Homosexuality
and
national socialism
synarc2000 wrote: Yes Evola did believe that to achieve great things you had to have all Male groups. He didnt believe in Homosexuality as it was against Tradition but believed more in Non Sexual Homo-Erotic aspects as was Similar to various German groups of the time. By Erotic though i mean non-Sexual, more a Deep Spiritual Brotherhood.
There is a good book but written by a women attacking these ideas which she says is Female Hatred called 'Male Fantasies' it covers the Pre-Nazi period and Focuses on a small group of Freikorps. She includes Junger. She identifies the double fold aspect that the Female produces the Race, but gives in to outside forces and is passive. While the Male is conscious of the Race but can't do anything about the Women who he sees as overtly Sexual. Similar to the ideas of Sex and Character by Otto Weininger. She says that the Blood and Iron views of these Freikorps were part of their hatred of Women and way of releasing Sexual energy. Colin Wilson also covers this subject in his many books.
This discussion reminds me of a bizarre and provocative item I ran into some time back. Here it is. I am still trying to decide what I make of it.
----------------------
SNIPPET:
"One German gay rights activist in particular illustrated the historic links between gay men and fascism: Hans Blher. If you take the theories of Hans Blher, strip away the homosexual content of his arguments, you have essentially, the official position of National Socialism and the theories of Alfred Rosenberg, the official philosopher of the Nazi Party. Bleher believed that the State, and all culture, is dependent not upon the family, but upon groups of men who band together. Men together, usually overseen by a homosexual elite, create cultural structures that protect the family: church, military, trade guilds, governing bodies, and ultimately, the State itself."
----------------------
FULL TEXT:
http://www.geocities.com/ARCOrg/WhyFacst.htm
Seven Common Questions...
Why are there gays? Why do religions condemn gays? Why are so many gay people left wing today? Why did the communists call the Nazi's "fags?" Why are there right wing gays in history? Are gay men, like the Jews, an alien elite? What is the future?
Answers...
Why are there gays?
It doesn't seem that hard to imagine a world without gays, a world where sex and love is strictly between men and women. But mother nature found such a world impossible, even repulsive, and guaranteed that homosexuality would be found evenly distributed throughout the human race, passed on primarily (it is thought) through the mother, never to be "bred out;" permanently a part of the human landscape.
Why did nature take such pains to ensure a homosexual minority?
Nature designed our orientation to have its own sexual proclivities, brain structure, and personality traits. As homosexuals we also have a highly elevated intelligence. Scholars are only just now examining the brain differences, but so far over 100 separate design differences have been proven, with a medium intelligence rate 15% higher than the heterosexual medium intelligence rate. Casting this intelligence rate on a bell curve shows that homosexual males on average are in the upper 3% intelligence range. Why is this? Why are we so different?
Nature has only one answer to this question, and to any question regarding the design and function of animals, humans or nonhuman. It is this: All biological characteristics evolved to help a specific gene pool survive. Gays exist because gays helped humans survive in a hostile and highly selective environment. Gays are more intelligent than heterosexuals because this helped the human gene pool survive. Since homosexuality is found in almost all cultures, in all times, and is also widely practiced in the animal kingdom, the salient question now becomes "How do gay people, with our elevated intelligence, help the gene pool survive?"
In a hunter gatherer society, human populations evolved in small bands of around 30 to 40 people. With gay men approximately 3-4% of the male population, this meant that there would on average be a homosexual male for every small band of humans. This small band required more than hunting skills to survive--though gay men undoubtedly excelled at this skill as well. This band needed male to male socialization, religious faith, cultural symbols of unity, education, and charismatic leaders that possessed oratorical, strategic, intuitive, and military genius.
Where do gays fit in? Nature chose gay men to fill this unique role of "nature's elite," possessing the extraordinary skills required to provide socialization and leadership. This meant balancing the need to survive and reproduce with the need to have a small minority focused almost entirely on bonding males together, creating a cultural expression for unity, and passing this cultural expression to the young. To accomplish this end humans evolved with a genetic "sliding scale" for sexual orientation. Passed on through the mother, the genetic predisposition toward homosexuality is less common for the first son, more common for the second, even more so for the third, and so on. In other words, nature prioritized breeding and survival of the race by raising the chances for a heterosexual first born son, and then increased the likelihood of a homosexual son for subsequent male children who then provided the leadership and cultural talents necessary to ensure group survival.
Though many have long suspected a special role for gay men, noting the obvious overrepresentation of gay men in any historical list of "great men," only in the past decade have there emerged a plethora of biological studies that compare the gay and heterosexual brain and that offer concrete explanations of how and why gays are different.
