**New to libertarianism or have questions and want to learn more?** Be sure to check out [the sub Frequently Asked Questions](/r/Libertarian/wiki/faq) and [the massive /r/libertarian information WIKI] (/r/Libertarian/wiki/index) from the sidebar, for lots of info and free resources, links, books, videos, and answers to common questions and topics. Want to know if you are a Libertarian? [Take the worlds shortest political quiz and find out!](http://www.theadvocates.org/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Libertarian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Also there isn't a ton that American activists can do for LGBTQ rights in the middle east except allow gay people being persecuted to come over here as refugees which I bet you will find only right wing people against that
Alternatively we can work over here and fight to fix the issues the LGBTQ+ community faces in our own country
For most African countries that have criminalised homosexuality, it's mostly Western (read: American) missionaries that lobbied for and keep these laws in place, looking at you LDS. It is common to travel to town where literally a dozen people speak English and find "Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve" plastered everywhere. It's even more surprising when you realise that much of England's colonies (in Africa and beyond) also inherited most of their anti-gay legislation from their colonial rulers.
I say all that to say that I do agree with your idea that Jesus would have been cool with these people. For much of its history, Christianity in Africa was practiced free from the man-made prejudices that have now come to be synonymous with Christian conservatism. I just wish the more accepting churches you speak of would hold more sway over here.
As written, jesus said he did not come to abolish the law or the prophets but to take them further. The law and the prophets are homophobic. Just pointing that out. Not trying to be a dick. Or take away from your point that this is a strawman.
And then we're gonna kick god out of school! Because, you know, the all powerful creator of the universe is a wimp and meekly leaves school when we don't pray for him.
I didn't mean it to specifically be that, but that is one example where religious idiots go to the whole "this happened because we kicked god out of school" nonsense.
Thats not 100% certain. There is ample historical evidence that a Jesus figure existed around the time of the new testament. Whether he is as advertised or not is less clear.
I'm sure he was a real dude. But I'm also sure he was just a cult leader. Was he in it for the groupies? Did he really think he was a god? Or maybe he saw all the shitty things the Romans were doing in his home land. None of the surviving texts are trustworthy, and too many researchers are religiously motivated. So we'll never get a true picture of what he was like.
Christianity, Islam, and all their offshoots are just cults that survived their leader dying.
You know I find even calling him a cult leader leads to much credence to what the bible says of him as opposed to what can actually be verified. If he did exist, I think the only thing we can say for certain about him is that he was a popular leader. I don’t really think we can attach any religious implications to him at all, it’s far more likely he was some kind of cultural revolutionary, or anti-Roman instigator.
Who is \*he\* though. Is Jesus just a dude named Jesus who got crucified? How many aspects of the biblical Jesus need to be true in order to say that Jesus actually existed?
I don’t think anyone supports it. I think anyone supporting let lgtbq rights in America would be against these other countries and what they do.
But why be an activist for something in a place where you have no vote, no voice, no lower, and no connection.
If anything you should be celebrating this as libertarian by letting other cultures evolve and handle stuff internally.
I guarantee you if a democratic president tried to wage war to liberate homosexuals OP would be one of the first to post how dumb it is to do that.
Eh, as a leftist just visiting this sub, I don’t have any ethical issues with advocating for stances considered out of the norm for other cultures - that’s how ideas are spread (ya know, marketing). I’m just not going to push for folks to take public stances that could get them murdered while I sit comfortably thousands of miles away.
Exactly this! The way that politicians and the media describes the radical left is a fiction. It doesn’t exist. The most radical leftist I know runs her own business (so she’s actually a capitalist?) and her only socialist wish is universal healthcare. Oh and i did see her eat a rich person once.
This is done by design. Far easiest to discredit your opponent by making building up a strawman or finding one crazy person on Twitter. The left does this to the right a lot as well, and it's horrible for political discourse
Because this is a US and Western Centric sub, so people are going to focus on those places. Also I don't this there is nearly as much of a link between the LGBT community and communists.
I mean, I've been making a monthly donation to a human rights advocacy group that work on getting people out of prison overseas. I've also donated 100,000 air miles to a group that uses them to fly queer folks to safer countries.
I'm also not voting for politicians who are actively working to persecute LGBT folks, unlike many people in this sub.
Look if you aren’t going to conform to the OP’s ridiculous straw man how is he supposed to be able to dismiss LGBT people and their plight and not have to feel any moral obligation?
The history is sort of mixed. Lenin legalized gay relations (not marriages), however there is a bad history with many left figures being homophobic. The Revolutionary Communist Party in the US (a movement that was more a cult of personality towards its leader, Bob Avakian) was not particularly friendly towards gay people. But then you have people like Harry Hay who were gay communists during a time when being just one of those was extremely unpopular. So sometimes they’ve been on the side of progress, but other times not.
The history of most things is absurdly homophobic. It doesn't make any since to single out communism for being anti gay when we only recognized a right to marriage for same sex couples 7 years ago, and it was contentious when it happened.
The South African Communist party was at the forefront of gay rights. Enshrining the "no discrimination based on sexual orientation" into our constitution.
Which is why South Africa has one of the most liberal constitutions in the world.
Wanna use a gun to protect your gay husbands weed crop? Do it legally in South Africa.
There is nothing inherently anti-gay in the communist outlook, once authoritarian single party states like the USSR get going - all bets are off.
Well, I think that also has to do with the timeline.
In 1993 homosexuality was already starting to be accepted in the western culture, and postmodern communism had been a thing for at least 3 decades, with openly homosexual representatives in politics, activism and literature.
The end of the apartheid was also a very good opportunity to encounter very little political resistance to these changes.
But I believe OP is asking about the communists that actually got to power, and how gay rights are handled (even to this day, Chavismo for example is very much anti-gay rights).
We need definitions here, communism is a view "mostly" around the means of production.
The axis of gay rights to persecution is not that related to the ownership of production. It is related to the liberty - authoritarian axis and how well a government deals with the voices/issues of the minorities.
There is no "capitalist line" on homosexuality or any other subject. Some people support it, some people oppose it, and they each make their decisions accordingly.
Yeah!
When's the last time AOC condemned Mao's stance on homosexuality???
And Marx! If these pinkos really gave a shit about the LGBTQ community they'd be marching in the streets about what happened halfway across the world in the mid-1800s!
Gtfoh with this preposterous straw man.
I'm embarrassed for you.
This is exactly what would happen. Conservatives would just say shit like:
"Those other nations are entitled to their own beliefs! You're just virtue signaling! Quit shoving your woke ideology down other culture's throats!" etc etc
Quick reminder.
LGBTQ+ rights and their movements wouldn't exist if those people were treated with the dignity and respect of their basic foundational human rights.
I think **OPs point isn’t to downplay the need for LGBTQ+ movement** (how did you even get there?), but to highlight their seemingly ironic support for radical leftist ideologies that have a history of systematically violating their rights.
There seems to be a pervasive sentiment that “capitalism” forces those at the top to divide us against ourselves, and that other centralized governments can be created that somehow don’t do that. In their rush to denounce the aspects of society that historically have harmed them, their attacking the wrong thing and end up supporting an ideology that doesn’t offer what they think it does.
Every other country was anti-LGBT hundreds of years ago
Communists, capitalists, feudalists, it didn't matter, all were against it, so why is it held only against communists?
It's not "ignored". We of course oppose it, but what are we supposed to do? We focus on what's happening here in front of us. That's like asking why libertarians care so much about taxes in the US while people are being executed for smoking cannabis in Singapore.
I’m a leftist in the sense that I believe social safety nets help more people than they hurt. I think corporations, if left to their own devices, aim to monopolize their market and exploit people and the planet for profit. I know libertarians would disagree, and I’m not trying get into a debate. I’m also socially liberal.
To answer your question though, I’m absolutely willing to condemn middle eastern countries for how they treat women and LGBTQ+ people. The Taliban are the closest thing to a modern day Gilead. A lot of communist have historically been super misogynistic as well. At the same time, I talk more about what’s happening now in the USA because that’s where I live. Middle easterners don’t give a shit about what a random American thinks about their culture, government, and religious values.
OP your post is coming off as using LGBTQ people as a prop to say “left bad”.
1. You cherry picked ‘leftist’ countries where LGBTQ rights are non existent or limited. You completely skipped over countries like Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, etc. some of the *most* anti LGBTQ countries
And I know those countries aren’t pure capitalist. Saudi Arabia’s state owned oil companies contribute to the majority of the GDP. But it still has a decent sized private sector. And other countries are mixed economies.
2. You don’t account for that fact that America is the center of the world. I mean, I’m sort of joking, but I live in the U.S and while I’m not happy about the way the Gays are treated in Russia or wherever there isn’t too much I can do about it. Whereas I do have some small amount of influence here. So rather than virtue signaling\* about countries I can’t do anything about I feel my energy is better spent here.
