#lgbt ussr

[noonewilleverknowistealkneecaps]

Hey, I've been following your Soviet Holmes art for a few… months? I don't know. Anyway, just wanted to say that I absolutely love the way you do this. I love this show and your art is like a breath of fresh air about these old show. Thank you for lighting up this part of Tumblr with your art, this adaptation doesn't have that many followers and fans, but I'm absolutely happy we have you ❤️

And i’m afraid i didn’t answer for a few months as well - for that im sorry. but! Oh wow, i didn’t realise I’ve been sharing holmes art for so long, thats cool, and you’re cool for this interest methinks🫵.

Im boutta jump around my room, jolly manner, for many of you are sharing the same braincell with me. I’m 100% yes for bringing something new to old shows: new perspectives, theories, lgbt takes or whatnot (that it lacks tbh, especially soviet media). It so exciting!! i mean!! showing well known narratives and characters from other sides and bringing (hopefully warm) nostalgia to those who love them old movies as much as you do.

Not no mention that soviet Holmes movie is one of THE classics in ussr cinema, it is shown every new year on tv after all. And with all that, i’m furious that it doesn’t appear to have much fanart or fanfics (as a mainstream!!). And with this treatment, imagine all the “coded” russian literature and other shows, man they are so untouched. Looking at russian etc., artists meaningfully for not having a cult of soviet johnlock already bc IT’SRIGHT THERE PEOPLE, BREAK FREE FROM CENSORSHIP AT ONCE, BE FREE, BE PROUD, SHARE, EXPLORE, RECYCLE.

My point is, i really want soviet media and old movies in general to see the light of the sun again, be explored in such tasty, tasty ways. I want to savour them ravishing contexts. Let us fester on our nostalgia. I know, for now i share some pretty straightforward and rather shallow interpretations, for now its just “lol, gay dads, adorable” but theres so much more deeper things in my brain(it is there!! I promise!!!) id like to share sometime soon.

Iuhhhhhhh, sorry, back to the message im answering to! THANK YOU SO MUCH, FOR TEXTING THIS AND TRANSPORTING THESE KIND WORDS TO ME BRAIN, MEANS THE WORLD AND BOOSTS MY INSPIRATION A TON!!!! I actually wanted to have asks for so long, its great to finally communicate with fans of my fav stuff, bc comments dont seem to be in favour on this app.

Anyway, you made me too emotional and you know too much now, let me eat you at once, dear commenter

[zarya-zaryanitsa]

Stalinist attitudes towards homosexuality and the events surroudning criminalization of homosexuality in Soviet Union in 1934 - excerpts from professor Dan Healey’s book „Russian homophobia from Stalin to Sochi”

In the same chapter I analyze the Soviet return to a ban on “sodomy” in 1933-34. It was a Stalinist measure, proposed by the security police and backed with relish by Stalin and his Politburo. Stalin personally edited the new penal article. This was the moment when the Soviet state adopted a modern anti-homosexual politics, the birth of modern Russian political homophobia. (…)

On September 15, 1933, deputy chief of the OGPU (secret police) Genrikh Yagoda proposed to Stalin that a law against “pederasty” was needed urgently. Stalin and Yagoda used the crude term pederastiia to discuss male homosexuality; but government lawyers revived the tsarist term muzhelozhstvo (sodomy) for the published law that was eventually adopted in March 1934. Yagoda reported that in August-September 1933, OGPU raids had been conducted on circles of “pederasts” in Moscow and Leningrad, and other cities of the Soviet Union. Yagoda wrote that these men were guilty of spying; they had also “politically demoralized various social layers of young men, including young workers, and even attempted to penetrate the army and navy.” From a recent collection of FSB archive documents of political cases against young Communists, it is clear that during the early 1930s, the secret police were obsessed with detecting counterrevolutionary moods among young people. Stalin forwarded Yagoda’s letter to Politburo member Lazar Kaganovich, noting that “these scoundrels must receive exemplary punishment” and directing a law against “pederasty” should be adopted. In the months that followed, Yagoda the secret policeman steered its passage through the various legislative drafts. (…)