The first thing to understand is how the heterosexual male and heterosexual female brain differ, and then examine how the homosexual male brain compares. At birth the infant brain has less specialization, and operates more as a whole. As the child grows older various specialized functions become apparent--language, mathematics, conceptualization of abstracts, and so on. Puberty releases hormones into the body that essentially stop this specialization. As most people are aware, girls "grow up" faster than boys, which means that they enter puberty first, and hormones are released that stop the specialization of the brain. Males, subject to a later puberty, proceed for a few extra years in brain development and specialization. The brain in the male is larger, the frontal lobe responsible for higher abstractions contains almost 50% more brain cells, and the specialization of the brain is more apparent in the male for a variety of functions, most obviously in mathematics, logical reasoning and abstract conceptualization. The female brain excels in wholistic, intuitive reasoning, and is smaller, and closer to the function of the infant brain than the male. To handle an exchange of information wholistically the female brain has larger neurological linkage between both hemispheres of the brain.
The gay brain is not a compromise between the male and female brain, but rather, has the specialized functions of the male brain, and also has the intuitive, wholistic function of the female brain. The cord that links the left and right hemispheres in the gay brain is significantly larger than in the female, which in turn is significantly larger than the heterosexual male cord. The result is a type of super-brain, with an elevated intelligence, and a range of gifts and talents that make the gay man as capable as the male specialization functions, and even more capable than the female in wholistic, intuitive processing. The result, though we have only begun to discover the differences in each section of the brain, is the ability to create culture, art, philosophy, science, and to produce superior strategists, generals, speakers, and great leaders. Nature designed gays to have a peculiar "grace under fire" capacity that has been anecdotally noted by gays for thousands of years. This is the unique ability, not only to function at a higher intellectual or artistic level, but to keep calm under stress, to remain in control under chaos and while in danger. This latter trait has made gay men particularly indispensable to the human gene pool throughout its long history, from the ancient Theban Band to the SS.
Modern biological science is only now proving the theories and ideas of Hans Blher, a brilliant gay German theorist who offered the most comprehensive evolutionary explanation for gay people and the role they play in society. He argued that society is not based upon the family, but rather, the family is based upon men who run together in packs. These men create the state and religion that unify a gene pool (in modern times, a larger conception of unity, the nation state) and protect the women and children from harm. Men create culture that protect the family. These men are socialized through the homosocial activity of gay men who bind the pact of men together through romantification of friendship, education of the young, sexual activity, and cultural and leadership skills. Without gay men the pack would not have worked. Without gay men there would be no state, church, organized military function, no apprenticeship of the young, no culture to help the family and the gene pool survive.
Why do religions condemn gays?
Most major world religions do not automatically condemn gays. An exception may be the Jewish faith itself, which not only condemns gays, but even prescribes that gay men be put to death at the hands of "righteous" Jews. The truth is that gay men have played a large role in the creation of major faith traditions, from Hinduism, to Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, and Paganism. If any one area of human endeavor benefits from the unique design of the gay brain it is religion. The creation of religious symbols and the development of a symbol creating priesthood helped small groups of hunter gatherers survive by providing group coherence, unity of purpose, and the will to die in battle on the promise of an afterlife. All these religious functions helped the gene pool survive in a hostile environment.
The Jewish media elite project a powerful anti-gay and anti-religious message. This message pits one group against another to keep a single religious or cultural awareness from arising among any non-Jewish group that could challenge Jewish hegemony. Gays are victims of this strategy. On one hand the Jewish media present gay men as secular hedonists bent on promiscuity and the fulfillment of lust. We are supposed to be, not religious, but light-headed "friends of Dorothy" absorbed with pop culture and obsessed with sex. On the other hand the Jewish media presents religious groups as narrow minded and ignorant bigots spouting hate toward gays, blacks and Jews.
This two pronged projection drives a wedge between gays and religious heterosexuals. It also deprives gay men of religious or cultural heritage. This leads many gay men to drift toward the political and secular left and into the arms of the democratic party. It deprives non-Jewish religious groups of the deep spiritual and intellectual gifts that gay men possess, impoverishing them culturally. Deprived of gay leadership these non-Jewish religious groups are shut out of the professions and out of the corridors of power. Gay men are likewise shut out of the structures they played so prominent a role in creating.
The two pronged media strategy has succeeded quite well. Take as an example, the Reverend Phelps. This gentleman is uneducated, bold, full of wrath toward gays, and willing to make pithy statements meant to demean and enrage gay men. With almost no followers outside his own family, this gentleman is given millions of dollars worth of free publicity. Why? To bait and enrage gays. To make gay men feel hatred toward their own religious traditions and their own people. As Reverend Phelps shouts at gays the media present gays dutifully shouting back, obliterating the chance of meaningful dialogue between heterosexual Christians and gay Christians.