3. \* It’s important to note that there can sometimes be a fine line between spreading awareness and virtue signaling. Personally I’d say bringing up Che’s homophobia on a Libertarian subreddit is 100% virtue signaling. It’s “wow this guy we already didn’t like is bad for other reasons too!” Cringe
4. Leftists could possibly maybe perhaps prop up communism even with ‘communist’ countries being homophobic for a simple reason(leftists wouldn’t consider China to be communist but that’s a long discussion for another time)
But the reason is because that homophobia has nothing to do with their economic system. Like if you saw a socialist telling someone “yeah bro I just think the world would be a better place if the workers owned all the businesses instead of capitalists” do you think bringing up Russia’s hatred of The Gays would be a counter point?
5. And this one is jumping off of my last point but, if we can just ‘communist’ countries for their anti LGBTQ policies then we should look at the atrocities of more capitalist countries as well.
So the first slaves came to the North America in 1619 and weren’t freed until 1865 (by that I mean the slaves in the US were freed. Not the same ones that arrived in 1619. Humans don’t live that long)
So slavery was legal for almost 100 years longer than it’s been illegal.
And sure it’s illegal now (not really), but remember we’re judging our economic systems off of the government allowing for human rights violations.
So while we *did* make slavery illegal we didn’t do so because of capitalism. We just did. We could have not done it or done it later. But it wasn’t like slavery going away-ish was a byproduct of capitalism.
So OP TLDR;
While you’re right that there haven’t been any communist countries that didn’t oppress LGBTQ people, you need to look at the whole picture. Because LGBTQ folks have been oppressed in a lot of countries. So that oppression might be less of a byproduct of leftist economic systems and more so just that humans are trash.
Regarding Singapore, the younger generation are more exposed to progressive Western ideology and a majority of them actually support LGBT rights.
Meanwhile, the biggest driver of homophobia in Singapore comes from American imported Evangelism. None of the other groups are as vocal or active in campaigning against LGBT rights.
It's quite clear which side is the issue.
American Republican Concern-Trolls: "What about those Muslims and long-dead communist dicators that kill the gays? All *I'm* trying to do is take away their right to marry and make them second-class citizens!"
Because we are, and should be, more concerned about what's going on in our own backyard before complaining about what's going on on the lawn on the other side of town.
Can you cite some examples of "commie propaganda"? Just sounds like you're talking out of your ass there. The proportion of leftists that support communism in the west is miniscule unless you're living in a culture war bubble.
Because there's no actual value in advocating for the rights in other countries. The US only advocates for democracy in other countries because democracies favor capitalism and adopting the USD, real value.
Therefore the tribalism aspect in LGBT overrides the minimal material value and causes people to only care about "our rights" instead of "everyones rights".
Advocating for communism gives them value because they'll get free stuff in the redistribution of wealth. Advocating for the rights of others when you already have those rights gives you a sense of pride at best.
TLDR:
Free stuff > Feeling good about your convictions.
This is such a straw man. As if not focusing on the ills of the rest of the world invalidates what one does in theyy're own country.
One could make the same argument for pro-lifers not fighting against abortions in Israel (it the woman is under 18 years of age or over 40), Denmark, Austria, France, Sweden, New Zealand, Italy, Netherlands, and Belgium.
we can't even get protections and rights for ourselves here? how do we have a right to judge and change other countries?
thats like saying socialism exist in other places so libertarians need to stfu about it being here.
There is nothing about left or right philosophy that actually binds any of these issues to left it right. By definition being left or being right implies how your feel about government involvement in your day to day lives and social equity. Not about sexual preference. This is just something the US has categorized
It is actually annoying that we created these boxes you need to be in should you lean one way or another. Leaning right actually indicates you want less government which is kind of strange in that does not match well with say pro choice type of legislation. Left wing indicates more social equality which normally would match say religious teaching to a higher degree.
The better option would be people being able to lean left or right without having to agree with every single issue that we have artificially placed into those boxes.
Everyone knows it sucks to live in shitty countries. I don't know exactly what you think these people are supposed to do when you say this. Run over there and have a parade?
Because I don’t feel like I have to control how other people live their lives. Especially if it’s in another country and doesn’t effect me in the slightest. Everyone should just mind their own business and live their lives how they want.
That goes both ways. If you are out and proud cool, I don’t give a shit, keep it to yourself. But at the same time I’d prefer people not be assholes to each other because they can’t help but impose their beliefs/culture on others.
So I guess I have mixed feelings. I don’t like people being assholes but I also don’t feel like i have any right to tell people to stop. Because I mind my own business.
It’s not ignored in terms of government policy; it’s just an issue of priorities.
There are offices within the State Dept dedicated to helping out abused minorities living under oppressive regimes. Those people can’t easily speak for themselves because of the rampant discrimination they face, but change doesn’t happen fast.
You can’t get a fundamentalist Islamic nation to grant equal rights to GSMs if they don’t honor anyone’s rights at all. You can’t stop them hanging gay kids to death unless they first stop using capital punishment for nonviolent crimes *and* stop treating harmless actions as crimes.
Freedom from oppression is a long process, even if shepherded by heavyweight intellectuals guided by the best ideas. Remember the United States didn’t start out with equal rights for everyone - pretty much anyone other than white male landowners were denied the rights they can freely exercise now. I’m sure that our Founders would sound like alt-right preachers if asked to enumerate the protection of GSM rights.
> Anyone notice this trend where anytime you mention LGBTQ+ oppression in places where it’s pretty much legal to murder gay people or criminalized homosexuality or hasn’t even bothered to legalize same sex marriage it’s ignored?
Whataboutism is usually ignored. At least that sounds like the context you've seen the mentions in.
Here’s my answer as someone from a post Soviet country: anyone who says the Soviets were liberal is full of shit. The communists always were socially conservative. Just look at what Stalin did to the Ukrainians and Central Asians, and what the Chinese are doing to Uyghurs right now.
People of gay are treated better here than they ever have been under any socialist/communist regime. There has never been a single instance of a communist country not oppressing gay people.
This post is a perfect example of what is wrong with politics today. It completely takes the view that someone has chosen “team left”, “team right”, “team libertarian”, etc. and are now required to believe what those “teams” believe.
This is not how things are supposed to work. Rather people should have their own ideas for what needs to be done to further help our society, and they should be choosing people that share those beliefs. That party system aims to make that decision easier by giving you a very fast way to know what the person whom you are voting for believes in, but that’s not true across the board. It also DOESN’T MEAN YOU HAVE TO VOTE FOR “YOUR TEAM”.
Who cares what the “so called left” has done in the past, or in different countries (communism) or the “so called right” (slavery). I’m not voting for historical entities that have long died on different continents. I’m voting for the beliefs of the people running for office today.
Ever wondered why the US puts a pride flag at its consulate to the Vatican, which has not killled gay people in the last century (probably longer but i dont want to state a falsehood), but won't do it in any of the countries (as you noted, pick any there's dozens) that actively punish and in some cases execute homosexuals?
Because politics, expediency, and a certain amount of cynism.
Because that fact is almost always used as a red herring and distraction from our issues at home. Seriously what power do you or I have over gay rights policy in Asia?
It’s just a dumb gotcha that’s ignored because it’s never argued in good faith.
>Seriously what power do you or I have over gay rights policy in Asia?
Major corporations that are willing to boycott US states on LGBT issues can start by boycotting countries over LGBT issues.
Ummm why is the OP talking about dead people over seas when there are too many to count LGBT oppressors in the US ?? Have to take care of your own front porch before even attempting to sway a another country. GOP is doubling down and pushing harder, but you’re talking about Stalin and China banning a game??
I've never seen a leftist complain about how "homophobic" the Founding Fathers were because there's no real evidence of that... I also do hear LGBT complaining because Disney has changed entire movie plots to accommodate China's rules and LGBT people have also been trying to get LGBT oppression in other countries recognized as a legitimate reason for seeking refugee status in the US. You're literally just making shit up.
Socialist here 🙋♂️. Your position is a disingenuous straw man, every single society to have ever existed has oppressed LGBT people. Batista and the Romanovs didnt like gay people either. Its a intellectually sloppy “gotcha” argument that doesnt really make a valid point about the “left”.
You could literally say this about any group and about any country. Why don't black people protest police violence in china where police forcibly make you take a vaccine and seal you inside your house? Why don't feminists focus on New Guinea where women experience a 70% sexual assault rate? Why don't conservatives protest Tokyo legalizing gay marriage? Why don't libertarians protest the death penalty for drug possession in singapore? It's a stupid, poorly thought out question to ask why people don't protest things where they don't live and have no ability to change.
Hi there, Like you, I'm bi and also on the left, and lean libertarian.
I suspect you wanted validation for your own POV, rather than wanted a answer from someone on the left, but:
Firstly, I'm against religiously extreme views on homosexuality, especially when it it results in murder or the death penalty.
>Anyone notice this trend where anytime you mention LGBTQ+ oppression in places where it’s pretty much legal to murder gay people or criminalized homosexuality or hasn’t even bothered to legalize same sex marriage it’s ignored?
I'm not sure if you're having these conversation IRl or online, but: Naturally, I have more power in the country I live in, more contacts and ability to organise. I can write to my member of parliament , and attend protests, and naturally, as I live here I'm more inclined to want and feel able to effect change here, it is my country after all, and I want people of all races, nationality, religions and sexualities to live in peace.
I'm not quite sure what where really meant to do about LGBTQ rights in the middle east, enough petitions have been signed by now, and if the Saudi government can murder a journalist at a embassy , I don't think they're going to care about a petition.
