How Fascism can deliver Gay Rights : when it's alright to be Gay but not Indian
…it could also be said that the rise of racial intolerance does not necessarily exacerbate homophobia. For instance, if the BNP had successfully ruled Britain for quite some time and achieved its racialist agenda, and moved on to the phase of ‘democratic fascism’ where more rights are demanded by and for the ‘preferred race’, we might actually see increasing respect for gays.
Singapore, for example, is a good case in point where the government’s half a century old policy of promoting and maintaining Chinese perspectival/racial dominance in all respects in the face of a more politically and perspectivally vibrant minority sector has seen increasing magnanimity in the face of the democratic interests of the Chinese. The promoted superiority of one race in the face of a distinguishable and less preferred minority can at times translate into moves to accept the ‘idiosyncrasies’ of the majority lest their failing to do so undermines the claim of cultural/racial supremacy. In this sense, it could be said that to advance gay rights in a fascist state, it would be prudential to have ‘less preferred’ minorities around. Gains by gay activists in such a milieu is therefore simultaneously a validation of the inclinations of the ‘preferred race’ as opposed to a validation of human rights since this same principle is not applied when it comes to racial/cultural issues. And given the mass apathy that it takes for cultural/racial supremacist agenda to go unchallenged for half a century, this apathy can also be relied upon to not lead to violence or abuse of gays. This is how fascism and apathy can come across as ‘democracy’ and ‘tolerance’. Few would realise that the gains by ethnic minorities in the face of such advances by an ethnically-defined majority are purely incidental. Hence, the illusion of equality can be perpetuated. That, I suppose, is the upside of fascism.
Hence, I was compelled to wonder, at one time, why it seemed alright to be ‘gay’ in singapore, but not ‘Malay’ or ‘Indian’ as the government did not deem it their business to impose proscriptions on the gay life whilst they and the people thought nothing amiss with the officially stated efforts to maintain a racial ‘balance’ in favour of the Chinese. One could also theoretically be gay and be chief of the armed/air/naval forces, but not if one was Malay. I suppose the government might step in and do something about the numerousness of gays if it reached a certain percentage of the population as this might lead to a decline in the Chinese population - unless, of course, there is an increase in gays in the Malay and Indian communities. Now, as to my allegations of the fascist nature of oppositional writers/thinkers, along with the opposition and its leaders, there not being a mention of this on the part of the thus aptly termed ‘democrats of the fascist left’ in singapore, I dare say, is one instance that vindicates said claims. It has come to a point that anti-fascists in singapore have moved to that part of the political arena that is even less visible than that occupied in the United Kingdom by the late ‘Screaming Lord Sutch’s’, ‘Official Monster Raving Loony Party’.
The crucial point here is that whilst any Singaporean can, technically, be gay, not every Singaporean is allowed to be ‘Malay’ or ‘Indian’. In other words, whilst there are no proscriptions on gay numbers, there is on non-Chinese numbers. And whilst one may find a 1000 gays congregating for a gay-pride and rights rally, that is not allowed when it comes to Indian or Malay rights rallies as it is supposed to incite ‘racial hatred’ and cause ‘law and order problems’. I have to wonder why gay-pride/rights rallies are not similarly banned for fear of inciting heterosexual hatred. When one takes these into consideration, one will then realise that in a fascist state that does not tolerate racial difference to the point that all cultures/languages are equally celebrated and promoted, ‘numerical balance’ is maintained along racial lines as opposed to, say, ‘foreigner’ vs. ‘local’ ones, and more attention is paid to the proclivities and interests of a majority defined along racial lines, we might then go on to appreciating how fascism can deliver gay rights.
Given this evidence, one can more than plausibly state that it is preferable that one is gay or a ‘foreigner’ but not Malay or Indian – unless one is a Malay/Indian homosexual foreigner that is. So, I suppose that makes singapore's gay movement as fascist as the fascism they purport to fight.
according2,
ed
Comments
Post a Comment
The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.
Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.