male intellectuals have been resolutely of the left (even when political parties on the left didn't welcome them, they remained radically pinko), and landmarks of gay men's activism from the Stonewall Uprising, le Front Homosexuel d'Action Révolutionnaire, Act-Up, to Queer Nation stand on the left side of the political spectrum. While we know that some white gay men have espoused a range of right-wing politics (from Nazism of Ernst Röhm to Cold-War anticommunism of Roy Cohn to Log Cabin Republicanism of Andrew Sullivan), we (especially those of us on the queer left), noting that right-wing gay men are generally marginalized (and sometimes purged) by their fellow right-wingers, think that right-wing gay men have found themselves on the wrong side of the political spectrum, against their own interests. The rise of Pim Fortuyn, however, signaled a new era of white gay male politics. (click link at top for the rest)


here's my comment:

pp goes pietpoetic soon as power goes, adds up and comes to powder, it's senses that is.
Wow!! Clutching the ashes of clip n clear straw claspery . .. I mean, where to start defusing this all too common selfrighteous indignation over a nation she on the other hand really digs (and what has it dug onto even the other world's and other's world side)? Sure, generalizations are really bad and decisions have a way of severing stuff (good intentions displaced by bad practice, good trappings severed from the long long road towards perfection, expulsions, relocation, trans-, im- and exports, etc) but I prefer to look at it roots radically and principles positively first and foremost. The ideal act makes room for new life in between formerly to formal tight and uniform fronts, formations/factions, etcetera (more like respacing and preplacement, not the dis- version then innit? Stick to basics and nobody gets hurt).
In my so humble it tends to crumble Ipinion Dutch liberality has cost too high a price (though paid pretty much in full till just as pretty recently) for (similarly specced, too high that is) tolerance is a dutch disease you too suffer by looking away from the real problems multiculturalism engenders and (looking) even further away from the problems which engendered its tumulticult in the first place (which is not to say it has no potential, the rise and fall of races proves that but if you so much as attempt to sequence that sort of stuff all of the pilotackily correct crowds line up to fall all over and against you too). For instance, taking America as home to the weary and hungry or wondering which group benefits most in the jostle leaves the reason for the hemorrhaging of places all these various folks hail from equally far out of the picture. Demography and cultural mores, economics, mindsets and lores are to be grasped in/as one clearly and vitally flowing,tightly fitting and fractal concept/process and hell, that takes the kind of practice squeezed further and further out of same punkcheer. Yoshie proves these far and widely ramified factors and aspects of population pressures (in the Dutch case nevertheless undeniably and therefore easy to admit self inflicted (pp), the turning of price into reward of admission (pp), kind of like zionist tactics (pp) in reverse, ironic for such an unhealthily pro-israel (pp) babbleboible (pp) below biggarbeltwoild) which threaten a real inundation (either that or morph'm into ugly aliens, they're limbering up with alienationisms already methinks, the densely populated Dutch case seams a not even that much exxagerated version of some damn near universally human problems against which some of them are, admission time again, draconically struggling) are pretty much off limits, out of bounds and totally taboo to her and hers, the messy masses minded.
Before I say anymore let me emphasize I am a firm believer in peace- and all the more forceful solutions (power to powder, lust to dust); now that we have that out of the way I hasten to add that the 'mistakenly' and 'made out to be' firm and irreconcilable Huntingtonian antagonism, the 'inherently and monolithically' this vs that is really much more of a tit vs tat, a hitting on one cheek and making them both hurt. The monotheisms and other factors furthering monomania and mindmoldies for the masses have been enjoying a winning streak against the, dare I say inherently, more richly variety filled and fielding narcissisms of small differences, I mean the less generalization triggering happy (militaristic pun intended), less scale-invariant (some Winter vs Kohr reading required here; meant is action/energydirection not indifferent to but to the contrary, hungry for scaling, the clinically clean, almost scientific term which tries and pretends to shed the karma of but will forever at heart still remain a remnant and echo from the materializionist side of the mixed bag known as the bible) though, of course, sometimes no less deadly still evermore local, differences.