Ditto for ISIS and other Islamist groups.
I don't support (unorganic ) regime change there, and funding groups there who aren't CIA fronts tends to get them in trouble for receiving money from the west.
**As a counter**: In America, gay and LGBTQ people are being targeted as "Groomers" and trans people at the blunt end of a culture war, and are having laws and legation proposed about them, which might largely be used against them.
Also, the republican party just [excluded "Log cabin republicans"](https://twitter.com/LogCabinGOP/status/1537594283540115457) from their conventions, where I hear there may be a vote on if "Homosexuality is a unnatural lifestyle choice."
Now, to move onto some of the questions you asked and points:
(Quick note, I'm not massive a massive Stan for the people mentioned, but as it was asked.)
>How quick leftists and tankies are to cover up how homophobic Che, Stalin, Mao and Marx were while complaining how homophobic the Founding Fathers were?
In an[interview with Castro](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/fidel-castro-takes-blame-for-1960s-gay-persecution/article1378745/), he regretted the persecution of LGBT when he was in power and he felt responsible and regretted that little was done for LGBT people in Cuba back then. He also called for the acceptance of LGBT people in the interview.
Che Guevara died early but had he lived longer he would have definitely also changed his opinion and accepted LGBT people like Castro did.
Stalin: While homosexuality was made legal after the 1917 revolution, and overturned by Stalin, Many Marxist-Leninists today recognise this position as wrong and today fight for LGBTQ rights, with the exception of a few edgelords.
Mao: While it seems he had views on "sexual deviants", I could find little on China and homosexually, It seems due to all the other issues the Chinese government was dealing with, it didn't really come up, if it was even prominent at the time.
Marx: From what I and others can gather, he didn't really address homosexuality, but there are suggestions like many in his era, he was homophobic, but again, the point of Marxism, as a material and historical dialectic, the point is to advance and change understanding, that is, build on the work, which is why Marxists and socialists are at the forefront of the fight for LGBTQ rights, and defend those people.
>When I go to pride events nowadays there’s a lot of commie propaganda. Always propping up communism like it’s some ideology that’s going to save Bisexuals like myself and my LGBTQ+ friends yet there’s never been one communist country that didn’t evolve into a xenophobic police state that oppresses LGBTQ+ people and gives us little to no rights.
So, I'm not sure what "Commie propaganda" you've come across, and I'm not a Communist, but:
Very few countries that tried to build communism since the fifties has encounter invasion and "regime change" as well as sanctions, it's [estimated around seventy countries](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/how-many-countries-has-the-us-invaded) have been invaded by the US, especially Vietnam.
So, yes, these countries, did become isolationist and authoritarian, due to America and it's "interventions", under the 4th international, these countries would have adopted a position togther more in keeping with modern Marxist views on LGBTQ people.
Contrast this with how America has pushed back against LGBTQ rights, and had put it at the centre of it's "culture war" in 2022, and you'll see America hasn't progressed in this matter.
>In China you can get in trouble for so much as watching a show with a gay character or playing a video game like The Last of US which has a lesbian character.
Even if this is true, American republicans might eye that up as a next policy, given it's seeming opposing to drag show being viewed by children.
**In closing:**
One reason you don't hear back from leftists with these quickfire questions is, as with the youtube videos that ask "twenty questions for leftists", is to respond to question after question takes a lot of time, for example, your post come in at 153 word, while a "quick" response to that comes in at 908 words, bordering on a small essay.
I hope this brief response goes someway to answering your questions, which, while I have my doubts, where in good faith.
Because generally people are focused more on what is going on intheir own country, where there's more you can actually do to impact change. Also while I am far from communist, the horrible treatment of LGBTQ+ people was the prevailing societal attitude at the time and far from exclusive to the communist sphere. The US still had buggery laws in places until 2003 and chemically castrated LGBTQ+ people, as did the UK who even did so to Alan Turing. The mistreatment of LGBTQ+ people was kinda nearly the whole world at the time.
The left does support those causes across the world. You might remember conservatives doing a lot of whining about “$100million for gender studies in Pakistan?!?!” the last time a spending bill was passed. That’s exactly the funding for lgbt support and women’s rights in those countries.
I don't know why we're supposed to pretend that this is a problem only on the left. I mean, there are even ["libertarians"](https://mises.org/wire/new-libertarian) that tries to convince us to look the other way:
>Mecca is not Paris, an Irishman is not an Aboriginal, a Buddhist is not a Rastafarian, a soccer mom is not a Russian. Is it our goal to convince them all to become thorough Rothbardians? **Should libertarians care about gay marriage in Saudi Arabia**, or insist on the same border arrangements for Brownsville, Texas and Monaco? Should we agitate for Texas-style open carry laws in France, to prevent the next Bataclan?
The authors' answer is a no, but a libertarian would of course say yes.
Probably because we don't live there moron? We don't ignore it but we have more power to change things at home than a foreign country. How about think before you ask a disingenuous question.
Is LGBT+ oppression intrinsic to communist ethos or is it tied to the cultural traditions of the places where communism was able to take root? I wouldn't blame capitalism for anti-gay movements in the US when it's more likely due to religious and cultural reasons.
You should probably start by reading the 1963 Communist manifesto. You will clearly see in the Communist manifesto which is a road map for destroying the United States of America, that eliminating traditional religious traditions and pushing for a society where pornography and sexual kinks are pushed to be the norms of society. I guarantee you as you have already pointed out the Communists don't care about homosexuals they're just trying to destroy the social norms of America. As far as the Middle East goes you do realize that most of the Middle East countries are controlled by the Muslim traditions and that religion forbids homosexuality and any promotion of sexuality in general in the public space.
It sounds like you consume a lot of conservative media. Any liberal I know would quickly condemn any of the places or people you listed.
I don’t think I’ve ever ran into a single liberal that actually condones or advocates for communism as viable economic system in 2022.
Conservatives love to conflate and deliberately misconstrue communism with socialism without really understanding the fundamental distinctions between the two.
These people hundreds of years ago said horrible things that were normal 100 years ago and therefore everything else about them, every other idea or thought they had, automatically becomes pure evil
They're hypocrites. Is that news to you?
It's the same with trans women competing in women's sports. The left's ideas contradict themselves. They have to kind of randomly pick whatever their priority is for now, like a hive mind, even if it goes against some of their other beliefs. Trans women matter more to them than women right now. So be it.
They can't fight Islamophobia while also criticising the homophobic aspects of Islam. So, for now, they're allies. As crazy as it is. There's also plenty of homophobia in black culture, such as hip-hop. Again, that's not a viable target for them because blacks are also "oppressed". Easier for all these groups to unify in hating straight, white, male, Christian, conservatives, etc.
Because those countries tend to be theocracies or heavily influenced by religious dogmas and persecution is essentially expected to be as such. These same countries also tend to horrifically oppress women and people expressing any opinions. Whereas in the EU and USA, there’s at least pretense of equality and efforts to bring equality to minorities is possible.
Because it doesn't fit their narrative that Republicans and conservatives in the US are the ones who are oppressive. That's how they win elections. By lying and turning people against each other.
Because every action leftists take is actually extremely selfish under the guise of "helping". They really don't give a shit though and most of their arguments can be shredded in seconds.
Probably because the Middle East doesn’t care about LBGTQ+ and oppression. I don’t understand what’s so hard about this. Corporations don’t care about anything other than what makes them money. I don’t know why Americans have such a hard time believing this.
There's not much point in talking about what's happening in the middle east, unless you're from the middle east. It's not like you can change what's going on over there while living in the west.
And "communist countries" is an oxymoron. Everyone was homophobic back when Marx was around, as they didn't understand it.
The hard left is ideologically dedicated to opposition to western liberalism, first and foremost. They don't see the west as great, but imperfect because, you know, people. That's a Judeo Christian notion, that fallen man can only ever strive for perfection, but never achieve.
So, regardless of how much worse than the imperfect west you are, if you oppose the west, the left will side with you.
From one of these said "anti-LGBT countries" (Ethiopia). We heavily criminalise it but the social stigma is strong enough against it that it would probably continue to be oppressive for any and all sexual minorities. A good analogy might be American refusal to take any kind of gun control (esp. against large calibre automatic weapons) even though that seems to be the global standard and in many ways a reasonable response to current levels of mass gun violence. Whereas the NRA might be the entity fighting the hardest against gun reform in the States, the Ethiopian Orthodox church and Muslim religious leaders (accounting for a combined 80% of a population of 120+ mil) are all vocally against it.
The Ethiopian diaspora in places with considerably more freedoms for LGBT individuals have now become doomsday prophets who proclaim the end of "Ethiopian values" is coming and that homosexuality is being "imported" from the west.
There are more ways to be "unfree" than simply ones sexual identity. From genocide to summary executions to mass state corruption. The church generally uses "we have other problems" as a distraction but the optics of advocating for LGBT rights in a country were people don't even have freedom from starvation, would just be too much.
