Wednesday, 31 May 2006

I love New York

From an article in the New York Daily News:

"Mayor Bloomberg landed another left on the right yesterday, coming out strongly in favor of gay marriage—and vowing the city will perform same-sex wedding ceremonies, if allowed. The Republican mayor used his weekly Sunday radio address on Memorial Day weekend to say he is 'firmly opposed' to any constitutional amendment outlawing same-sex marriage. President Bush and other prominent Republicans endorse the Federal Marriage Amendment, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman. The measure is set for a Senate vote next month. 'The U.S. Constitution should be something that unites, rather than divides Americans,' said Bloomberg."

Occasionally I have toyed with the idea of moving to New York. It is one of the most tolerant and vibrant cities in the world, and Mayor Bloomberg's comments on marriage just made the thought even more appealing. And, to be honest, I've been mostly bored ever since I in 2003 returned to Sweden after my five years in the Netherlands. Don't get me wrong, Sweden is a beautiful country with a caring and forbearing people, but the culture and society is just so overly organized and stiff. I must stay for a couple of years to finish the education I've started, but then I'm off. If not to New York, somewhere else—anywhere else.

Wednesday, 31 May 2006

Om mitt brev till socialdemokraterna

Jag hade bestämt mig för att inte skriva någonting mera om Stefan Sanneskär på min blogg eftersom jag tänkte att det nog skulle göra mer skada än nytta. Men efter flera uppmärksammade bloggartiklar med spekulationer om inte bara mig utan även andra för mig okända människor, så börjar situationen bli sådan att det krävs en förklaring.

Jag vill börja med att erkänna mina tvivel rörande mitt eget agerande. Kanske borde jag bara ha låtit saker bero och inte gjort något alls. Men jag, liksom flera i min närhet, blev upprörda av mycket i Sanneskärs sätt att argumentera för påstådda kopplingar mellan homosexualitet, pedofila övergrepp och djursex. Extra känsliga var jag/vi nog eftersom en grov, organiserad misshandel av homosexuella helt nyligen genomfördes i Kristianstad, bara några mil från min hemstad Malmö. Ett antal personer blev överfallna, slagna och knivskurna av nazister som motiverade sin handling med att acceptens för homosexuella kommer att leda till att andra "perversa läggningar" blir accepterade. Alltså exakt samma argument som Sanneskär använder.

Samma dag som RFSL genomförde en manifestation i Kristianstad mot våldet var det flera som pratade med mig om Sanneskärs artiklar eftersom de följt länkar härifrån. Ett kille från SSU tyckte att jag borde skriva till Marita Ulvskog eftersom partiet nog borde se över vilka de länkar till från sin hemsida. Ett par dagar senare gjorde jag just detta. Kanske var det en överreaktion, kanske inte. Jag uppfattade hursomhelst att saken var såpass allvarlig att socialdemokratin centralt åtminstone borde känna till min och andras åsikt i frågan. Risken är naturligtvis att detta enbart uppfattas som en strävan efter censur, men jag vill då understryka att min avsikt inte var att tysta någon, bara att göra det partibundna bloggandet mer hänsynstagande. Vi är på väg in i en valrörelse som ser ut att bli ganska smutsig. Jag vill inte se att partier med en bra politik i dessa frågor går ner sig i homofobiträsket av misstag. De bör lämna det åt extremhögern och den konservativa kristenheten.

För att undvika fler spekulationer om vad jag gjort och skrivit så lägger jag ut mitt brev – med stavfel och allt – till Ulvskog här (pdf). Som framgår skickade jag en kopia till Urban Lindstedt, som tyvärr fått ta mycket frän kritik av vänner, vilket inte var min avsikt. Detta är allt. Några stora borgerliga konspirationer mot socialdemokratin har jag inte initierat. Någon reaktion från Ulvskog har jag ännu inte fått, men att länkar till Sanneskärs blogg tagits bort tolkar jag som ett stöd för homosexuellas lika rättigheter i samhället. En stor eloge till socialdemokraterna för detta.

Wednesday, 31 May 2006

Good Morning, Night

Aldo Moro was kidnapped by the communist terror organization The Red Brigades on 16 March 1978. Two months later, he was executed. He was prime minister of Italy five times, and he led the Christian Democrats, the country's largest political party, at the time of his abduction. While in captivity, Moro wrote several letters to his friends, family, and finally the Pope. From Wikipedia:

"In his letters, Moro advocated that the state's primary objective should be of saving people's lives, and that the government should strive to comply with his kidnappers' requests. Most of the leaders of the Christian Democrats argued that the letters did not express truthfully Moro's intentions, having been written under coercion by his kidnappers, and refused to attempt any negotiation, in stark contrast with Moro's family's requests. In his appeal to the terrorists, Pope Paul VI asked them to release Moro 'without conditions'."

In 2003, Italian movie director Marco Bellocchio made a film about the kidnapping entitled Buongiorno, notte ("Good Morning, Night" in English). I saw it a few days ago and would strongly like to recommend it. In the centre of the plot, Bellocchio has the only female Red Brigade member involved in the abduction. Through her, we follow the known story as well as her own struggle with the morality of Marxist revolutionary ideology. It is superbly done, and although we know the end—that Moro will die—Bellocchio manages to keep the suspense throughout the film.

The film could be seen merely as a study of terrorism, or Marxism, but I think it is more than that. It shows us how humans connect to each other, and what a burden loyalty can be to an ideologist. Whatever political reason people might have for killing others, when confronted with naked humanity it is difficult not to be affected. This is why so much of modern warfare is based on technique that disconnects soldiers from their enemies—propaganda is used to dehumanize the enemy, and the helmets are equipped with headphones and loud music that prevents the sound of human suffering from reaching the soldier.

Terrorism is an inhuman activity. Most people know that, but Buongiorno, notte shows us why. For most people, killing a fellow human being simply is not as simple as it might seem.

Tuesday, 30 May 2006

Benedict & Palpatine

Many have noted Pope Benedict XVI's resemblance to Star Wars' Emperor Palpatine, but it still strikes me repeatedly. Not only are the two men walking, moving and posing in the same manner, they seem to favour the same fashion designer too, even though they prefer different colours for their capes. Women don't play a significant role in their lives; and when it comes to politics, they are not exactly poles apart either—democracy, equal rights, and liberty are not their cup of tea.