When in mid-September 1933 Yagoda wrote to Stalin, recommending the adoption of a formal law against sodomy, he apparently cited a figure of 130 arrests of “pederasts” for the operations in “Moscow and Leningrad.” According to Ivanov, the archives of the St. Petersburg FSB reveal that during August-September 1933, 175 men were arrested on grounds of homosexual relations in Leningrad alone. The raids on “pederasts” continued and probably expanded to the principal “regime” cities, including Kharkov and Kiev. It appears that somewhere inside the central secret police machinery, an order originated in late July or early August 1933 to begin arrests of “pederasts” known to the authorities on their card-indexes either as “anti-social” or “declassed” elements, or as a security threat with international dimensions. (…)

In the 1993 release of correspondence between Yagoda and Stalin leading to the sodomy ban, one other significant document was published from the same file in the Presidential Archive. It is a sixteen-page letter to Stalin, from a homosexual British Communist, Harry O. Whyte (1907-60), an ex­ patriate journalist living in Moscow who loved a man who was a Soviet citizen. His Soviet lover was arrested sometime during late 1933 or early 1934. The release of the Whyte letter said little about its provenance and the author. It was typical of the 1993 publication that this document also appeared without commentary, but was labeled “Humor from the Special Collections” by archivists or editors who failed to show any historical empathy or intellectual curiosity.

Whyte, who worked for the English-language Moscow Daily News, wrote to Stalin, in May 1934, asking him to justify the new law. The journalist boldly explained why it violated the principles of both Marxism and the Soviet revolution. He argued that persecution of the law-abiding homosexual was typical of capitalist regimes and fascist ones: Nazi Germany’s “racial purity” drive was just the most extreme example of the push in both systems for “labor reserves and cannon fodder.” “Constitutional homosexuals, as an insignificant portion of the population . . . cannot present a threat to the birth rate in a socialist state.” Their position was analogous to that of other unjustly persecuted groups: “women, colored races, national minorities” and the best traditions of socialism showed tolerance of the relatively insignificant number of naturally occurring homosexuals in the population. He asked Stalin, “Can a homosexual be considered a person fit to become a member of the Communist Party?” In a revealing reaction, Stalin scrawled across the letter, “An idiot and a degenerate. To the archives.” Whyte got a blunt answer to his question: he was expelled from the Communist Party; he hastily left the Soviet Union for England in 1935. (…)

The dictator turned to his cultural spokesman Maxim Gorky, to explain the law’s rationale for Soviet and European readers. Gorky wrote an article that appeared in Izvestiia and Pravda on May 23, 1934, and later in a German-language socialist newspaper in Switzerland, in which he compared healthy Soviet youth to the degenerate youth of Nazi Germany. “Destroy the homosexuals - and fascism will disappear” he concluded, propounding the genocide of a social group on the grounds of sexuality. Later in 1936, People’s Commissar of Justice Nikolai V. Krylenko gave a speech to the central Soviet legislature in which he explained that the law was necessary because homosexuals were not healthy workers but “a declassed rabble, or the scum of society, or remnants of the exploiting classes.”

[williammooreowo]

a couple of countryhumans sketches

I have certain problems that prevent me from drawing digital art That's why I'm posting old works from my sketchbook

I hope to be able to create digitally again soon

[mudvi]

At the concert of the band “Laibach” in Sarajev, 1989. Photographed by Milomir Kovačević Strašni

[socialismforall]

"Lavender & Red (Parts 10-12)" (2004) by Leslie Feinberg. LGBTQ+ History Meets Socialist History.

[treich-1807]

SORRY I'M LATEEE BUT HAPPY PRIDE ❤️🫶🏳️‍🌈

[alphabet-is-a-sheep]

Under communism, pride will be year-round and secret police will send straight people to gulags, call that the KGBTQ+ /j

[delicehm]

In soviet history there was a period it was believed that the big part of fascism is homosexuality and you can't beat fascism without getting rid of gays. The only reason why being gay was legal at first is because it's forbidence was there before and made by Empire they wanted to abolish and Lenin being, apparently, a much nicer(still not exactly n i c e) guy than Stalin *Le sigh* why am I not surprised by it?