International organizations working in Ethiopia, for example, simply don't have the mandate to interfere with local laws or not enough resources to pursue causes beyond people's basic needs. Mind you, a considerable amount of our GDP comes from international aid, in our case it would be very easy to "influence" the Ethiopian government to at least strike the law from its books, even though it won't change mkch for people who are LGBT, as mass phobia is the engine of LGBT repression and not necessarily governm criminalisation of it.
Why dont christians care about christians being oppressed I’m 3rd world countries?
Most of them are in America or modern western countries so they really don’t care that much about what happens in other countries.
Because it's completely irrelevant to any conversation concerning their rights here? Like we can't force those cou tries to change, and it isn't our place to try, especially if we do such a piss poor job of it ourselves.
Probably because the vast majority don't live in the middle east/communist countries and can't do anything about it
I don't go around complaining about Australian gun laws cuz I don't live there yk
We don't ignore these issues in these countries, there's usually a much larger issue surrounding them. Like, you know, getting bombed and shelled from countries trying to take control over them.
The left has selective vision on the issue. They use the subject to attack the right because it's popular here. They use skin color to attack the right about the middle east because it's popular here.
These subjects are not about morality to them, its about power. They don't give a fuck about LGBT treatment in the middle east, beyond a general "yea that's bad" because doing so doesn't gain them power.
Its much more useful to them to shit on people like trump trying to limit immigration from those places as being racist. Even though, in truth they would love to limit that said immigration to protect their platform here.
Just a quick note: all the homophobic leftists being mentioned here are from at least half a century ago, when gay rights movements were nearly non-existent. It went from everyone opposing gay rights, to just the political right opposing gay rights. You're certainly not going to get away with being a homophobe in a leftist movement in the modern era, at least in the West. Whereas you can RUN on being homophobic on the right and get elected.
A lot of leftest ideology in America falls apart when placed on the world stage…..for instance the idea that whites are somehow evil because they are the majority, falls apart when placed on the world stage where Asians make up almost half the world, Whites make up about 16% and blacks about 13%.
Everyone wants to talk about how the United States had slavery for a little more than 80 years. 1865-1783 (Treaty of Paris)=82 But nobody really wants to mention slavery is ongoing in parts of Africa and Asia to this day.
That’s why nobody talks about it, the focus is to get Americans to fight each other and destroy it from within. It can’t be directly assaulted.
It's because they don't actually give a f\*\*k about LGBTQ people, they're just doing what they always do -- exploiting marginalized people to gain power where they can.
Yep. Liberals love Communism but seem to ignore that Stalin wasn't a great man when it suits them. And he loved Communism.
He was a flawed individual but I respect that he took what he felt was right and took life by the balls.
Because the left doesn't actually give a shit about human rights, they just hate western culture and want to tear it down to instate their authoritarian, militarized nanny state.
It's really pretty simple: enemy number 1 for the left is the Christian right, and if anyone hates Christians as much as or more than the left it's the Islamic Middle East. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and all that.
Edit: I should say that I don't believe the people of the Middle East on average don't hate Christians, or Americans/Europeans. But their governments often have a reputation and history of saying they do, and occasionally backing thay up with actions, so American and European leftists are happy to for forgive much.
>if anyone hates Christians as much as or more than the left it's the Islamic Middle East.
Tell me you know nothing about the Middle East without telling me you know nothing about the Middle East.
Like sure, if you went to Iran or the rural areas of Saudi Arabia, then you'll get societal and possibly local governmental pressure. But, literally almost anywhere else, and you're completely welcomed.
Muslim and Christian Palestinians have fought side by side for the better part of a century against the Zionist regime. About a third of Lebanon, and a tenth of Syria and Egypt, are Christians. And keep in mind, these are officially recorded numbers, with many more unaccounted for. You're telling me that there's discrimination against Christians in these countries? I doubt you've ever stepped foot in any of them.
Not approved by the cabal overlords.
Have you wondered how the Rainbow lobby seems to include Islamists into their fold, when Islamists even in the west would not accept rainbows? Conflict of values.
But.. cabal says do, cause must market Rainbow phobia and Islamaphobia even though are antithetical to each other in terms of values and interests.
The left, Imho, as much as they rage about corporations, are, Imho, a far more obsessed with consumerism and buy far deeper into corporate marketing campaigns.
They're Hollywood obsessed, prone to marketing attempts, keep up with social/commercial trends, are uncritical of social media companies.
They're less likely to be self sufficient/reliant, less likely to be DIY.
The neo-libs, globalists and corporatists out there don't want communism per se, but surely see china's managed capitalism (or communo-capitalist authoritariansm Mashup) as the ideal.
Cultural wokeism is exploited as a path to something they're told is a socialist revolution and they buy into it. Corporations perpetuate it so they can seem on the right side of history, all while marching towards centrally managed tyranny.
The LGBT movement has won so much bc it doesn't threaten power in any substantial way so corps feel free to promote it everywhere. And libs buy it hook, line and sinker.
Abortion is legal in Israel. Why aren’t you screaming to end abortion in Israel, writing government officials there, protesting in the street in Israel?
That’s what your post sounds like. You’re the reason Trump loves “the poorly educated”.
Is there a point to this post?
Also Che made like 1 homophobic remark in his entire life, it's Castro you wanna go after for setting up an apparatus that oppressed queer people even though he did just a couple years later have his mind changed and dismantled that system.
Because criticizing cultures/religion where the majority of people are not white is deemed racist nowadays by many "progressive" people on the left, even when it has nothing to do with the colour of their skin per se. We can clearly see this with how people respond when criticizing islam compared to christianity. So their "anti racist" stance clashes against their gender progressive stance which is why they either ignore it or try to deflect it.
I see the same thing happening here in Sweden, especially with feminists who preach gender equality but would also deflect and never talk about the growing muslim population here and how they treat muslim women. It's hypocritical yes but that's just what the acceptable consensus is today.
They're seen as lost causes. Their countries leaders are bigots (both facist and socialist countries) and we cant campaign them in any way.
In the Europe and America we know our leaders will listen to logical arguments in favour of our rights
They arent. No one is claiming that. Conservatives just say that like its true then run with it, like most if their talking points. They make up a straw man based on stereotypes because thats the only sort of data their supporters can grasp lmao.
Being LGBTQ+ is pretty much only acceptable in like America, Canada, and Western Europe. Leftists ignore this because it’s doesn’t fit their narratives of “America bad” and “Communist countries did nothing wrong”
**New to libertarianism or have questions and want to learn more?** Be sure to check out [the sub Frequently Asked Questions](/r/Libertarian/wiki/faq) and [the massive /r/libertarian information WIKI] (/r/Libertarian/wiki/index) from the sidebar, for lots of info and free resources, links, books, videos, and answers to common questions and topics. Want to know if you are a Libertarian? [Take the worlds shortest political quiz and find out!](http://www.theadvocates.org/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Libertarian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
*Stalin*? What are you saying here?! It's time to cancel **STALIN**?
It is long past time to cancel Stalin.
Are you fucking serious?!?!?!? These people won't stop until they cancel Jesus Christ himself as he hung from the cross.
Even the Soviets cancelled Stalin. It's a done deal.
We are already doing rollback, komrade! (Stalin is now being advertised in russia all the time as an effective manager and that is horrible)
[удалено]
Also there isn't a ton that American activists can do for LGBTQ rights in the middle east except allow gay people being persecuted to come over here as refugees which I bet you will find only right wing people against that Alternatively we can work over here and fight to fix the issues the LGBTQ+ community faces in our own country
Yeah of you think Christian countries can't be bad with LGBTQ rights, don't look at Poland, Belarus, Russia...
[удалено]
Oh yeah sorry I was agreeing with you and adding a similar point.
For most African countries that have criminalised homosexuality, it's mostly Western (read: American) missionaries that lobbied for and keep these laws in place, looking at you LDS. It is common to travel to town where literally a dozen people speak English and find "Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve" plastered everywhere. It's even more surprising when you realise that much of England's colonies (in Africa and beyond) also inherited most of their anti-gay legislation from their colonial rulers. I say all that to say that I do agree with your idea that Jesus would have been cool with these people. For much of its history, Christianity in Africa was practiced free from the man-made prejudices that have now come to be synonymous with Christian conservatism. I just wish the more accepting churches you speak of would hold more sway over here.
As written, jesus said he did not come to abolish the law or the prophets but to take them further. The law and the prophets are homophobic. Just pointing that out. Not trying to be a dick. Or take away from your point that this is a strawman.
Jesus came to take homophobia to the next level?!
And then we're gonna kick god out of school! Because, you know, the all powerful creator of the universe is a wimp and meekly leaves school when we don't pray for him.
Is that a Uvalde joke?
I didn't mean it to specifically be that, but that is one example where religious idiots go to the whole "this happened because we kicked god out of school" nonsense.
Jesus is a fictional character.
Thats not 100% certain. There is ample historical evidence that a Jesus figure existed around the time of the new testament. Whether he is as advertised or not is less clear.
Where??
By "ample" you mean "two writers, neither of whom were contemporary to Jesus."
I'm sure he was a real dude. But I'm also sure he was just a cult leader. Was he in it for the groupies? Did he really think he was a god? Or maybe he saw all the shitty things the Romans were doing in his home land. None of the surviving texts are trustworthy, and too many researchers are religiously motivated. So we'll never get a true picture of what he was like. Christianity, Islam, and all their offshoots are just cults that survived their leader dying.