Monday, 29 May 2006

Biblical child abuse

In one of today's earlier entries, I wrote about "gay-curer" Joseph Nicolosi, president of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, and how he advices fathers to toss their sons in the air in order to make sure the boys become straight men. Just now, I found that blogger Andrew Sullivan has published an email he got from a victim of Nicolosi's methods. As it turns out, not even the ex-gay movement itself truly believes what it is saying.

"Needless to say, neither I nor any of the other ten guys in group therapy turned straight. At the beginning I was sure I was straight and told others I was 'ex-gay'. Was I wrong! I finally came to the point of asking myself, 'Do I want to be happy as a gay man and damned to hell or lead a horrible, depressing life on the verge of suicide, celibate and all alone but on the way to heaven?' I chose the first route and have never looked back. (Many of us call ourselves 'ex-ex-gays.')

I consider Nicolosi and the ex-gay leaders con-men and hucksters. They know the truth, but push ahead deceiving and hurting so many. This is just another example of 'Quack Science,' that so many Christianists are pushing on our country. From 'Intelligent Design,' to the denial of global warming, and refusal to allow stem-cell research, these zealots are trying to make science fit their literal interpretations of the Bible."

Here in Sweden we have a similar organization to Nicolosi's called Medvandrarna, and just as in the US are Christian families in Sweden sending their gay sons and lesbian daughters off to be cured by these quacks. There is no known "cure" for homosexuality, so all this is doing is making the children hate themselves, which I think is a cruel form of abuse.

Monday, 29 May 2006

The beast that will not die

Speaking of cartoons, don't miss Peter Bagge's take on the War on Drugs in Reason magazine. You'll find it here.

Monday, 29 May 2006

More of Towelie

The South Park character Towelie I wrote about last week seems to be very popular. I have received several emails regarding Towelie, some of them with pictures. You see two of them here. The one to the left is from Matthew in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. He and two friends made a Towelie costume in crafts class a while ago, and when he searched the Internet, he found my blog and sent me this picture. The image to the right comes from Joep at Weer in the Netherlands. He found this picture on a website belonging to an online shop that specializes in cartoon character dolls.

Monday, 29 May 2006

Slippery Slope

The multi-step slippery-slope argument is popular among people who wish to prevent progress since it cannot be thoroughly refuted. That is due to its nature of presentation: every step in isolation might seem logical. However, if one study the complete link connecting the first and last part, the argument most often prove to be fallacious. It is for this reason that most rhetorical methodologists reject slippery-slope arguments. But this arguing technique is popular nonetheless, especially among people who for non-related reasons hold a certain belief or opinion.

The past few days I have been involved in a rather destructive online discussion with a Swedish left-wing blogger who claims that legalizing same-sex marriages will ultimately result in public approval of paedophilia and zoophilia. The argument rests on the assumption that same-sex relationships are based on a deviant sexuality closer related to paraphiliac behaviour than heterosexual relationships are. In other words, gays and lesbians have more in common with child molesters and perverts than heterosexuals do.

This is not true, even if the Extreme Right and many conservative Christian organizations regularly use claims of this sort in their homophobic propaganda. In fact, a vast majority of child molesters are heterosexuals, and the most common place for sexual abuse of all sorts is the household of the regular nuclear family. Jay R. Feierman's "Pedophilia: Biosocial Dimensions", a study from 1990, shows that among male paedophiles, only about 7–10% are interested in boys. This percentage is about the same as for the frequency of homosexual tendencies in the general male population according to many large studies.

In light of this, it is difficult to see how legalizing same-sex marriages would change anything. If anything, we ought to do something about all those dangerous heterosexual families that might harm young girls.

Slippery-slope arguments are used by homophobes to prove all kinds of bad consequences of homosexuality. In America, the Christian anti-gay movement has turned the use into an art form. There is nothing that cannot be linked to something homosexual. So when conservative writer Stanley Kurtz of the National Review wrote an article about Sweden, the anti-gay slippery-slope argument came natural to him:

"Sweden has obviously begun to slide 'down the slope.' Were it not for the supposedly final same-sex partnership initiatives of 1987 and 1994, Sweden would not now be facing calls for the abolition of marriage and the recognition of polyamorous partnerships.

[…]

What does it mean when a movement wants simultaneously to formalize gay marriage, equate marriage with mere registered partnerships, equate registered partnerships with mere cohabitation, and then abolish marriage itself? It seems contradictory, but it all makes perfect sense once you realize that Sweden's social liberals don't support either gay marriage or registered partnerships out of any affection for marriage itself. On the contrary, Sweden's social left is simply using gay marriage as a lever to achieve the abolition of marriage itself.

This is not how things were supposed to turn out according to the 'conservative case' for gay marriage. Registered partnerships should have decreased cultural radicalism. Instead they've merely whetted the left's appetite for more radical reforms.

Once again, Sweden is showing us a possible future. The idea that we can and should abolish marriage and recognize multi-partner unions has its advocates in America, though they may seem too few to be bothered with. We ought not, however, mistake their chances for long-term success. Those radical advocates recognize something that even the moderate proponents of gay marriage overlook or deny: gay marriage changes the way that young people see and understand their social world. The slope from gay marriage to polyamory and ultimately to no marriage is not slippery by accident, but by design."

While on the subject of homophobia, I read an article in Los Angeles Times about the ex-gay movement—they claim to cure homosexuals—and what their president, Joseph Nicolosi, said at a public meeting in Florida:

"'There is no such thing as a homosexual. We are all heterosexual. Our body was designed for the opposite sex.'

The audience of more than 700 sat rapt in the pews of a Fort Lauderdale church. Some held Bibles. Others took notes. Nicolosi went on to tell them that fathers could help their sons stay straight by bonding through rough-and-tumble games, such as tossing them in the air.

'Even if [the dad] drops the kid and he cracks his head, at least he'll be heterosexual,' Nicolosi said, chuckling. 'A small price to pay.'"

And these child-throwers argue that same-sex marriages and gay parenting are harmful to children?