PS, I'm not westerner, I'm from post-soviet country, I take interest in history(mostly pre-annexation-by-RI, but after it too), I don't support capitalism. I don't try to put shade on USSR, it did it pretty well itself

[lizbetlovesbyler]

still thinking about this

tw ; talks about gun violence, racism and homophobia

I love everything our community has done and all the work that has gone into analysis, but you dont need a 300-something slide goodledoc to prove there's something going on here.

They talk about wills sexuality in the first episode, going so far as to use what is now a slur to describe him.

"oh but, lizbet, it was the 80s, it wasn't a slur then" I'm aware, but every film/show/book/play that is written in a different time period than the one it is set still has to be relevant to the audience it was made for. A lot of people think stranger things is set in the 80s to call back to classic thrillers like IT and ET, which it is...at its very basic, fundamental sketches. If that was all it is, the GA and younger watchers especially would not care for it as much as they do.

Anyone who ever read 'An Inspector Calls' in school should know what I mean. In 'An Inspector Calls', he author writes about the ignorance of an upper class 1912 family living in capitalist England through the context available to a 1947 audience. The audience knows the family faces two upcoming world wars, the titanic sinking and the great depression, this knowledge is used to highlight the ignorance of the family by believing England, and they too, are free from mistake or flaw. This dramatic irony screams out at you as you are watching/reading it. the typical audience doesn't scrutinise every detail, despite if those details are intentional.

"what makes stranger things relevant?" I hear you ask. "what context do we have that enhances the storytelling?"

Rising Russian-American tensions - Russians weren't actually shown as a threat in the show until season 3. Before then, it was pure paranoia from the US government in the show that fuelled their research and experiments, as the show is set during the cold war, it is relevant for the time period. The show reflects real life tensions as they've spiralled out of control due to the Russo-Ukrainian war through the actual introduction of Russian villains. (I think its common knowledge that the USSR were not actually opening interdimensional portals underneath 80s malls.)

The opening scene of season 4 showing the massacre of the lab children, children we'd seen innocently playing in the rainbow room. 010 we see taking a 'lesson' with Dr Brenner, the interaction is calm and the two joke. Moments later, every single one of those children is murdered. we hear sirens, screaming, and gunshots. The US in 2022 saw 51 school shootings. Gun laws in the US are a topic that a lot of people still do not want to address, but through stranger things, the writers force forward the reality of modern America in a way impossible to ignore. The reality that the leading cause of death in American children and teens is gun violence. The reality that an estimated 4.6 million american children live in a home where a gun is kept loaded and unlocked. The reality that, on average, 23 children are shot in the United States every single day. It's also the idea that it was the forced conformity of Henry Creel that pushed him towards this warped perception of humanity, allowing him to justify his actions. Reflecting the cases in which the shooter was a bullied student. Forced conformity being a core theme of the show, because it is relevant.

Constant reminders of a racial divide and aggression towards black characters, a theme that has persisted throughout the seasons much like it has persisted in real life.

Growing LGBT acceptance

That's all I can come up with at the moment, I'm really eager to hear other peoples ideas on this, but moving on.

Each of these themes can be traced back to the very first episode.

and then we have

If you think this is far fetched, consider how you'd write the first episode of a multi-seasonal period piece to introduce ideas and themes relevant to your audiences.

Consider how the recent legalisation of same-sex marriage in the US would impact your choices.

For the purpose of portraying Will as a reserved kid for which it is unusual for him to not have come home, it would have had the same effect for Joyce to stop at the fact he is made fun of at school for his clothes and such.

this line adds a layer to her concern, that Will was targeted and hate-crimed, she is trying to get the police involved. What does Jim do?