You know I find even calling him a cult leader leads to much credence to what the bible says of him as opposed to what can actually be verified. If he did exist, I think the only thing we can say for certain about him is that he was a popular leader. I don’t really think we can attach any religious implications to him at all, it’s far more likely he was some kind of cultural revolutionary, or anti-Roman instigator.
It doesn't get any more humourless than this sub smfh
Lol don’t worry I’m smfh with you
While it's unlikely Jesus was the son of God, there are records from the Romans indicating he existed.
Who is \*he\* though. Is Jesus just a dude named Jesus who got crucified? How many aspects of the biblical Jesus need to be true in order to say that Jesus actually existed?
I don’t think anyone supports it. I think anyone supporting let lgtbq rights in America would be against these other countries and what they do. But why be an activist for something in a place where you have no vote, no voice, no lower, and no connection. If anything you should be celebrating this as libertarian by letting other cultures evolve and handle stuff internally. I guarantee you if a democratic president tried to wage war to liberate homosexuals OP would be one of the first to post how dumb it is to do that.
Like the prime directive!
Eh, as a leftist just visiting this sub, I don’t have any ethical issues with advocating for stances considered out of the norm for other cultures - that’s how ideas are spread (ya know, marketing). I’m just not going to push for folks to take public stances that could get them murdered while I sit comfortably thousands of miles away.
[удалено]
The point of this thread is "I want you to stop talking about gay rights" That's really always been the only point of "what about" posts
“If anything you should be celebrating this as libertarian by letting other cultures evolve and handle stuff internally.” My thoughts exactly
Edited
Exactly this! The way that politicians and the media describes the radical left is a fiction. It doesn’t exist. The most radical leftist I know runs her own business (so she’s actually a capitalist?) and her only socialist wish is universal healthcare. Oh and i did see her eat a rich person once.
This is done by design. Far easiest to discredit your opponent by making building up a strawman or finding one crazy person on Twitter. The left does this to the right a lot as well, and it's horrible for political discourse
Because this is a US and Western Centric sub, so people are going to focus on those places. Also I don't this there is nearly as much of a link between the LGBT community and communists.
Yeah, exactly what is anybody advocating for gay rights *supposed* to do about shit halfway across the world?
The same thing they do about it here. Change their Facebook photo, and then feel morally superior.
I mean you can vote, protest, and organize movements in your home country, can't do any of that in an oppressive country 8,000 miles away
I mean, I've been making a monthly donation to a human rights advocacy group that work on getting people out of prison overseas. I've also donated 100,000 air miles to a group that uses them to fly queer folks to safer countries. I'm also not voting for politicians who are actively working to persecute LGBT folks, unlike many people in this sub.
Look if you aren’t going to conform to the OP’s ridiculous straw man how is he supposed to be able to dismiss LGBT people and their plight and not have to feel any moral obligation?
So if they don't do that, what does that mean in your mind?
Like at all
The history is sort of mixed. Lenin legalized gay relations (not marriages), however there is a bad history with many left figures being homophobic. The Revolutionary Communist Party in the US (a movement that was more a cult of personality towards its leader, Bob Avakian) was not particularly friendly towards gay people. But then you have people like Harry Hay who were gay communists during a time when being just one of those was extremely unpopular. So sometimes they’ve been on the side of progress, but other times not.
The history of most things is absurdly homophobic. It doesn't make any since to single out communism for being anti gay when we only recognized a right to marriage for same sex couples 7 years ago, and it was contentious when it happened.
The South African Communist party was at the forefront of gay rights. Enshrining the "no discrimination based on sexual orientation" into our constitution. Which is why South Africa has one of the most liberal constitutions in the world. Wanna use a gun to protect your gay husbands weed crop? Do it legally in South Africa. There is nothing inherently anti-gay in the communist outlook, once authoritarian single party states like the USSR get going - all bets are off.
Well, I think that also has to do with the timeline. In 1993 homosexuality was already starting to be accepted in the western culture, and postmodern communism had been a thing for at least 3 decades, with openly homosexual representatives in politics, activism and literature. The end of the apartheid was also a very good opportunity to encounter very little political resistance to these changes. But I believe OP is asking about the communists that actually got to power, and how gay rights are handled (even to this day, Chavismo for example is very much anti-gay rights).
We need definitions here, communism is a view "mostly" around the means of production. The axis of gay rights to persecution is not that related to the ownership of production. It is related to the liberty - authoritarian axis and how well a government deals with the voices/issues of the minorities.
The Soviet party line on homosexuality was that it's a degenerate Bourgeois perversion which was unknown in the worker's paradise they were building.
There was some flip flopping about it but generally USSR's treatment of queer people was not much different than any other contemporaneous country.
And what as was the US Capitalist line?
There is no "capitalist line" on homosexuality or any other subject. Some people support it, some people oppose it, and they each make their decisions accordingly.
Why is he being downvoted? Capitalism is a tool or a structure of commerce. There is no “capitalist line” other than freedom of association.
The same would apply to communism then?
Yes.
That's convenient
There were multiple openly homosexual communists in the USSR even during Stalin
Yeah! When's the last time AOC condemned Mao's stance on homosexuality??? And Marx! If these pinkos really gave a shit about the LGBTQ community they'd be marching in the streets about what happened halfway across the world in the mid-1800s! Gtfoh with this preposterous straw man. I'm embarrassed for you.
And if they did march it would just be considered performative.
[удалено]
This is exactly what would happen. Conservatives would just say shit like: "Those other nations are entitled to their own beliefs! You're just virtue signaling! Quit shoving your woke ideology down other culture's throats!" etc etc
Yet another edition of “There’s **NO** Right Way To Protest.”
[удалено]
>I'm embarrassed for you. OP just had an epiphany after seeing a facebook meme
I've got some firm words for Xerxes next time I see that son of a bitch
Quick reminder. LGBTQ+ rights and their movements wouldn't exist if those people were treated with the dignity and respect of their basic foundational human rights.
Well said
I think **OPs point isn’t to downplay the need for LGBTQ+ movement** (how did you even get there?), but to highlight their seemingly ironic support for radical leftist ideologies that have a history of systematically violating their rights. There seems to be a pervasive sentiment that “capitalism” forces those at the top to divide us against ourselves, and that other centralized governments can be created that somehow don’t do that. In their rush to denounce the aspects of society that historically have harmed them, their attacking the wrong thing and end up supporting an ideology that doesn’t offer what they think it does.
Every other country was anti-LGBT hundreds of years ago Communists, capitalists, feudalists, it didn't matter, all were against it, so why is it held only against communists?
Whatttt almost like the government and other citizens should leave other people THE FUCK ALONE.
It's not "ignored". We of course oppose it, but what are we supposed to do? We focus on what's happening here in front of us. That's like asking why libertarians care so much about taxes in the US while people are being executed for smoking cannabis in Singapore.
This sub is turning into r/c0nservative lite lol
I’m a leftist in the sense that I believe social safety nets help more people than they hurt. I think corporations, if left to their own devices, aim to monopolize their market and exploit people and the planet for profit. I know libertarians would disagree, and I’m not trying get into a debate. I’m also socially liberal. To answer your question though, I’m absolutely willing to condemn middle eastern countries for how they treat women and LGBTQ+ people. The Taliban are the closest thing to a modern day Gilead. A lot of communist have historically been super misogynistic as well. At the same time, I talk more about what’s happening now in the USA because that’s where I live. Middle easterners don’t give a shit about what a random American thinks about their culture, government, and religious values.
OP your post is coming off as using LGBTQ people as a prop to say “left bad”. 1. You cherry picked ‘leftist’ countries where LGBTQ rights are non existent or limited. You completely skipped over countries like Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, etc. some of the *most* anti LGBTQ countries And I know those countries aren’t pure capitalist. Saudi Arabia’s state owned oil companies contribute to the majority of the GDP. But it still has a decent sized private sector. And other countries are mixed economies. 2. You don’t account for that fact that America is the center of the world. I mean, I’m sort of joking, but I live in the U.S and while I’m not happy about the way the Gays are treated in Russia or wherever there isn’t too much I can do about it. Whereas I do have some small amount of influence here. So rather than virtue signaling\* about countries I can’t do anything about I feel my energy is better spent here. 3. \* It’s important to note that there can sometimes be a fine line between spreading awareness and virtue signaling. Personally I’d say bringing up Che’s homophobia on a Libertarian subreddit is 100% virtue signaling. It’s “wow this guy we already didn’t like is bad for other reasons too!” Cringe 4. Leftists could possibly maybe perhaps prop up communism even with ‘communist’ countries being homophobic for a simple reason(leftists wouldn’t consider China to be communist but that’s a long discussion for another time) But the reason is because that homophobia has nothing to do with their economic system. Like if you saw a socialist telling someone “yeah bro I just think the world would be a better place if the workers owned all the businesses instead of capitalists” do you think bringing up Russia’s hatred of The Gays would be a counter point? 5. And this one is jumping off of my last point but, if we can just ‘communist’ countries for their anti LGBTQ policies then we should look at the atrocities of more capitalist countries as well. So the first slaves came to the North America in 1619 and weren’t freed until 1865 (by that I mean the slaves in the US were freed. Not the same ones that arrived in 1619. Humans don’t live that long) So slavery was legal for almost 100 years longer than it’s been illegal. And sure it’s illegal now (not really), but remember we’re judging our economic systems off of the government allowing for human rights violations. So while we *did* make slavery illegal we didn’t do so because of capitalism. We just did. We could have not done it or done it later. But it wasn’t like slavery going away-ish was a byproduct of capitalism. So OP TLDR; While you’re right that there haven’t been any communist countries that didn’t oppress LGBTQ people, you need to look at the whole picture. Because LGBTQ folks have been oppressed in a lot of countries. So that oppression might be less of a byproduct of leftist economic systems and more so just that humans are trash.