Saturday, 27 May 2006

Fascist Russia

As expected, there was turmoil in Moscow today when gay-rights activist tried to organize the country's first Pride parade. About a thousand police officers were hindering the activists, and seventy people were arrested. Meanwhile, Christian and fascist organizations—working together as always—were abusing people who tried to participate. BBC writes:

"Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov said he had banned the march because he believed homosexuality was not natural and because the event would cause outrage in society—a position supported by many Christian and Muslim groups."

I have written about the planned parade and the mad homophobia in Moscow before (here and here). What happened today proves that Russia is not a true democracy. Not that I believed it was, but to prohibit a peaceful march clearly shows that there are a lot of Soviet mentality left to be sorted out in Russia.

Update: Washington Post, "Moscow's First Gay Pride Parade Disrupted by Police and Hecklers".

Friday, 26 May 2006

Look out for pot-smoking towels

From Wikipedia:

"At the end of the episode, Towelie is very high and has no idea where he is. This leads Cartman to tell him, 'You're the worst character ever, Towelie.' Towelie replies, 'I know.'"

The day before yesterday I saw a South Park episode from 2001 entitled "Towelie" (age 17 in towel-years). It was hilarious and I fell in love with the pot-smoking towel right away. I still giggle when thinking about him. So don't miss the episode if it runs on a television near you. In the meanwhile, you can read more about Towelie here.

Friday, 26 May 2006

Stopp för godtycket!

Bahnhof, Sveriges äldsta internetoperatör, kräver ett stopp för det politiska godtycket och kämpar för att yttrandefriheten på internet ska få vara kvar. Därför startar man kampanjen Integrity. Besök deras hemsida och sätt press på ditt webbhotell.

Thursday, 25 May 2006

Socialdemokratisk självironi?

"Inte nog med att vi vinner Hockey-OS, Hockey-VM och att det haglade os-medaljer över oss i OS, vi har även världens mest framsynta regering."

Är detta ironiskt eller allvarligt menat? Om det är ironiskt så är det kul, om inte faktiskt ganska tragiskt. Jag väljer att fnissa åt det. Joakim Jonsson i Sollentuna har humor.

Thursday, 25 May 2006

Konsten att förtala en folkgrupp

Efter att ha läst igenom kommentarerna till Stefan Sanneskärs senaste blogginlägg om mig inser jag att det inte går att diskutera med honom. Han tillhör den gruppen kristna som anser att om inte de oemotsagda får hävda att homosexuella våldtar barn och djur så är de förföljda. Det är samma offerretorik som alla motståndare till lika rättigheter för alla medborgare alltid har använt sig av. När extremkristna hävdar att det finns en koppling mellan homosexualitet och övergrepp på barn och djur så är detta egentligen samma retoriska knep som Ku Klux Klan och andra rasistiska grupper använde när den amerikanska medborgarrättsrörelsen växte sig stark och började vinna samhällsdebatten. Rasisterna sa sällan rakt ut att det de nedvärderade afro-amerikanerna för var deras hudfärg, utan man gick omvägar genom att tillskriva människor med vissa hudfärger specifika egenskaper. Allt som var hemskt i samhället tillskrev man så de svarta. Samma sak är det homosexuella idag. Vår kärlek talas det inte om, utan istället tillskrivs vi diverse parafila beteenden.

I USA ser man denna typ av argumentation oftare än i Europa. Extremkristna grupper formligen pumpar in pengar i homofobiska kampanjer och ger ut massor av anti-homo-litteratur varje år. Just metoden att beskylla homosexuella för alla övergrepp på barn är en klassiker. Det kan exempelvis se ut såhär i den extremkristna propagandan:

"It should be pointed out that latent homosexuality also exists among people who appear to be heterosexual. The key word is APPEAR. Paedophilia is exclusive among homosexuals, it is not merely more common among homosexuals. Heterosexuals do not engage in paedophilia or homosexuality under any circumstance. There is no such thing as a person who is 'mostly heterosexual,' or a 'little bit homosexual' – you are or you are not – there is no gray area. For example; a pregnant woman is either pregnant or she is not - she is never just a 'little pregnant.' When those whom appear to be heterosexual are found to be paedophiles they are not heterosexual. (They are sometimes made reference to as closet homosexuals or latent homosexuals). A common example of this would be the boyfriend who has access to his girlfriend's children and seduces them. To the mother of the children he 'appears' to be hererosexual – but he is not. The same holds true for the stepfather or stepmother who seduces the stepson or stepdaughter. The same is true of women that seduce the children whom they have access to. Such persons may appear to be heterosexual when, in fact, they are not. The defilement of children is not considered normal in a healthy society. Homosexuality is not considered normal in a healthy society. Political correctness does not promote a healthy society, to the contrary, it intentionally promotes disease, sorrow, insanity and hatred. Political correctness itself is a hate crime against human dignity and ultimately against all humanity."

(Citatet ovan är en kommentar resulterat av Steven Baldwins kvasivetenskapliga artikel "Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement", publicerad på det extremkristna Regent Universitys hemsida. Baldwin använder exakt samma teknik som alla med syfte att misskreditera en folkgrupp: han väljer ut ett fåtal tokar och drar generella slutsatser om hela gruppen utifrån dessa. Med den tekniken går det att bevisa allting om alla – blondiner är dumma, judar är snåla, svarta är våldsbenägna…)

Som alla kan se så är inte Sanneskär unik på något sätt. Hans argumentation är de extremkristnas; med samma påståenden om kopplingar mellan homosexualitet och pedofili, och med samma gnäll om politisk korrekthet.

Om det inte vore för den starka kopplingen mellan extremkristen homofobi och våld mot homosexuella så skulle det vara mycket lättare att rycka på axlarna åt alltsammans. Tyvärr är det nu så att de lögner och fabrikationer som Sanneskär och andra extremkristna sprider faktiskt skadar människor rent fysiskt. I morgon genomför exempelvis RFSL en manifestation i Kristianstad mot våldet som drabbade deras lokalförening i lördags, då en grupp från Nationalsocialistisk Front misshandlade flera personer. En av de misstänkta förövarna, Simon Lindberg, ska enligt uppgift försvara misshandeln med att acceptens för homosexualitet leder till pedofila övergrepp. Argumenten går alltså igen – den extremkristna rörelsen föder så den nazistiska.