He expresses judgement.

There is no reason to include this other than to lay the groundwork for a theme that will come back later in the show.

A theme that did come back and slapped us all in the face.

A theme that didn't go away like a lot of people wanted it to/assumed it would.

Assumed it would go away because so many shows nowadays drop a label or a flag pin on a character and leave it at that. It's frankly humiliating how people stoop so low to kiss the feet of writers who reduce them down to a few stripes. (most prominent example to me is Sasha Waybright's pitiful bi sticker in the last 3 minutes of the final episode that got people screaming in excitement.)

If this were the Russian-American tensions theme, it would be unusual to drop it before the shows concluding season, its core to Elevens storyline and the interactions of the main cast with ignorant government officials.

People have grown accustomed to the representation of queer characters with labels, that representation is the co-existance of hetero and homo characters without ever needing to address the differences. But we are different, its the beauty of being different that is ignored. I feel quite a lot of representation nowadays fails to reflect the core of LGBT experiences - love.

It is the love that makes us who we are, not the labels.

This is what makes Stranger things worthy of recognition, the queer characters are introduced through their love for others, not a single label is needed, they actually make a point of not labelling a single sexuality, which a lot of people mistook for them "dancing around the topic".

You think, for even a moment - with a style of queer storytelling such as that, that Wills love is going to be used to fuel the heteronormative relationship?

Stranger things - the show about being different, about love conquering hate - wouldn't go so far as to let Mike return that love?

yeah, right.

(i would like to add that these themes are serious issues i'm grateful the writers address. this post isn't meant to prove byler endgame, but the impact a requited love between them would bring to audiences and why that is important, much like the other themes.

the only way to have the full impact is for this theme to persist another season and play a crucial role to the shows conclusion, hence why Mike and Will are likely centre stage, even if they dont "get together", their bond is crucial to the plot, whatever happens with them and rovickie will be unforgettable.)

[zarya-zaryanitsa]

„If USSR was around today it would be progressive with LGBT rights”, my dear, USSR is literally the source of contemporary Russian approach to LGBT issues.

[txttletale]

I hope you don’t mind me asking, but how could someone like you, who otherwise has such based opinions, be a fan of Stalin? How do you reckon with his crimes? Especially when Trotskyism is right there for you to follow instead?

i'm not a 'fan' of stalin--i don't consider myself a 'fan' of any historical person. i would not even consider myself a 'fan' of people whom i admire, who have seriously influenced my thinking with their theory (e.g. lenin). and for much the same reason i am not a 'fan' of stalin i feel no need to reckon with 'his' crimes--he was just one person. stalin neither 'perpertrated the purges' nor 'starved ukraine' nor 'industrialized the USSR' nor 'defeated nazism'. he would have had to be a very busy man to execute all those folks and eat all that grain and mine all that coal and kill all those fascists on his own!

i think inasmuch as stalin personally influenced policy in the USSR, he mostly did so for the worse (e.g., encouraging a lot of the social reaction of the 30s in regards to LGBT and women's rights and national minorities, standing by lysenko long after it became clear that his theories were bullshit) -- where he did so for the better, it was usually because he recognised the value of adopting the positions of someone who was a better and more capable theorist. so i don't care for the lionization of the man that goes on in some circles.

however, i'm not interested in condemning him as some cartoonish supervillain either. if you have gotten the impression that i am a 'fan' of stalin, it is likely because i refuse to repeat anticommunist propaganda about how he killed One Gazillion People, because i sharply shut down anybody i see trying to propagate the fascist double genocide myth, because i think that the positive achievements of the USSR in the 1930s and 1940s--improving the lives of millions, performing one of the fastest industrializations in history, defeating German fascism--are impressive and laudable and refusing to learn from them because of a fear of 'stalinism' (something which i don't think meaningfully exists or ever did) is misguided and counterproductive, and because i think that the failures of that period are better understood as the results of the legacy of russian chauvinism and of the strain on soviet political systems caused by the civil war and wwii rather than the liberal conception of history where stalin, god-emperor of russia, unilaterally decided to Be Evil because he was a Sicko

as for why i'm not a trotskyist, i've covered that here. i simply don't think that any of trotsky's critiques were useful to anybody except the US empire, i think most of trotsky's theoretical positions are wrong, and i've had nothing but deeply deeply negative interactions with trotskyist organizations in the real world.