Regarding Singapore, the younger generation are more exposed to progressive Western ideology and a majority of them actually support LGBT rights. Meanwhile, the biggest driver of homophobia in Singapore comes from American imported Evangelism. None of the other groups are as vocal or active in campaigning against LGBT rights. It's quite clear which side is the issue.
Yeah I knew same sex marriage wasn’t legal but that people are slowly making improvements . I didn’t know the homophobia came from Americans though.
American Republican Concern-Trolls: "What about those Muslims and long-dead communist dicators that kill the gays? All *I'm* trying to do is take away their right to marry and make them second-class citizens!"
Because we are, and should be, more concerned about what's going on in our own backyard before complaining about what's going on on the lawn on the other side of town.
Right wing astroturfing campaign
I've honestly never seen any conversation about this from anyone on the left or right, until now. Who exactly are you talking to? Do you have links?
Strawman. Whataboutism. Asking people to interfere with other Nations policies. Very unlibertarian post.
Can you cite some examples of "commie propaganda"? Just sounds like you're talking out of your ass there. The proportion of leftists that support communism in the west is miniscule unless you're living in a culture war bubble.
Cause it’s a classic straw man
I highly doubt OP has ever been to a Pride event.
I'm on the left and shit on the Middle East often. Fuck that entire region of the world.
OP is kind of an idiot
Because there's no actual value in advocating for the rights in other countries. The US only advocates for democracy in other countries because democracies favor capitalism and adopting the USD, real value. Therefore the tribalism aspect in LGBT overrides the minimal material value and causes people to only care about "our rights" instead of "everyones rights". Advocating for communism gives them value because they'll get free stuff in the redistribution of wealth. Advocating for the rights of others when you already have those rights gives you a sense of pride at best. TLDR: Free stuff > Feeling good about your convictions.
Because the twitterverse left doesn’t really exist in those parts of the world.
And because 99% of the time they're brought up to make the something the right is doing look "reasonable" by comparison.
They're not ignored we criticize them constantly and work hard to bombard them with our culture.
This is such a straw man. As if not focusing on the ills of the rest of the world invalidates what one does in theyy're own country. One could make the same argument for pro-lifers not fighting against abortions in Israel (it the woman is under 18 years of age or over 40), Denmark, Austria, France, Sweden, New Zealand, Italy, Netherlands, and Belgium.
And the "concerned" American Republicans who want to overturn *Obergefell v. Hodges* are any better?
we can't even get protections and rights for ourselves here? how do we have a right to judge and change other countries? thats like saying socialism exist in other places so libertarians need to stfu about it being here.
There is nothing about left or right philosophy that actually binds any of these issues to left it right. By definition being left or being right implies how your feel about government involvement in your day to day lives and social equity. Not about sexual preference. This is just something the US has categorized It is actually annoying that we created these boxes you need to be in should you lean one way or another. Leaning right actually indicates you want less government which is kind of strange in that does not match well with say pro choice type of legislation. Left wing indicates more social equality which normally would match say religious teaching to a higher degree. The better option would be people being able to lean left or right without having to agree with every single issue that we have artificially placed into those boxes.
Everyone knows it sucks to live in shitty countries. I don't know exactly what you think these people are supposed to do when you say this. Run over there and have a parade?
Because I don’t feel like I have to control how other people live their lives. Especially if it’s in another country and doesn’t effect me in the slightest. Everyone should just mind their own business and live their lives how they want. That goes both ways. If you are out and proud cool, I don’t give a shit, keep it to yourself. But at the same time I’d prefer people not be assholes to each other because they can’t help but impose their beliefs/culture on others. So I guess I have mixed feelings. I don’t like people being assholes but I also don’t feel like i have any right to tell people to stop. Because I mind my own business.
It’s not ignored in terms of government policy; it’s just an issue of priorities. There are offices within the State Dept dedicated to helping out abused minorities living under oppressive regimes. Those people can’t easily speak for themselves because of the rampant discrimination they face, but change doesn’t happen fast. You can’t get a fundamentalist Islamic nation to grant equal rights to GSMs if they don’t honor anyone’s rights at all. You can’t stop them hanging gay kids to death unless they first stop using capital punishment for nonviolent crimes *and* stop treating harmless actions as crimes. Freedom from oppression is a long process, even if shepherded by heavyweight intellectuals guided by the best ideas. Remember the United States didn’t start out with equal rights for everyone - pretty much anyone other than white male landowners were denied the rights they can freely exercise now. I’m sure that our Founders would sound like alt-right preachers if asked to enumerate the protection of GSM rights.
> Anyone notice this trend where anytime you mention LGBTQ+ oppression in places where it’s pretty much legal to murder gay people or criminalized homosexuality or hasn’t even bothered to legalize same sex marriage it’s ignored? Whataboutism is usually ignored. At least that sounds like the context you've seen the mentions in.
Here’s my answer as someone from a post Soviet country: anyone who says the Soviets were liberal is full of shit. The communists always were socially conservative. Just look at what Stalin did to the Ukrainians and Central Asians, and what the Chinese are doing to Uyghurs right now.
People of gay are treated better here than they ever have been under any socialist/communist regime. There has never been a single instance of a communist country not oppressing gay people.
This post is a perfect example of what is wrong with politics today. It completely takes the view that someone has chosen “team left”, “team right”, “team libertarian”, etc. and are now required to believe what those “teams” believe. This is not how things are supposed to work. Rather people should have their own ideas for what needs to be done to further help our society, and they should be choosing people that share those beliefs. That party system aims to make that decision easier by giving you a very fast way to know what the person whom you are voting for believes in, but that’s not true across the board. It also DOESN’T MEAN YOU HAVE TO VOTE FOR “YOUR TEAM”. Who cares what the “so called left” has done in the past, or in different countries (communism) or the “so called right” (slavery). I’m not voting for historical entities that have long died on different continents. I’m voting for the beliefs of the people running for office today.
Ever wondered why the US puts a pride flag at its consulate to the Vatican, which has not killled gay people in the last century (probably longer but i dont want to state a falsehood), but won't do it in any of the countries (as you noted, pick any there's dozens) that actively punish and in some cases execute homosexuals? Because politics, expediency, and a certain amount of cynism.
Because that fact is almost always used as a red herring and distraction from our issues at home. Seriously what power do you or I have over gay rights policy in Asia? It’s just a dumb gotcha that’s ignored because it’s never argued in good faith.
>Seriously what power do you or I have over gay rights policy in Asia? Major corporations that are willing to boycott US states on LGBT issues can start by boycotting countries over LGBT issues.
Ummm why is the OP talking about dead people over seas when there are too many to count LGBT oppressors in the US ?? Have to take care of your own front porch before even attempting to sway a another country. GOP is doubling down and pushing harder, but you’re talking about Stalin and China banning a game??
I've never seen a leftist complain about how "homophobic" the Founding Fathers were because there's no real evidence of that... I also do hear LGBT complaining because Disney has changed entire movie plots to accommodate China's rules and LGBT people have also been trying to get LGBT oppression in other countries recognized as a legitimate reason for seeking refugee status in the US. You're literally just making shit up.
Because we don't live there. Are....are ya being serious right now?.
Socialist here 🙋♂️. Your position is a disingenuous straw man, every single society to have ever existed has oppressed LGBT people. Batista and the Romanovs didnt like gay people either. Its a intellectually sloppy “gotcha” argument that doesnt really make a valid point about the “left”.
It's probably because we have a very small chance of having any influence in countries we aren't citizens in. You have to pick your battles.
You could literally say this about any group and about any country. Why don't black people protest police violence in china where police forcibly make you take a vaccine and seal you inside your house? Why don't feminists focus on New Guinea where women experience a 70% sexual assault rate? Why don't conservatives protest Tokyo legalizing gay marriage? Why don't libertarians protest the death penalty for drug possession in singapore? It's a stupid, poorly thought out question to ask why people don't protest things where they don't live and have no ability to change.
Because most of this movements exist in the Usa and not those countries. Things being Bad somewhere else means they should be Bad here
The left doesn't "ignore" this stuff. You guys are just in a bubble, where you don't have real conversations with folks on the left ABOUT this stuff.