Avslutar med att tacka för all epost med anledning av mitt bemötande av Sanneskär.

Wednesday, 24 May 2006

Sambandsofficeren replikerar

Mitt inlägg från igår om Stefan Sanneskärs homofobi har föranlett en ny post på hans blogg med den lite roliga titeln "Aqurette agerar sambandsofficer". Det framkommer inte så mycket nytt i sak, men Sanneskär kommer med några nya påståenden som jag bara helt kort vill bemöta:

"Det första är att jag med all tydlighet har fått klart för mig och också rätt i mitt resonemang att när det gäller hbt så får inga kritiska åsikter framföras."

Detta är naturligtvis inte sant. Möjligen har Sanneskär en poäng såtillvida att det blivit svårare för dem med hans åsikter att framföra sina åsikter oemotsagda. För bara några år sedan, på den tiden då jag och Sanneskär var tonåringar (det skiljer bara något år mellan oss), så var det tvärtom så att det var de med positiv inställning till homosexualitet som upplevde att det straffade sig att framföra sina åsikter. För bara tjugo år sedan så var det fortfarande politiskt korrekt att vara negativ till homosexuellas lika rättigheter och homosexualitet i sig. Jag har alltid försvarat allas rätt att få säga vad de vill, även sådant som sårar andra. Därför är jag motståndare till lagen om hets mot folkgrupp. Om detta skrev jag bland annat i den kristna tidningen Dagen när frågan om inkludering av homosexuella i denna lag var en aktuell fråga för riksdagen. Men min kärlek till det fria ordet betyder inte att jag anser att alla framförda åsikter ska få stå oemotsagda. Tvärtom!

"Det andra är att Aqurette likt en vessla springer omkring i bloggosfären för att tipsa om sådant som skulle kunna ställa meningsfränder mot varandra.

Det tredje är att partivän och journalist som Jonas Morian helt okritiskt tar ställning i frågan och gör sig därigenom otjänsten att ställa sig bakom även det som Aqurette har skrivit på sin egen hemsida."

Det enda jag har gjort är att på min blogg citera och kommentera Sanneskär när han framfört tanken att lika rättigheter för homo- och heterosexuella par skulle öppna för ett framtida erkännande av sexuella relationer mellan vuxna och barn samt mellan människor och djur. Det som sedan hände var att den socialdemokratiske bloggaren Jonas Morian – för övrigt en gammal arbetskamrat från EU-folkomröstningen 1994 – skrev om det jag skrivit om. Av denna lilla fjäder blev det en stor höna. Jag har alltså inte gjort något aktivt för att sprida min kritik av Sanneskär mer än att publicera ett kort inlägg på min blogg.

Avslutningsvis så vill jag punktera idéen att jag försöker göra detta till en fråga om "socialdemokraterna kontra moderaterna". I en jämförelse mellan partierna skulle socialdemokratin vinna stort i inrikespolitiska frågor som direkt rör homo- och bisexuella. Moderaterna är numera det enda partiet som inte tagit ställning i frågan om könsneutral äktenskapslagstiftning, vilket beror på den ständigt pågående konflikten mellan liberaler och konservativa. Denna interna konflikt har i alla liknande sammanhang tidigare resulterat i att de moderata riksdagsledamöterna fått rösta efter personlig övertygelse eftersom en partilinje saknats. I de flesta fall har majoriteten moderater i riksdagen röstat mot förbättrad lagstiftning för homo- och bisexuella.

Tuesday, 23 May 2006

Fear Factor Fever

If you're bored or have nothing better to do, why not listen to Paul Hipp's "Big Gay GOP Fear Factor Fever"? Corny, yes, but funny, too.

Tuesday, 23 May 2006

Homoäktenskap och våldtagna barn

"Då anser jag att man lämnar dörren vidöppen för sådant som vi idag inte kan tänka oss men som faktiskt blir en ganska naturlig följd av detta, nämligen att manegen är krattad för alla typer av sexuella läggningar och samlevnadsformer. Två exempel är tidelag och pedofili."

"Pedofili och tidelag skulle med all politisk korrekthet kunna jämställas med vilken samlevnadsform som helst. Inte nu och inte inom överskådlig tid men jag anser inte att man ska öppna upp dörrarna till t.ex. homoäktenskap och månggifte."

Så förklarar socialdemokraten Stefan Sanneskär sitt försvar för diskriminering. Så om du fortfarande levde i villfarelsen att alla socialdemokrater var genuint intresserade av att förbättra livssituationen för homosexuella – tänk om! Sanneskär är nämligen inte vilken sosse som helt, utan är upphöjd till en av partiets elitbloggare på Motallians.

Det är sorgligt att det alltid är samma trötta homofobi som återanvänds. Till leda har vi hört påståendet att vuxna skulle börja våldta djur och barn om homosexuella parrelationer omfattas av samma lagstiftning som heterosexuella. Tanken är tydligen att om två myndiga vuxna människor av samma kön tillåts ingå äktenskap så kommer den naturliga nästa steget att bli legaliserade äktenskap mellan en myndig vuxen och ett omyndigt spädbarn. Det är liksom hela Åke Green-grejen ännu ett varv. Kan inte böghatarna hitta lite nya argument?

Tuesday, 16 May 2006

Time off

In a few hours, I will leave Malmö for a weeklong holiday in Amsterdam. I will visit some friends and enjoy the city I left two years ago. Somehow, Amsterdam remains "home" to me in a way that other former places of residence do not. When I return, it feels as if I had not left the Dutch capital at all. I know the language, the people, the culture, and every Amsterdam backstreet.

If something extraordinary happens or if I find something I just have to write about, I might post an entry. I will read my emails at least once a day, but my blog will most likely stay silent until the 23rd.