[flock-of-cassowaries]

Whereas I hate it when my boss and coworkers ask me about my plans for my vacation, because if I say:

“I plan to make progress on my various my extremely self-indulgent fanfiction projects, which are about the gay cannibal show, and also the horny+evil rich media heirs show; and it’s like, also extremely personal and kind of autobiographical in places, but also very horny, and no, you can never, ever read it (j/k you can, I will make a protestant version with all the sex scenes removed just for you! Do you want to hear the whole plot? I’m very, very proud of it.)”

…everyone will remember that forever, and it will make my working relationships with them even more awkward than they already are (just due to my high level of general social awkwardness).

i love it when my teachers ask about my interests because i get to yap about some gay cannibals from a decade old show and jack antonoff

[eye-in-hand]

I think a lot of the American rad-left support of the USSR stems from the radical left of the mid century; a time where America was fighting the cold war via propping up the "American Dream", one that is very heteronormative, patriarchal and of course, capitalistic. Because being gay, non-christian, against marriage, etc was labeled communist. So of course to be against the American propaganda you had to be communist right? To be pro-lgbt, women and racial rights, etc you were labeled a communist here.

The issue is of course, that this idea of communism is not rooted in how communism has ever played out, actually living under communism, or being affected as millions of people die of starvation around you. American radical leftism is still American. You are still viewing the world as an American, no matter how much you denounce your ties to the country you live in. Until you can acknowledge the evils, and listen to the people that were oppressed under the USSR or CCP, you will never actually understand communism. You understand the big boogie man America made up. You are playing McCarthyism even if you're on "the other side" of it.

Like cultural christian atheists who treat every religion like Christianity, you're still looking at the world through a christian lens even if you aren't christian anymore, until you self reflect and branch out of what you consider normal.

American "communists" are not communists, and they never will be until they actually look past their American idea of communism.

It's more important to be pro-human rights (LGBT, womens, racial, etc) than it is to be communist or capitalist. The economy will always favor those who created it, otherwise they wouldn't have created it. But human rights and having values is more important than what those values make other people label you as.

I've been called a communist, I've been called McCarthy, etc. At the end of the day what I stand for is human rights. Capitalism and Communism are economic systems, tools for the economy and the work force/production of labor. Not for human beings.

And if you actually think the USSR or places like that stand for human rights just because they're anti-west? You're painfully American.

[hussyknee]

it’s rare to find a sinhalese person (online atleast) who is supportive of tamil self-determination. genuine question: among leftist circles in sri lanka, how common is such a stance?

I don't know whether I'm a reliable source to answer this question because I'm very jaded about this in general. A couple of days ago, someone on the Sri Lanka Reddit started up discourse about Maitreyi Ramakrishnan's choice to reject identifying with the country that tried to genocide her people, which I'm still chewing wire about. I'm a very isolated person with a very small social circle of like-minded leftist friends. They're mostly not SinBud and anti SinBud nonsense, but none of them are Tamil and I'm the one who really convinced them about Eelam I think. The people I learned from, who are out there doing the work of building inter-ethnic dialogue and overturning Sinhalese propaganda, might have a more hopeful view.