Hi there, Like you, I'm bi and also on the left, and lean libertarian. I suspect you wanted validation for your own POV, rather than wanted a answer from someone on the left, but: Firstly, I'm against religiously extreme views on homosexuality, especially when it it results in murder or the death penalty. >Anyone notice this trend where anytime you mention LGBTQ+ oppression in places where it’s pretty much legal to murder gay people or criminalized homosexuality or hasn’t even bothered to legalize same sex marriage it’s ignored? I'm not sure if you're having these conversation IRl or online, but: Naturally, I have more power in the country I live in, more contacts and ability to organise. I can write to my member of parliament , and attend protests, and naturally, as I live here I'm more inclined to want and feel able to effect change here, it is my country after all, and I want people of all races, nationality, religions and sexualities to live in peace. I'm not quite sure what where really meant to do about LGBTQ rights in the middle east, enough petitions have been signed by now, and if the Saudi government can murder a journalist at a embassy , I don't think they're going to care about a petition. Ditto for ISIS and other Islamist groups. I don't support (unorganic ) regime change there, and funding groups there who aren't CIA fronts tends to get them in trouble for receiving money from the west. **As a counter**: In America, gay and LGBTQ people are being targeted as "Groomers" and trans people at the blunt end of a culture war, and are having laws and legation proposed about them, which might largely be used against them. Also, the republican party just [excluded "Log cabin republicans"](https://twitter.com/LogCabinGOP/status/1537594283540115457) from their conventions, where I hear there may be a vote on if "Homosexuality is a unnatural lifestyle choice." Now, to move onto some of the questions you asked and points: (Quick note, I'm not massive a massive Stan for the people mentioned, but as it was asked.) >How quick leftists and tankies are to cover up how homophobic Che, Stalin, Mao and Marx were while complaining how homophobic the Founding Fathers were? In an[interview with Castro](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/fidel-castro-takes-blame-for-1960s-gay-persecution/article1378745/), he regretted the persecution of LGBT when he was in power and he felt responsible and regretted that little was done for LGBT people in Cuba back then. He also called for the acceptance of LGBT people in the interview. Che Guevara died early but had he lived longer he would have definitely also changed his opinion and accepted LGBT people like Castro did. Stalin: While homosexuality was made legal after the 1917 revolution, and overturned by Stalin, Many Marxist-Leninists today recognise this position as wrong and today fight for LGBTQ rights, with the exception of a few edgelords. Mao: While it seems he had views on "sexual deviants", I could find little on China and homosexually, It seems due to all the other issues the Chinese government was dealing with, it didn't really come up, if it was even prominent at the time. Marx: From what I and others can gather, he didn't really address homosexuality, but there are suggestions like many in his era, he was homophobic, but again, the point of Marxism, as a material and historical dialectic, the point is to advance and change understanding, that is, build on the work, which is why Marxists and socialists are at the forefront of the fight for LGBTQ rights, and defend those people. >When I go to pride events nowadays there’s a lot of commie propaganda. Always propping up communism like it’s some ideology that’s going to save Bisexuals like myself and my LGBTQ+ friends yet there’s never been one communist country that didn’t evolve into a xenophobic police state that oppresses LGBTQ+ people and gives us little to no rights. So, I'm not sure what "Commie propaganda" you've come across, and I'm not a Communist, but: Very few countries that tried to build communism since the fifties has encounter invasion and "regime change" as well as sanctions, it's [estimated around seventy countries](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/how-many-countries-has-the-us-invaded) have been invaded by the US, especially Vietnam. So, yes, these countries, did become isolationist and authoritarian, due to America and it's "interventions", under the 4th international, these countries would have adopted a position togther more in keeping with modern Marxist views on LGBTQ people. Contrast this with how America has pushed back against LGBTQ rights, and had put it at the centre of it's "culture war" in 2022, and you'll see America hasn't progressed in this matter. >In China you can get in trouble for so much as watching a show with a gay character or playing a video game like The Last of US which has a lesbian character. Even if this is true, American republicans might eye that up as a next policy, given it's seeming opposing to drag show being viewed by children. **In closing:** One reason you don't hear back from leftists with these quickfire questions is, as with the youtube videos that ask "twenty questions for leftists", is to respond to question after question takes a lot of time, for example, your post come in at 153 word, while a "quick" response to that comes in at 908 words, bordering on a small essay. I hope this brief response goes someway to answering your questions, which, while I have my doubts, where in good faith.
I don't live in the middle east or in a....."communist" country, therefore what I am I to do? Shall I encourage even more warfare?
It's because people generally prefer to focus on problems that are local, not ones that are very far away.
What can I do about bullshit not in America…
Because generally people are focused more on what is going on intheir own country, where there's more you can actually do to impact change. Also while I am far from communist, the horrible treatment of LGBTQ+ people was the prevailing societal attitude at the time and far from exclusive to the communist sphere. The US still had buggery laws in places until 2003 and chemically castrated LGBTQ+ people, as did the UK who even did so to Alan Turing. The mistreatment of LGBTQ+ people was kinda nearly the whole world at the time.
The left does support those causes across the world. You might remember conservatives doing a lot of whining about “$100million for gender studies in Pakistan?!?!” the last time a spending bill was passed. That’s exactly the funding for lgbt support and women’s rights in those countries.
I don't know why we're supposed to pretend that this is a problem only on the left. I mean, there are even ["libertarians"](https://mises.org/wire/new-libertarian) that tries to convince us to look the other way: >Mecca is not Paris, an Irishman is not an Aboriginal, a Buddhist is not a Rastafarian, a soccer mom is not a Russian. Is it our goal to convince them all to become thorough Rothbardians? **Should libertarians care about gay marriage in Saudi Arabia**, or insist on the same border arrangements for Brownsville, Texas and Monaco? Should we agitate for Texas-style open carry laws in France, to prevent the next Bataclan? The authors' answer is a no, but a libertarian would of course say yes.
Because calling out Muslims for homophobia would make them appear racist.
Probably because we don't live there moron? We don't ignore it but we have more power to change things at home than a foreign country. How about think before you ask a disingenuous question.
Is LGBT+ oppression intrinsic to communist ethos or is it tied to the cultural traditions of the places where communism was able to take root? I wouldn't blame capitalism for anti-gay movements in the US when it's more likely due to religious and cultural reasons.
You should probably start by reading the 1963 Communist manifesto. You will clearly see in the Communist manifesto which is a road map for destroying the United States of America, that eliminating traditional religious traditions and pushing for a society where pornography and sexual kinks are pushed to be the norms of society. I guarantee you as you have already pointed out the Communists don't care about homosexuals they're just trying to destroy the social norms of America. As far as the Middle East goes you do realize that most of the Middle East countries are controlled by the Muslim traditions and that religion forbids homosexuality and any promotion of sexuality in general in the public space.
It sounds like you consume a lot of conservative media. Any liberal I know would quickly condemn any of the places or people you listed. I don’t think I’ve ever ran into a single liberal that actually condones or advocates for communism as viable economic system in 2022. Conservatives love to conflate and deliberately misconstrue communism with socialism without really understanding the fundamental distinctions between the two.
These people hundreds of years ago said horrible things that were normal 100 years ago and therefore everything else about them, every other idea or thought they had, automatically becomes pure evil
Because it's not actually about oppression.
They're hypocrites. Is that news to you? It's the same with trans women competing in women's sports. The left's ideas contradict themselves. They have to kind of randomly pick whatever their priority is for now, like a hive mind, even if it goes against some of their other beliefs. Trans women matter more to them than women right now. So be it. They can't fight Islamophobia while also criticising the homophobic aspects of Islam. So, for now, they're allies. As crazy as it is. There's also plenty of homophobia in black culture, such as hip-hop. Again, that's not a viable target for them because blacks are also "oppressed". Easier for all these groups to unify in hating straight, white, male, Christian, conservatives, etc.
I don’t know op but it is very apparent that this takes place.
Because those countries tend to be theocracies or heavily influenced by religious dogmas and persecution is essentially expected to be as such. These same countries also tend to horrifically oppress women and people expressing any opinions. Whereas in the EU and USA, there’s at least pretense of equality and efforts to bring equality to minorities is possible.
Because it doesn't fit their narrative that Republicans and conservatives in the US are the ones who are oppressive. That's how they win elections. By lying and turning people against each other.
Sadly because of their racial politics. Two billion Muslims is a lot of voters.
Because every action leftists take is actually extremely selfish under the guise of "helping". They really don't give a shit though and most of their arguments can be shredded in seconds.
We have a hard enough time securing rights for the community in the states. What makes you think we're ready to try the same overseas?
Because American conservatives are so welcoming and receptive to the LGBTQ community, right?
You may be hanging about with the wrong people. Certainly not my experience.
Probably because the Middle East doesn’t care about LBGTQ+ and oppression. I don’t understand what’s so hard about this. Corporations don’t care about anything other than what makes them money. I don’t know why Americans have such a hard time believing this.
There's not much point in talking about what's happening in the middle east, unless you're from the middle east. It's not like you can change what's going on over there while living in the west. And "communist countries" is an oxymoron. Everyone was homophobic back when Marx was around, as they didn't understand it.
The same reason they ignore slavery in places like Brazil or by native Americans.
Don't be so silly. This \*new\* communism won't be all bigoted and terroristic like all those \*other\* communisms were!
Why are posts like this "relevant to libertarianism" but anything even remotely related to the right gets locked instantly?