Monday, 15 May 2006

Sickening love of a despot

The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, hails the Venezuelan president in the Guardian. He writes that Hugo Chávez "deserves the unequivocal support of not only every supporter of social progress but every genuine believer in democracy in the world". It's sickening. Worse still are the greetings Chávez got when he delivered a three-hour speech in the British capital yesterday. This is how the European Left—the same people that mass-produce crocodile tears over tortured Iraqis and rally against "the tyrant" George W. Bush once a week—is treating a man who has tortured and threatened the opposition for years until they gave up and handed him all power. After years of harassment, Chávez now controls every seat in the Venezuelan parliament—and that is what Livingstone calls true democracy.

Monday, 15 May 2006

An email about liberalism

A reader explains the different attitudes towards the terms liberalism and liberal in the US and Britain:

"In American English the word 'liberal' has, within a political context, a totally different meaning than it has in Swedish: in American English it is used more or less synonymous with 'people who belong to the left wing of the Democratic Party'—which is somewhat klutzier to say. Those people are usually far from what you, presumably, mean by 'liberal'.

In British English, one often hear people say (i.e. in oral speech) things like 'small capital liberal' or 'small letter liberal' in order to separate the referred to label from members of the Liberal-Democratic Party—the latter often referred to as 'Liberals' or 'Libs'. (Although, there seems to be a growing trend to refer to them as 'Lib-Dems' to avoid confusion.)"

I begin to realize that a more precise terminology is needed on my part. In Sweden, France, and South America I have also met a third term, neoliberalism, which makes thing more confusing still. So perhaps "liberalism" is too vague and should not be used any longer? Or maybe Mario Vargas Llosa had a point when he wrote this in Reason Magazine:

"I consider myself a liberal. I know many people who are liberals, and many more who are not. But, throughout a career that is beginning to be a long one, I have not known a single neoliberal. What does a neoliberal stand for? What is a neoliberal against? In contrast with Marxism, or the various kinds of fascism, true liberalism does not constitute a dogma, a closed and self-sufficient ideology with prefabricated responses to all social problems. Rather, liberalism is a doctrine that, beyond a relatively simple and clear combination of basic principles structured around a defense of political and economic liberty (that is, of democracy and the free market), welcomes a great variety of tendencies and hues. What it has not included until now, nor will it include in the future, is that caricature furnished by its enemies with the nickname neoliberal.

A 'neo' is someone who pretends to be something, someone who is at the same time inside and outside of something. It is an elusive hybrid, a straw man set up without ever identifying a specific value, idea, regime, or doctrine. To say 'neoliberal' is the same as saying 'semiliberal' or 'pseudoliberal.' It is pure nonsense. One is either in favor of liberty or against it, but one cannot be semi-in-favor or pseudo-in-favor of liberty, just as one cannot be 'semipregnant,' 'semiliving,' or 'semidead.' The term has not been invented to express a conceptual reality, but rather, as a corrosive weapon of derision. It has been designed to devalue semantically the doctrine of liberalism. And it is liberalism—more than any other doctrine—that symbolizes the extraordinary advances that liberty has made in the long course of human civilization."

Monday, 15 May 2006

The meaning of liberalism

Two friendly readers have pointed out to me that the term liberalism stands for high taxes and big-government politics to most Americans and Britons. The ideology most Scandinavians and continental Europeans refer to as liberalism is in fact libertarianism. My two emailing readers therefore suggest that my comment on Jonah Goldberg's forthcoming book Liberal Fascism confuse the issue. What Goldberg most likely is criticising is leftist politics and not liberalism per se.

I think this I correct. Being referred to as a liberal in the US is something completely different from being called a liberal in Europe. But putting the questions of government size and economics aside, liberals of all sorts normally share an idea of a society built on reason and tolerance rather than religion, class struggle, or historical justification. American conservatism of today focus much on cultural issues—some even call it a cultural war—where such things as abortion, gay rights, free media, and the secular state are the targets. In this "war" liberals of all kinds stand for progressive politics against the religiously conservatives.

However, I have not read Mr Goldberg's book and cannot say for sure what it is about. What interested me when I wrote my previous entry on this topic, was that both Left and Right are using the same smear tactics. Swedish communists and American right-wing conservatives both loathe liberals—even if they have different ideas of what this means exactly—and blame us for the fascism they themselves often supported. The criticism seems to follow the same thread: if people were allowed too much freedom, society would fall apart, and therefore we must put restrictions on civil liberties. Most true liberals would disagree with that. I know I do.

Sunday, 14 May 2006

Om skotten i Ådalen 1931

"Naturligtvis ha de kommunistiska elementen utnyttjat situationen för att hetsa upp stämningarna och driva fram konflikter med ordningsmakten. Ny Tid har aldrig tvekat i att fördöma denna trafik, att visa hur oförenlig den är med den utvecklingsståndpunkt, till vilken arbetarrörelsen hunnit, och hur skadlig den är för arbetarnas sanna intressen. Vi ha heller icke tvekat, när det gällt att hävda nödvändigheten av att ordningen upprätthålles, eho det vara månde som stör densamma. Därmed är vår ställning till våldsgärningarna i Ådalen också given. Men man gör inte sin plikt genom att endast fördöma bolsjevikerna. Det finns även andra ansvariga."

Detta skrev Per Albin Hansson om skotten i Ådalen 1931. Läs mer på Dick Erixons blogg.

Sunday, 14 May 2006

Misguided smear campaigns

Earlier this week I posted an entry (in Swedish) about one of Sweden's most fanatic communist bloggers who recently made an attempt to smear liberalism by accusing it of being a gateway to fascism. I find this line of arguing ridiculous since there are no proof of implemented human rights and liberty for all resulting in totalitarian regimes. In fact, if history has taught us anything, it is the opposite—democracy, individual liberty, and free markets have proven most effective at combating fascism. While Marxist communists per se are fascists—and many conservatives have been wooed by totalitarian ideas in the past—libertarians and true liberals have always firmly supported a free society.

I have known for long that many conservatives also try to smear liberal ideas, but I was not aware that their way of doing so was so similar to the methods of Sweden's communist bloggers. However, today I learned that a new book by the American conservative writer Jonah Goldberg will be published next year. It is entitled Liberal Fascism: The Totalitarian Temptation from Mussolini to Hillary Clinton and seems to follow the same line of arguing that many European left-wing extremists like to engage in. I guess the reason behind these smear campaigns are to make liberals and libertarians like myself angry and bewildered, but I must say that the bizarre lies and distortions used by the enemies of liberty makes me feel pretty good about being a liberal.