Some scholars cut against this trend however. John Boswell, now deceased, particularly disturbed the Jewish media because his work showed the historical compatibility between gay men and Christians. In Homosexuality, Tolerance, and Christianity Boswell traced a fascinating symbiosis between gay men who enriched the church, and periods of remarkable acceptance alternating with periods of non-acceptance. Boswell's latest book, Same-Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe uncovered early Christian friendship rituals that he argued were a form of actual gay marriage, sanctioned by the church. This book, right before his death, promised to help bridge the contemporary misunderstanding between gays and the church they helped create.
After his death, Jewish scholars wrote a series of reviews against this brilliant Yale scholar and accused him of historical fraud and dishonesty in terms so extreme that only the trial of David Irving compares to the diatribe. The Boswell scholarship promised to remove the wedge that the Jewish media had so carefully forced into place. The smear campaign has now died down, but no other writer has taken up the task of healing the wound between gay men and Christianity.
A longer expose of gays and religious history in a world context would take far to much space to cover here. But the homo erotic nature of world faith traditions bear witness to gay contributions. The ancient Greek and Roman religions celebrated homosexuality as a normal part of the family of gods. Zeus, the beautiful Apollo with his love of Ganymede, the worship of the boy god Antinious and many other examples show the ancient European religions to contain powerful homosexual strands. Islam celebrates a paradise with beautiful male and female youths giving pleasure to the faithful, while the Sufi mystics barely troubled to camouflage their homosexual feelings behind the veil of mysticism. The history of the church itself is an encyclopedia of homo-eroticism: the relationships between David and Jonathan, Christ and John, Paul and Timothy; and a rich history of saints who appear to be gay, from Augustine, to Anselm, to Cardinal Newman.
This rich and remarkable contribution to religious history makes the betrayal of religious heritage by gay men perverse. Gay men are particularly sensitive to both erotic and transcendent beauty, and have worked for and died for the traditions they played a central role in founding. To abandon this heritage, to be told by a Jewish media that the vehicle we built with our own hands is evil, to jump out of this vehicle and let it crash and burn is inhumane to our people and self destructive to our selves. We deprive our own people of quality religious experience, leaving a church without oratory, art, philosophy or literature, while depriving ourselves of prayer, fellowship, peace, and meaningful engagement with our own people in the practice of faith.
Of course there are religious people who condemn gays, and gays who condemn religious people. The key is not to get all sides to agree, but to begin talking to each other, and understanding one another. The key is also to stop a vicious Jewish elite from pitting gay people against their own religious traditions in order to divide and brutalize a people that needs to come together as one racial and cultural family. Differences will always exist, but differences do not need to be exploited by an alien, merchant elite. All families fight, but we do not need outsiders cheering us into a destructive civil war that will lead to the destruction of our people and civilization itself.
Why are so many gay people left wing today?
Gay men have traditionally been not on the left, but on the right. However, since the 1960's, with the final displacement of the old European elite and the ascendance of the new Jewish elite, a coalition on the left has been built on a strong anti-white Christian bias. By driving wedges between groups the Jewish media has managed to build a coalition on anti white male hatred. This coalition includes racial minorities who feel convinced of injury from the majority, of women who feel second class to men, of gays who feel disenfranchised by heterosexuals. The resulting coalition based not on a positive bond or program, but on the common ground of discontent, has enabled a the Jews to back up media and money power with votes and virtually control the entire political process in the United States.
Gay men have a place in the coalition, though are offered little. The democratic party controlled congress for almost 70 years since 1932 until the Republican majority of 1986, but never passed a single gay rights bill. Bill Clinton entered office and worsened the condition of gay men in the military by initiating a don't ask don't tell policy in direct contradiction to his promise to lift the ban by executive order. What little progress for acceptance has been made for gay men in the late 20th century is due to "coming out" and the horrors of the aids crises that called forth a powerful lobbying effort by ordinary gay men to confront government inaction, as well as general sympathy to the epidemic and victims of it. The leftist coalition offered gay men a timid rhetoric of acceptance, but little of substance.
This has led to a two fold misunderstanding. The first that gay men are left wing, the second that the left accepts gays. Neither are true. Gay men vote Republican by approximately 50% (30-40% for the whole gay and lesbian community, lesbians voting more heavily democratic than gay men). The left coalition is dominated by an African American and Jewish community that is vociferously anti-gay and anti-white. The democratic coalition, with increased Mexican immigration and continued white flight to the Republican party, promises to become even more homophobic in the future.
Why did the communists call the Nazis "fags?"