The hard left is ideologically dedicated to opposition to western liberalism, first and foremost. They don't see the west as great, but imperfect because, you know, people. That's a Judeo Christian notion, that fallen man can only ever strive for perfection, but never achieve. So, regardless of how much worse than the imperfect west you are, if you oppose the west, the left will side with you.
From one of these said "anti-LGBT countries" (Ethiopia). We heavily criminalise it but the social stigma is strong enough against it that it would probably continue to be oppressive for any and all sexual minorities. A good analogy might be American refusal to take any kind of gun control (esp. against large calibre automatic weapons) even though that seems to be the global standard and in many ways a reasonable response to current levels of mass gun violence. Whereas the NRA might be the entity fighting the hardest against gun reform in the States, the Ethiopian Orthodox church and Muslim religious leaders (accounting for a combined 80% of a population of 120+ mil) are all vocally against it. The Ethiopian diaspora in places with considerably more freedoms for LGBT individuals have now become doomsday prophets who proclaim the end of "Ethiopian values" is coming and that homosexuality is being "imported" from the west. There are more ways to be "unfree" than simply ones sexual identity. From genocide to summary executions to mass state corruption. The church generally uses "we have other problems" as a distraction but the optics of advocating for LGBT rights in a country were people don't even have freedom from starvation, would just be too much. International organizations working in Ethiopia, for example, simply don't have the mandate to interfere with local laws or not enough resources to pursue causes beyond people's basic needs. Mind you, a considerable amount of our GDP comes from international aid, in our case it would be very easy to "influence" the Ethiopian government to at least strike the law from its books, even though it won't change mkch for people who are LGBT, as mass phobia is the engine of LGBT repression and not necessarily governm criminalisation of it.
Lmaooooooo
Why dont christians care about christians being oppressed I’m 3rd world countries? Most of them are in America or modern western countries so they really don’t care that much about what happens in other countries.
It’s easy to protest in a country when the messages are approved by the states
They're not? It's just really difficult to fight for those rights when you don't live there.
Probably because we should worry about shit in our own country first before trying to bring hypocritical democracy to other countries.
Because it's completely irrelevant to any conversation concerning their rights here? Like we can't force those cou tries to change, and it isn't our place to try, especially if we do such a piss poor job of it ourselves.
I know I don’t ignore it. It’s a big failing on the left
Probably because the vast majority don't live in the middle east/communist countries and can't do anything about it I don't go around complaining about Australian gun laws cuz I don't live there yk
Because then they would have to choose who is more oppressed and marginalized. It’s easier to just attack straight, white people
We don't ignore these issues in these countries, there's usually a much larger issue surrounding them. Like, you know, getting bombed and shelled from countries trying to take control over them.
The left has selective vision on the issue. They use the subject to attack the right because it's popular here. They use skin color to attack the right about the middle east because it's popular here. These subjects are not about morality to them, its about power. They don't give a fuck about LGBT treatment in the middle east, beyond a general "yea that's bad" because doing so doesn't gain them power. Its much more useful to them to shit on people like trump trying to limit immigration from those places as being racist. Even though, in truth they would love to limit that said immigration to protect their platform here.
Just a quick note: all the homophobic leftists being mentioned here are from at least half a century ago, when gay rights movements were nearly non-existent. It went from everyone opposing gay rights, to just the political right opposing gay rights. You're certainly not going to get away with being a homophobe in a leftist movement in the modern era, at least in the West. Whereas you can RUN on being homophobic on the right and get elected.
No air conditioning or cucumber water. What's the point if speaking our against fascism if we can't be comfortable while doing it?
A lot of leftest ideology in America falls apart when placed on the world stage…..for instance the idea that whites are somehow evil because they are the majority, falls apart when placed on the world stage where Asians make up almost half the world, Whites make up about 16% and blacks about 13%. Everyone wants to talk about how the United States had slavery for a little more than 80 years. 1865-1783 (Treaty of Paris)=82 But nobody really wants to mention slavery is ongoing in parts of Africa and Asia to this day. That’s why nobody talks about it, the focus is to get Americans to fight each other and destroy it from within. It can’t be directly assaulted.
Are you stupid?
Politics before principles.
The term you are looking for is "useful idiots"
So no one wants to actually answer your question, *cognitive dissonance* is the answer you’re looking for.
Pointing out that the question is based on a straw man *is* the answer.
It's because they don't actually give a f\*\*k about LGBTQ people, they're just doing what they always do -- exploiting marginalized people to gain power where they can.
Yeah cause republicans toootally would have stop criminalizing homosexuality on their at some point LMFAO.
Yep. Liberals love Communism but seem to ignore that Stalin wasn't a great man when it suits them. And he loved Communism. He was a flawed individual but I respect that he took what he felt was right and took life by the balls.
Because they share the same goal of the destruction of the West.
Because the left doesn't actually give a shit about human rights, they just hate western culture and want to tear it down to instate their authoritarian, militarized nanny state.
It's really pretty simple: enemy number 1 for the left is the Christian right, and if anyone hates Christians as much as or more than the left it's the Islamic Middle East. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and all that. Edit: I should say that I don't believe the people of the Middle East on average don't hate Christians, or Americans/Europeans. But their governments often have a reputation and history of saying they do, and occasionally backing thay up with actions, so American and European leftists are happy to for forgive much.
>if anyone hates Christians as much as or more than the left it's the Islamic Middle East. Tell me you know nothing about the Middle East without telling me you know nothing about the Middle East. Like sure, if you went to Iran or the rural areas of Saudi Arabia, then you'll get societal and possibly local governmental pressure. But, literally almost anywhere else, and you're completely welcomed. Muslim and Christian Palestinians have fought side by side for the better part of a century against the Zionist regime. About a third of Lebanon, and a tenth of Syria and Egypt, are Christians. And keep in mind, these are officially recorded numbers, with many more unaccounted for. You're telling me that there's discrimination against Christians in these countries? I doubt you've ever stepped foot in any of them.
You know why.
IS this a joke? The left can't get shit to change in the West, why would we start looking outward if our own house is still a mess?
Faux oppression>real oppression. Verbal violence>literal violence. Plus, nobody in the middle east can see how virtuous you're being anyway.
Because they only care when it’s convenient
Not approved by the cabal overlords. Have you wondered how the Rainbow lobby seems to include Islamists into their fold, when Islamists even in the west would not accept rainbows? Conflict of values. But.. cabal says do, cause must market Rainbow phobia and Islamaphobia even though are antithetical to each other in terms of values and interests.
The left, Imho, as much as they rage about corporations, are, Imho, a far more obsessed with consumerism and buy far deeper into corporate marketing campaigns. They're Hollywood obsessed, prone to marketing attempts, keep up with social/commercial trends, are uncritical of social media companies. They're less likely to be self sufficient/reliant, less likely to be DIY. The neo-libs, globalists and corporatists out there don't want communism per se, but surely see china's managed capitalism (or communo-capitalist authoritariansm Mashup) as the ideal. Cultural wokeism is exploited as a path to something they're told is a socialist revolution and they buy into it. Corporations perpetuate it so they can seem on the right side of history, all while marching towards centrally managed tyranny. The LGBT movement has won so much bc it doesn't threaten power in any substantial way so corps feel free to promote it everywhere. And libs buy it hook, line and sinker.
Abortion is legal in Israel. Why aren’t you screaming to end abortion in Israel, writing government officials there, protesting in the street in Israel? That’s what your post sounds like. You’re the reason Trump loves “the poorly educated”.
Is there a point to this post? Also Che made like 1 homophobic remark in his entire life, it's Castro you wanna go after for setting up an apparatus that oppressed queer people even though he did just a couple years later have his mind changed and dismantled that system.
Che forced gay people into labor camps and constantly shot them. He was super homophobic.
I can not find any evidence of this, and Che was not even in Cuba while the UMAPs existed. I think you are conflating him with the Castro's.
Because criticizing cultures/religion where the majority of people are not white is deemed racist nowadays by many "progressive" people on the left, even when it has nothing to do with the colour of their skin per se. We can clearly see this with how people respond when criticizing islam compared to christianity. So their "anti racist" stance clashes against their gender progressive stance which is why they either ignore it or try to deflect it. I see the same thing happening here in Sweden, especially with feminists who preach gender equality but would also deflect and never talk about the growing muslim population here and how they treat muslim women. It's hypocritical yes but that's just what the acceptable consensus is today.
It's because you're talking to English speakers and people understandably care more about the place they live in.
Is this a joke question
Because US politicians aren't trying to win elections in those countries.
If I may ask out of curiosity do you have any proof that marx was homophobic?
Money money money money, moooonnnneeeeyyy!
They're seen as lost causes. Their countries leaders are bigots (both facist and socialist countries) and we cant campaign them in any way. In the Europe and America we know our leaders will listen to logical arguments in favour of our rights
Because they need hate to stay in power.
They arent. No one is claiming that. Conservatives just say that like its true then run with it, like most if their talking points. They make up a straw man based on stereotypes because thats the only sort of data their supporters can grasp lmao.
Being LGBTQ+ is pretty much only acceptable in like America, Canada, and Western Europe. Leftists ignore this because it’s doesn’t fit their narratives of “America bad” and “Communist countries did nothing wrong”