Friday, 12 May 2006

Lesbian brains—a no-brainer?

The somewhat peculiar right-wing Christian—and ridiculously homophobic—organization Concerned Women for America has gone wild over Associated Press's reporting on a new Swedish "gay brain" study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Dr Warren Throckmorton, a teacher of Psychology and fellow for Psychology and Public Policy at the religiously conservative Grove City College, has helped the concerned women in their effort to distort the study.

"A new and widely reported Swedish study that suggests that lesbians respond differently from heterosexual women when exposed to sex hormones has been seriously misinterpreted, one of the researchers says.

The Associated Press (AP) story noted that a similar study was done last year on men, and that with the new female study, 'the findings add weight to the idea that homosexuality has a physical basis and is not learned behavior.'

In response to an e-mail inquiry from Grove City College Professor of Psychology Dr. Warren Throckmorton, researcher Dr. Ivanka Savic of the Stockholm Brain Institute said of the AP interpretation of her work, 'This is incorrect and not stated in the paper.'

[…]

The AP report was carried widely in major newspapers and on TV and radio. Most reports cited the study as more 'evidence' for a genetic or biological cause for homosexuality without noting that no credible study suggesting direct biological causes has ever been replicated and that many have been refuted.

The Swedish study merely found that lesbians respond differently, not that their brains were hardwired that way before any sexual activity. Recent brain research also shows that brain patterns may emerge in response to certain activities.

'It's reasonable to believe that prior sexual behavior would predict future sexual responses,' Throckmorton said."

They might have a point. The AP did not report the full contents of the study, but to assume that the obvious biological difference between lesbians and heterosexual women is an effect of homosexual experience is—well—brainless. The only reason Christian organizations make such efforts in distorting this issue are that without the idea of "self-made homosexuality" they cannot continue to portray gays and lesbians as blameworthy sinners.

Personally, I don't care much if my sexual orientation is a result of biology or unconscious choice; to me it's more important to fight for the right to be whoever I want to be regardless of other people's opinions. But I must admit that if Dr Throckmorton and the concerned women are right, I will be happy to tell my straight friends that they better not try gay sex, because if they do, their brains will change and they'll be hooked for life.

Wednesday, 10 May 2006

En liberal fascism?

I slutet av förra året fördes en diskussion om kommunismens likheter med nazismen på denna och andra bloggar. I mångt och mycket var mina bidrag repliker på påståenden som kom från Motvallsbloggens Kerstin Berminge, en av den svenska bloggosfärens allra mest högljudda och konspiratoriska kommunister. Nu återkommer hon indirekt till ämnet i ett blogginlägg med titeln "Liberalismen – ett förstadium till fascism?".

I försöket att driva denna tes hänvisar hon till fem böcker (alla utgivna på kommunistiska och socialistiska förlag) och Frankfurtskolans marxistiska tänkare. Från en bok med titeln Kritisk teori – en introduktion har Berminge hämtat följande stycke som väl sammanfattar hennes egen tes:

"Till grund för Frankfurtskolans analys av nationalsocialismen låg tesen, att nationalsocialismen inte innebar ett brott med liberalismen och monopolkapitalismen. Den var tvärtom fullbordandet av liberalismen och det logiska resultatet av den kapitalistiska världsmarknaden."

Lite senare skriver Berminge själv:

"Så kommer TV-programmet om Folkpartiet liberalerna, och kompletterar bilden. Det handlar om makt. Det handlar om att urholka, ta risken ur demokratin, det handlar om att härska genom att söndra och den vägen liberalerna vandrar just nu är till förvillelse lik den väg som många vandrade fram till nazismen. Nu leder vägen till förtryck av arbetare världen över och till krig mot muslimerna, det nya hotet mot oss alla. Det är ett nytt liberalt parti, inte längre det socialliberala parti vi varit vana vid. Det liknar mer Frankfurtskolans uppfattning om liberalismens logiska slutpunkt.

För den som är lite insatt i tanketrenderna och samhällsfilosofin under förra sekelskiftet, är dagens tanketrend, på nästan alla områden, nästan exakt densamma som då [1930-talet]. Inre fienden är de undermåliga människorna, de sjuka, de lata, du odugliga gamla samt eventuella missnöjda arbetare, de yttre fienden är emellertid andra än de var då, Idag är det muslimerna. Det handlar om kontroll av människorna, det handlar om att ta risken ur demokratin, men lite smartare än Hitler gjorde."

Ett återkommande tema på Motvallsbloggen är propaganda. Allt som inte är kommunistiskt och som inte i övertydliga ordalag tar avstånd från marknadsekonomi och individuell frihet är enligt Berminge propaganda. Långa kedjor av obevisade länkar mellan västvärldens storföretag och olika tankesmedjor presenteras. I denna väv av liberala konspirationer är Timbro värst och mäktigast i Sverige. Ja, faktum är att i Motvallsbloggens värld är Timbro en så mäktig organisation att självaste regeringen står handfallen inför dess propaganda.

Detta är naturligtvis rena fantasier, men det är i detta sammanhang man måste se försöken att koppla samman liberalismen med fascismen. För liksom i Berminges konspirationsteorier saknar denna tes bevis. Hon presenterar inte en enda liten förklaring till hur en ideologi som strävar efter en minimal stat och individuell autonomi kan bana väg för en ideologi som önskar se en allsmäktig stat och ett folk i strama tyglar. De likheter som blir tydliga i jämförelsen mellan kommunismens och nazismens litteratur och praktisk saknas här. Den som läst vet att det var de socialistiska staterna som föraktade de lata, sjuka och odugliga. Vi som levde då minns bilderna från det sovjetiska tvångsarbetet och de rumänska institutionerna där oönskade barn lämnades att dö.

Varje gång som totalitarismen har vunnit mark har liberalerna protesterat – oavsett det varit fascister till höger eller vänster som förtryckt människor. Kommunisterna har gjort det ibland, när ideologin tillåtit, men inte lika konsekvent. Jag tror det är detta som irriterar Berminge och övriga extremvänstern.