The Nazi's were accused of homosexuality since its inception. Its hard to distinguish between anti-Nazi propaganda and historical truth. Both Communists and Democrats in Germany accused the Nazi party of having a heavy homosexual leadership. Jewish scholars after World War II also made similar claims. But since the 1960s when the Jewish elite found it useful to pull white gay men and white women into the leftist coalition, such accusations have ceased, and now sound strange to our ears.
We do know that most gay men in pre-war Germany were right of center, as Magnus Herschfeld noted.
Hirschfeld, a prominent Jewish gay activist on the left in 1920s Germany, claimed that 75% of gay men were on the right, primarily, associated with the Nazi party. Certainly most of the gay activists in pre-war Germany supported the Nazi party. When Allies "liberated" Germany they kept the few gay men they found in camps under confinement and released the Jewish prisoners. Why? Because according to the Allied powers, gays deserved to be in jail. Unfortunately this policy reflected the abuse and mass murder of gay men that both the Communists and modern democratic societies have inflicted on the gay community throughout the twentieth century. After the War, small groups of gay Fascists met secretly for decades. Clearly there is a link between the Nazi party and gay men.
One German gay rights activist in particular illustrated the historic links between gay men and fascism: Hans Blher. If you take the theories of Hans Blher, strip away the homosexual content of his arguments, you have essentially, the official position of National Socialism and the theories of Alfred Rosenberg, the official philosopher of the Nazi Party. Bleher believed that the State, and all culture, is dependent not upon the family, but upon groups of men who band together. Men together, usually overseen by a homosexual elite, create cultural structures that protect the family: church, military, trade guilds, governing bodies, and ultimately, the State itself.
Why did Nazism attract such broad support, gay and straight? Because National Socialism resurrected a shattered economy, launched the most modern and effective environmental program the world had ever witnessed, and successfully solved class division, a record matched by no other political system. It also threw off the Jewish yoke of domination, making way for an organic elite, that is, an elite that shared the ethnic and cultural heritage of the people they ruled. Gays rightly take a great deal of pride in this achievement. The gay friendly atmosphere of early Nazism and the political alignment of the majority of Germany's gay men on the "far right" helped guarantee the success of this movement until the final days of the war.
Why are there right wing gays in history?
Any list of the top one hundred "great men" in history would show the majority to be gay, or, given limited information, probably gay. The superior gay brain structure creates superior poets, painters, sculptors, orators, writers, theologians, generals, and politicians. Our abilities also find the fullest outlet in a society that celebrates not the common man, but the exceptional and unique. This means that gay men do well with other groups of men: in the military, church, or a hierarchical political system such as monarchy or fascism. We tend to be denied access to power and natural leadership in democracies where candidates gain power by feigning an identity with the common man, and by advancing the lowest common denominator. In particular gay men have suffered under Communism and Democracy, political systems dominated by an alien Jewish elite that has openly persecuted and, often, mass murdered gay men.
Are gay men, like the Jews, an alien elite?
Unlike the Jewish elite, that considers itself a chosen people, apart, and superior to the goy (non-Jews), gay men are an organic elite. We are gifted with special abilities by nature to benefit our people, and to work for a better future for everyone; men, women, children, gay and straight. We have no us versus them agenda. Our record of service to our people is a record of great culture and fair, efficient, just government. Since we arise out of the same gene pool as those we rule, we are a gift from our people to our people. Every straight man and women can take pride that they will produce with their own bodies, future generations of great gay men. We are our people, our people are us.
What is the future?
The future is glorious. Our Jewish elite is dying. The materialism and ethnic supremacy that catapulted junk dealers to media moguls has also destroyed their work ethic, eroded their ethnic identity, and secularized their thinking. Between a low birth rate and high intermarriage to non-Jews, Jews are disappearing from the surface of the earth. While they consolidate power at the top of the pyramid, their base is eroding. The Jewish community is becoming a talking head severed from a biological body.
Gay men however, are born everyday. We are approximately 3% of the male population and renewed generation by generation. We will always exist, and we will always have the biological gifts necessary to create culture and provide a dynamic leadership for our people. We must not fool ourselves by thinking that our current position in the Left Coalition will protect us. That protection will cease the minute our alien elite perceives that we are coming into our own, or become aware of our natural place in society. The assault by Jewish psychology, the identification of gay men as molestors of children, the Hollywood smear machine that daily degrades gay men and invites violence against us, this will all worsen in the immediate future. But we will ultimately prevail. They are dying, victems of their own success. We on the other hand are more gifted, more creative, more virtuous, and more manly. We created the great cultures of the past from the Ancient Greeks to the Renaissance, and we will create the great cultures of the future. The past is ours. The future will be ours also.
(Jan.17, 2001)