Thing is, there's no one "leftist" faction here because "left" doesn't mean the same thing as it does in the West. The Rajapaksas' party SLPP is socialist, a legacy of the SLFP that they branched off from, who was the party aligned with the USSR. They and their voters and their saffron terror acolytes (Buddhist priesthood) are all for public infrastructure they can rob blind and central government they can use to crush minorities, and build on the nationalist fervour of genocidal Sinhalese Buddhism that's served both major parties independence. There's quasi-communists, descendants of the ethnonationalist Marxist JVP that rose in opposition to the class corruption of ethnonationalist USSR-aligned socialist SLFP and enthonationalist US-aligned neoliberal UNP. The current JVP party itself is no longer communist; their coalition the NPP are mostly just very pro-union social democrats, and they've since distanced themselves from their ethnic myopia, possibly due to suffering much of the same state terrorism as minorities via militarisation and policies like the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). They're the most vocal about the abolition of the executive presidency, the removal of all martial law mechanisms and the PTA, defunding of military and police, and restructuring and executing the long-mismanaged socialist infrastructure. These are usually the working class and university students, but their base has been growing in other demographics too, since we "held our noses and voted" for the Yahapalana government in 2015 and it ended up fucking us over. But despite their sympathy with the suffering of Tamils and Muslims and favouring the devolution of power, most still cling to the idea that Sinhalese majoritarianism is a fair result of democracy.

The kind of pro-LGBT, anti-racist, feminist liberals that would pass muster with the western left otoh, are a minority of urban, English-speaking middle class. The younger of this crowd is increasingly favouring the aforementioned NPP (that is rapidly marrying the economic left with the social consciousness led by western dialogues that go against their traditional rural working class base), but that is very new and hampered by decades of Red Scare propaganda. The minority communities and the urban liberals traditionally vote for the current neoliberal party, that has distanced itself from their virulent nationalism over the last thirty years and basically modelled itself after the US Democrats (diet right-wing as opposed to nuclear right-wing) Their idea of reducing corruption and increasing efficiency is privatizing everything, makes the right pro-feminist and pro-LGBT noises, and coasts on the minority votes on the promise of never actively feeding ethnosupremacy, even if they won't do anything about it either. The Sinhalese affiliated with this party are deeply uncomfortable with if not entirely resistant to the idea that the North and East are Tamil lands colonized by the Sinhalese. Just like the quasi-communists, urban liberals are aware of the corruption and complicity of the Buddhist priesthood in ethnofascism and are prepared to do exactly as much nothing about it.

What I'm trying to say is that Sinhalese Buddhist ethnosupremacy is baked in to the Sri Lankan political fabric. "Left" means jack shit when it comes to whether Tamils have rights, in much the same way that the western left agrees on everything except Palestine. It's a political no man's land everyone tries not to look at.

The fundamental problem is that Sinhalese people who know enough about 1958, 1983, or the full scope of genocide perpetrated against Tamils during the last push of the war, let alone all 26 years of it, are very much in the minority. It takes a particular education to understand that "Sri Lanka" is a post-colonial invention that took over from "Ceylon", which was nothing but a construct for the ease of British administration. As far as I know, this education is confined to activist organizations and whoever followed my sociology program. So my kind of anarchist leftism that calls the war a Tamil genocide with their whole chest, calls the priesthood saffron terrorists, and recognises Eelam, is vanishingly small, afaik.

To be honest, I never really questioned the propaganda and narrative we've been spoon fed myself until I went to Canada when I was 23 to complete my anthro degree (became disabled and dropped out after). One thing that struck me was how racist the Sinhalese diaspora was. I was raised SinBud, my school didn't admit any non-Sinhalese, half my uncles were in the military, but these people that had left the country decades ago still hated Tamils and Muslims in a way that nobody else I knew did. I wondered whether this was what it had been like when it had all started; whether this hatred that seemed to have been preserved in amber was a true taste of what had ignited Black July. Suddenly the attitude of the Tamil diaspora towards the Sri Lankan government and Sinhalese people didn't seem so unreasonable.