Uppdatering: Missa inte Berminges hårresande fantasier i kommentarerna till inlägget. Bland annat skriver hon följande:

"Det där med invidiens frihet och konkurrens om allting leder oftast till något helt annat än idealen säger alltså, inte sällan till det rakt motsatta och den ideala liberala totala friheten finns bara inte, har aldrig funnits och kommer aldrig att finnas.

Ta exempelvis det intressanta TV-programmet ikväll om hur man i Indien och Kina tar bort flickfoster och dödar nyfödda flickor, för att alla vill ha pojkar, vilket är rationellt att vilja när det är pojkarna som står för försörjningen av föräldrarna på ålderdomen och när flickorna bara blir dyra att gifta bort. Men vad som är rationellt för enskilda familjer blir synnerligen irrationellt, och riskabelt, när alla gör likadant. Kina har alltså redan idag ett överskott av män på 40 miljoner, i somliga delar av Pakistan och Indien är det samma sak. Där finns c:a 30% färre flickor.

OK, säger den liberale fanatikern och utopisten: Ett bra sätt att öka statusen för kvinnorna, som blir mycket mer eftersökta när det blir brist på dem - tillgång och efterfrågan du vet!! Det där som löser alla problem i den fria liberala kapitalismens konkurrenssystem."

Ännu en gång får vi berättat för oss vad liberaler egentligen tycker och att konsekvenserna av frihet och mänskliga rättigheter – rätten till liv och egendom – är brutala och inhumana samhällen. Berminge låter förstå att det enda vettiga är förtryck och totalitarism. Får människor göra som de vill blir det folkmord. Själv undrar jag om det utifrån Berminges resonemang inte vore bättre att på en gång låta avliva hela mänskligheten eftersom vi som individer ändå är helt oförmögna att leva värdiga liv.

Tuesday, 9 May 2006

Tokiga folkpartister från förr

Ett bloggrykte enligt artikel av Eric Sundström i den socialdemokratiska nyhetstidningen Aktuellt i Politiken:

"Per Gahrton, idag miljöpartist, förlorade en kuppartad ordförandestrid i FPU mot Lars Leijonborg 1971 med endast en röst. Detta lär ha provocerat FPU-medlemmen Lars Ohly, idag vänsterpartist, till den milda grad att han snodde FPU Österåkers klubbkassa och skickade pengarna till FNL i Vietnam."

Monday, 8 May 2006

Europe must not give in to Hamas

From an article in the Guardian:

"The EU is preparing to go it alone and channel emergency funds to the Palestinians if talks with the US, Russia and United Nations on setting up an international mechanism for easing their financial plight fail this week, senior officials indicated at the weekend."

To give in to Palestinian Islamists would be a big mistake by the EU. The Western nations must stand firmly united against Hamas until the organization has acknowledged Israel and denounced the use of terror attack aimed at civilians. Furthermore, it is politically perverse to give European taxpayers' money to a political movement that thrives on hate of everything Western.

Sunday, 7 May 2006

Chávez just can't get enough

From an article in the Winston-Salem Journal:

"President Hugo Chavez said yesterday that Venezuelan voters should have the chance to decide whether he should govern the country for the next 25 years.

Speaking at a stadium packed with supporters in central Lara state, Chavez said that he would hold a referendum to put the question of his remaining in office to Venezuelans if the opposition pulls out of coming presidential elections.

'I am going to ask you, all the people, if you agree with Chavez being president until 2031,' he said.

It was not clear whether Chavez was talking about holding a legally binding vote to eliminate term limits or proposing a plebiscite.

Chavez said Friday that he said he might seek 'indefinite' re-election through a referendum if the opposition boycotts the presidential vote."

It is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between new and old socialism. Not only is the communist rulers' Marxist rhetoric the same, but so are their self-absorption and fetish for power. Venezuela is slowly heading towards dictatorship.

Saturday, 6 May 2006

Deadly religiosity

Seen on the picture is a 14-year-old boy, hanged in a Baghdad suburb after being accused of sodomy and homosexual behaviour. According to a new report published in the UK, executions of alleged homosexuals are common in Middle Eastern countries and regions ruled by Islamists.

"Detailed and reliable figures concerning Iranian executions for Lavaat (sodomy) are hard to come by, as the government rarely gives out information concerning its criminal justice system. It seems particularly reluctant to provide statistics on sodomy cases, much as Britain and Europe were reluctant to reveal the true scale of executions in the days when sodomy was a capital offence.

Homan, an Iranian lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) exile group, estimated that around 4,000 people had been executed for Lavaat from 1979 until the mid-1990s. An attempt to set up a gay organisation in the early 1980s led to 70 executions. Around 100 gay people were sentenced to death following one raid on one private party in 1992.

A very large number were executed, or rather lynched without trial, as the Ayatollahs began to hijack the Iranian Revolution by the end of 1979. Those killed reportedly included foreign visitors. That year gay activists from the Lavender Crescent Society in San Francisco were taken from the airport in Tehran shortly after their arrival and summarily shot dead. Gay and bisexual men were quite literally hanged from trees at that time. Executions of lesbians took place as well. Additional 'smokescreen' charges, such as rape and kidnap, were rarely made, seemingly because there was very little international interest or protest at these widespread killings of LGBT people. Since the world did not care much about the execution of queers in those days, the tyrants in Tehran felt no need to disguise their actions and motives."

Simon Forbes of the British gay and lesbian human rights group OutRage! has written a report based on information gathered from sources inside Iran. His research reveals:

• Lynchings by Iran's security forces, and "honour killings" by families in the south western province of Khuzestan
• Secret hangings in prison
• The method of hanging is designed to cause slow, agonising strangulation
• Internet entrapment of gay Iranians using foreign-based online gay dating agencies
• A pattern of framing gay people on charges of kidnap, rape and paedophilia
• Claims of rape are sometimes made to save the family's honour or to save the passive partner from execution, and are part of an Iranian government propaganda offensive to scapegoat and demonise gay people
• Comparisons with Saudi Arabia, where it is also suggested that bogus rape charges are levelled against gay men
• Hypocrisy of the mullah's attitudes towards the abuse of young girls, the rape of both males and females in custody, and widespread sodomy in religious colleges

Why many religious people are so determined to make life horrible for homosexuals, I do not know for sure. What I do know, however, is that neither the Bible nor the Koran promotes this kind of homophobia. There are passages that some interpreters say condemn men engaged in sexual intercourse with each other, but the holy books do not endorse systematic abuse of these men. So, if I were to speculate, I think many religious people enjoy their homophobia because they are cowards—they risk nothing when they put blame on a marginalized minority group.

