October 4, 2007
In the lesbian capital of the united $tates, Northampton, Massachusetts, we picked up a daily paper with a cartoon against Iran's president. The cartoon quotes Ahmadinejad saying that "we don't have" homosexuals in Iran next to a hanging. A similar cartoon is available for sale on the Internet.(1) The implication is that Iran hangs all the gays.
The anti-Iran cartoons are militarist and chauvinist. There are no supporting facts in the paper. The typical paper running these cartoons leaves the impression that if there is a death penalty, no one who happens to be gay could be guilty of a crime.
Ironically, an involved Liberal argument against Iran that we found actually proves our point. Iran is not just against public homosexuality. It is against any public sexuality. We would like to see anyone prove that Iran actually discriminates against gays/lesbians more than others.
An article claiming that Iran is trying to ban a gay writer admitted the following about the article causing the talk of banning:
"Ghahreman made no explicit reference to homosexuality in the interview, but said that 'sexual boundaries must be flexible ... The immoral is imposed by culture on the body.'"(2)Of course that point is buried in the article toward the end. The article is titled "Iran bans paper for interviewing homosexual."(2)
In other words, cartoons are running across the united $tates, especially in liberal blue state bastions, to drum up war against Iran--for current sexual customs of the united $tates. It does not occur to these people they are drumming up war for a fad. This year open sexuality is in in the united $tates.
No organization claiming Stalin or Mao has any value if it does not apply dialectics on the question of the principal contradiction. Iran is an oppressed nation. We prioritize Iran's oppression by imperialism above other questions. Those in denial on this point speak of the principal contradiction in name only and are worthless to Maoism.
At this moment, the U.$. papers are full of stories about planned military attacks on Iran and a dry-run by I$rael on September 6 that already happened.(3) There is even talk that Cheney is insurbordinate to Bush on the question of Iran.(4) Kucinich has threatened to move to impeachment over Iran(5) and Vermont's senators opposed a resolution on terrorism in Iran, because of fears it will be used for war.(6) However, it is not possible to bother Amerikans with any of this, because they are too obsessed with sex to be bothered with international politics. So we even agree with Iran about the problem of the "porno-personality." Amerikans just do not even realize how much space sex is taking up, even in the intellectual towns such as where Smith College resides. Their articles on Iran aren't even as deep as Playboy Magazine. Next it will be "Obama girls for bombing Pakistan."
The professoriat running Northampton is not capable of more than political correctness to unite the white middle class. It is to be expected that the hardcore liberal Democrats and the white supposedly liberal-radicals are going to take up white nationalism. It is the organizations claiming Stalin and Mao who have an obligation to point out what the principal contradiction is and how to think dialectically. Until the organizations claiming Stalin and Mao learn why they have dialectical materialism, it will be hopeless to reorient those would-be anti-militarists of the left-wing of white nationalism.
3. In the Vietnam War, at the end Nixon became desperate and started bombing Cambodia too. http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20071002/cm_huffpost/066706
4. Eli Lake, "Ex-Cheney Adviser Denies Trying To Stir War With Iran," http://www.nysun.com/article/63477