Then, later in the same uni term, I went to an art exhibition of a white artist who travelled the world collecting information about their genocides and made art about them, and found a painting depicting Sri Lankan Tamils in 2008. Promptly had a meltdown. Went to the lady and told her tearfully that it was all propaganda, we didn't really hate Tamils, not even my uncles in the army hated Tamils, it was a war, the LTTE had terrorized us for my whole lifetime. Bless the woman, she didn't fight me, just let me cry at her and patted my hand and pretended to take me seriously. This made it easier for me to really think about what I knew once I'd stopped wailing and stamping. It prompted a years-long self-interrogation and fact finding that made me unearth how much brainwashing had been done to us by everyone, from our families to our school textbooks to news media. It's like the air we breathed was propaganda. And I still didn't know a fraction of what life had been like for Tamils (or Muslims) and the scope of atrocities perpetrated by the Sinhalese until I began my Society and Culture degree at the Open University when I was 30. The first year textbooks were only broadstrokes facts, but at last I found out about Gnananth Obeysekera, Prageeth Jeganathan, Stanley Thambaiya, Malithi DeAlwis. Their work on nation-making, ethnicity, historical revisionism, genocide and ethnic conflict and state terrorism...everything I should have been taught as a child. The chapters on the rapes and murders and shelling and war crimes and IDP camps were..indescribable. That was what properly radicalised me about Tamil self-sovereignty, because there's clearly no possible way the Tamil people will ever be safe and safeguarded under a Sinhalese majoritarian government.

I had to drop out of that programme too because of my health. But during the mass protests against the government in 2022, I learned even more about Tamil indigeneity, the extent of JR Jayawardena's crimes, and the persecution of Marxists and victims of the '71 and '89 insurrections. So much of the protests and their encampments were directed and galvanized by social media, that organised online and in-person lectures, teach-outs, and live discussions that anyone and everyone could attend right alongside the protests. I've never seen that kind of truly democratized, free, egalitarian civic education and discourse before. That was the very first time I saw academics, survivors, refugees and human rights activists being given a respectful platform, the masses hearing firsthand accounts from people of the North and East and witnesses of Black July. April to July 2022 was a truly golden bubble of time where I saw people finally start listening, believing, and challenging all their convictions. It was the closest we ever came to realising the hope that things could be different; that we could, as a society, understand how Sinhalese ethnosupremacy had been the black rot killing this country from the first, stop being racist Sinhala-first cunts and actually hold any of these murderers accountable.

Teach us to hope, I guess.

But I suppose it's no small thing that I learned about the Tamil resistance and struggle and taught all my friends about it. I'm sure they're informing their own circles in small ways too. These tendrils are hard to see, but they exist and grow. Especially with the fall of the Rajapaksas and their Bhaiyya contingent, more people can see ethnosupremacy for the grift that it is, and the younger generations are less defensive, more willing to listen and eager for justice and change. So I guess the answer is: not very common, but less uncommon than it used to be.

[qqueenofhades]

maybe i'm misunderstanding the concept, but it lately it's felt like Online Leftists™️ have been using homonationalism as a cudgel against lgbt people wanting to go abroad and feel comfortable doing so instead of as idk a way to critique american exceptionalism or whatever

The thing about Online Leftists and American exceptionalism in any capacity is that literally all their ideas and concepts of it are a) gibberish and b) completely contradictory and hypocritical. This is because it is all based on a reactionary Vibes ideology that has to constantly change itself to oppose whatever the Democrats/the US/the West in general is doing and therefore has no actual logical guidelines or consistent internal principles. To wit:

America is the most powerful country in the world, and that influence is always and forever totally evil because (insert terrible shit America has done here, which is then generalized and applied to all time periods and places without context or nuance). Indeed, America is so powerful that no other country or government in the world has actual agency or makes real choices for which they are morally and legally responsible; they're just helpless and manipulated pawns reacting to American/Western imperialism (which is the only kind of imperialism that exists, somehow). As such, nothing they ever do is actually "bad" or worthy of condemnation, because they're just totally victimized by America and everything they do is justified as long as it is anti-America. Hence, Russia genociding the Ukrainians is actually fine and good, the Ukrainians must have deserved it somehow (witness how many of the people currently screaming about Gaza were yelling that Ukraine was totally fine to attack actually!) and America is evil for trying to intervene. Russian propaganda calls America bad, we think America is bad, and therefore Russian propaganda must be correct, we love Russian propaganda a whole lot and have no interest in examining that fact any further. Russia is actually good because it used to be the USSR! Did you know that?