If you are able to read Dutch, I would like to recommend a superb book on Islam and homosexuality: Islam en homoseksualiteit by Omar Nahas.

Thursday, 4 May 2006

Spring causes fewer entries

In the past couple of days, spring has finally brought with it some warmth to Malmö. The sun has been shining, and I have strolled about in shorts for the first time this year. This past winter has been unusually hard, cold, and snowy for Skåne (the southernmost part of Sweden), so I have really looked forward to sunnier weather. Due to the nice temperature outside, I will produce fewer blog entries than normal this week. After such a horrid winter, I need to get some air.

Tuesday, 2 May 2006

Cannabis as medicine

"If cannabis were unknown, and bioprospectors were suddenly to find it in some remote mountain crevice, its discovery would no doubt be hailed as a medical breakthrough. Scientists would praise its potential for treating everything from pain to cancer, and marvel at its rich pharmacopoeia—many of whose chemicals mimic vital molecules in the human body. In reality, cannabis has been with humanity for thousands of years and is considered by many governments (notably America's) to be a dangerous drug without utility. Any suggestion that the plant might be medically useful is politically controversial, whatever the science says. It is in this context that, on April 20th, America's Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a statement saying that smoked marijuana has no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States."

In this week's The Economist there is an article on the political obstacles for medical marijuana. As I have written many times, people suffering from painful illnesses are paying the price for the politically motivated "war on drugs".

Tuesday, 2 May 2006

Liberalerna – den ursprungliga vänstern

♫ "Båd' stat och lagar oss förtrycka, vi under skatter digna ner."

Liberala Partiet genomförde igår en liten manifestation i Göteborg. På sin banderoll citerade de ett stycke ur Internationalen som dagens socialdemokrater och kommunister gärna vill glömma bort.

Från början var skattesänkningar en viktig del i kampen mot det feodala samhället och aristokratins makt över bönder och arbetare. Därför var kravet på skattesänkningar en självklar del av Internationalen och andra tidiga kampsånger.

Som alla svenskar vet så har vänsten med tiden glidit allt längre bort från sitt ursprung. Idag handlar deras kamp om att bevara privilegierna för en egen politikeradel på bekostnad av folket. Bakom slagord om solidaritet och rättvisa döljer sig ett förakt för den vanlige medborgaren som arbetar för brödfödan. Föraktet tar sig sitt synliga uttryck i ständigt högre skatter, vilket trots finslipade argument egentligen bara resulterar i att man likt den feodala aristokratin samlar resurser i händerna på en liten elit. I Sverige har den gamla tidens kungamakt övertagits av statsministern och hans hov på statsrådsberedningen. Och precis som förr så bygger de sin makt med folkets pengar.

Emellanåt uppstår diskussioner mellan nyliberaler och socialliberaler och vilka som egentligen förestår "den ursprungliga liberalismen". Jag tycker den diskussionen kan vara intressant, men viktigare ändå vore att oftare poängtera att det är vi liberaler som förestår den ursprungliga vänstern. Det var inte socialdemokraterna eller kommunisterna som inledde nermonteringen av privilegiesamhället och aristokratin – det var våra föregångare. Och nu när vi åter hamnat i en situation där skattetrycket blir allt högre och människors egenmakt blir allt mindre så är det hög tid att återvända till denna den ursprungliga kampen. Liberala Partiet gjorde just detta i gårdagens manifestation.

PS! Läste nyss en artikel i Dagens Arbete om hur LO-förbunden medvetet låter straffa de arbetare som valt att vara med i a-kassan men inte i facket. Detta är också ett sätt för makten att markera sitt revir. Den som inte rättar in sig i de socialdemokratiska leden straffas och riskerar få sin ekonomi förstörd. En självklar borgerlig reform borde gå ut på att privatisera a-kassan. Som det är nu så finansieras försäkringssystemet via skatten medan LO får låtsas som om det är deras egna pengar. Låt istället varje arbetare betala hela försäkringspremien mot att hela denna kostnad blir skattebefriad. Låt också de privata försäkringsbolagen erbjuda arbetslöshetsförsäkringar och möjliggör därmed för vanliga medborgare att ingå vilka försäkringsavtal de vill. De allra flesta är faktiskt myndiga nog att teckna sina egna försäkringar. Det fungerar alldeles utmärkt när det gäller hem-, bil- och olycksfallsförsäkringar.

Monday, 1 May 2006

May Day

Yesterday the Swedes were celebrating their King; today they are celebrating their Government. Elitists have a busy agenda these days.

"May Day, first day of May. Its celebration probably originated in the spring fertility festivals of India and Egypt. The festival of the Roman goddess of spring, Flora, was celebrated from Apr. 28 to May 3. In medieval England the chief feature of the celebration of May Day was the Maypole; this was decorated with flowers and streamers, the loose ends of which were held by dancers, who encircled the pole, weaving intricate patterns as they passed each other in the dance. These dances are still performed for exhibition purposes in England and the United States. The Second Socialist International in 1889 designated May Day as the holiday for labor, and since that time it has been the occasion for demonstrations, parades, and speeches among socialists and communists."
— (From Answers.com)

Sweden is one of very few democratic countries where May Day is a national holiday—and not for the reason of welcoming spring, but to commemorate Karl Marx's teachings. In nearly every town around the country, the loyal—and often well paid—members of the governing Social Democratic Party and their communist supporters are marching and protesting, pretending to be the voice of the working class. The socialist parties have run Sweden politically at just about every level for the last seventy-five years, so when government ministers protest at May Day demonstrations, they are in fact agitating against the society they themselves have formed. To any one not blinded by socialism, this is pathetic.