However, Israel genociding Gaza is utterly unforgivable and terrible and anyone who tries to offer any kind of realistic critique or appraisal of what can or can't be done to stop it is a genocide apologist. America should in fact be intervening to the point of invading Israel and/or dismantling the Israeli state, because maximalist American military intervention is Good when we say it is (but the rest of the time it's the most awful evil thing in the world WHY DON'T YOU CARE ABOUT THE GLOBAL SOUTH). America is still the most powerful country in the world and it should be intervening at all times, but actually it shouldn't do that at all because we're totally not the right-wing America First isolationists sent through the rabbit hole. If America does not choose to exercise its almighty godlike power to stop all the evil in the world (but remember, American military intervention of any kind is obviously bad and Ukraine should definitely still be genocided), it is just proving how evil it actually is. Remember, nobody else makes real choices. They're just reacting to America. America is all-powerful and also evil but still should use this evil power for good because it's good if we decide it is.

Voting is meaningless because the parties are the same, but it's powerful enough to produce a president god-king who could just decide to snap his fingers and end all bad things in the world but just doesn't do that (at least if he's a Democrat; we don't really care what a Republican president does). We think this is a good idea, but don't worry, America is still the source of all evil in the world. America should intervene everywhere and nowhere all at once. America should do nothing because everything it does is evil and past redemption and the only solution is The Revolution which destroys society. America is evil because it was founded on the violent oppression and exploitation of minorities, and therefore the solution is to let fascists be elected to punish those minorities even more because they get in the way of our purist thought experiments and their actual lived experiences don't matter when they contradict our Ideology. BUT ACTUALLY IT STILL SHOULD MILITARILY INTERVENE EVERYWHERE WE SAY SO BUT ACTUALLY IT SHOULDN'T EVER GLOBAL SOUTH. (We don't know what the Global South is or any of its issues, politics, problems, identities, languages, postcolonial developments or so forth, but we know that the Cold War happened and it was all America's fault. Have you heard this piece of Russian propaganda about how Joe Biden is the antichrist? SILENCE IS VIOLENCE SO YOU BETTER SHARE IT.)

Likewise, we support LGBTQ rights in theory but we don't think they're ever worth actually voting to protect (remember, voting is meaningless!) if that also contradicts our aim of The Revolution. We love virulently anti-gay groups like the Houthis if they theoretically support our Anti Genocide stance (don't look at Ukraine, that doesn't count) and also hate Jews. Israel is the only country in the world that has LGBTQ rights and also does stupid or awful military things, and therefore it alone is the problem because it's just pretending to be a democracy or have LGBTQ rights (in comparison to the rest of the Middle East) because it's just cynically covering for all its sins, but those sins are actually America, because Israel is just a white settler colonialist outpost of America, so America not stopping what Israel is doing (by being Israel) is bad. Remember, America is the source of all evil in the world and all other countries are its puppets, so it is also Israel, but it should stop being Israel, because it's the only country that ever makes any choices or has agency. We are very smart.

...basically, if your head hurt trying to read that or follow the logic, that's the point. It has to change constantly and contort itself around in order to both oppose those Weak Mainstream Liberals and act like it has the perfect moral high ground in doing so, regardless of what principles it has to change or what hypocrisies it has to embrace. As such, it has been stripped of any authentic critique or ability to say anything about anything, and I suggest we generally stop letting it pretend that it does. That is the only way to rescue western leftism and make it actually 2% of use at opposing fascism, because right now? Nah. Not in the least. It's actively and gleefully enabling fascism, and after so long hearing how us normie Democratic-voting losers were going to be the ones collaborating with fascists, it makes me just a little bit crazy. Good thing we can erase that too.

[pikslasrce]

ofc u do look at this

do u guys wanna see smth funny and cool (gay lenin)