General Forum > Gay Homeland - General discussions

Central Issues

(1/5) > >>

Mogul:
Recognition as a people
One of the innovative ideas of the recent gay nationalism movement was the suggestion to define the LGBT-community as a people and seek a recognition before the United Nations. This was apparently also the main motivation behind the selling of passports and citizenship certificates by the deceased GLK - to give some signs of cultural "homeland". Though the praxis was certainly ill-fated and didn't separate between affiliation to a state versus affiliation to a people, the idea behind it was pretty smart.

Jon Matlick, the former Lord Protector of the GLK has commented in our Caffé and brought it to the point:


--- Quote from: Jon on Sat, Aug 20, 2005, 14:56 ---[/color][...] It was a GOOD idea with a lot of potential. Not because it would give GLTBi people a place to escape and go live in isolation. Not because it was/is important to have a territory to claim as our own. It was a GOOD idea because IF “Official” recognition could have been achieved it would have given the Global GLTBi community a voice on the world stage.

Article 15.
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
Article 16.
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 15 and 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human rights, among others, could have been better enforced and violation prosecuted before the International Court of Justice. In my mind, THIS was the ultimate goal of gaining recognition as an Independent Nation and therefore the reason that a territory was important. This is why I stuck with the “Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea” for as long as I saw even a glimmer of hope that the goal might be achieved. [...]
--- End quote ---

In my reply, I have noted that it was then not necessarily to claim a territory to seek recognition as a people:


--- Quote from: Mogul on Sat, Aug 20, 2005, 19:09 ---[/color][...] a recognition by United Nations was/is an important part of the original project and its successors. Though I do not share your views about lacking necessity to be able to actually offer refuge to real human beings, I understand that it would be a greate step forward by a recognition as a people (not necessarily as a nation). You see, Sinty and Roma are peoples, not nations as well as many diverse minorities living abroad. All of them are in posession of passports of their host land, but they are protected as minorities. Is this a kind of status you would appreciate for the gay people? So why claim Cato? Wouldn't a rightfully acquired cattle farm serve much better? One can have different opinion about the real use of such level of recognition, and I am not sure that a tiny state on a tiny reef would change the situation for the gay people considerably. [...]
--- End quote ---

This point (being a people independently from having a territory) is one of our central issues, I think. Indeed, the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" guarantees in its article 15: 1) the right to have a nationality and 2) the right to change one's nationality. Why shall we not define our own nationality and take advantage of our rights? There are no rules prescribing the procedure for definition of a nationalithy, in doubt the self-counsciousness certainly shall suffice.

The recognition as a people would hopefully lead to consolidation within the GLBT-community and strengthen our appearence to the world in generall. The self-counsciousness as a people will not only help in talks for our self-administered territory, it would lead to a higher cultural output and a rise in solidarity within the GLBT-communities.

The approach followed by the "Unified Gay Tribe" might be a good first attempt in this direction, if thought consequently as a definition of a "tribe" and not a "state", which it of course is not. Hovewer, the all-inclusive definition of this tribe is less helpful to actually determine what makes us different from other peoples, as till last developements anybody non-homophobic could become member of this tribe. The same is true for the "Gay Commonwealth Kingdom". The political correctness is a good habit, but not a very practicable thing when you are describing a people and establishing a nation. I hate to write this here, but heterosexuals do not belong to the primarily targeted groups - they are simply "not of the same blood". It would be much more important to actually integrate gays and lesbians from outside of the US and Europe than care about heterosexual grandmothers and cousines. Much more attention must be paid to the needs of our brothers and sisters in the third world: for them it's not that much a question of equal jobs opportunities, but a simple question of life and death.

We will need a very serious discussion about the definition of our people. Are the gay and lesbian people affiliates of our new-defined people (likewise "tribe" or "nation") by the right of mere existence, or is a membership in a specified organization required? Isn't it completely illogical then that a heterosexual member of such an organization is a "tribe member" and a homosexual non-member is not? How comes that there are various organizations claiming the exclusive right to represent the entire LGBT-population on this planet?

My answer to this dilemma is, that the "gay people" exists independently from any organization - just as roma and sinti do exist without the need to be formally "declared". The only thing we can do is, to try and describe this folk by it's peculiar customs and traditions and look forward strengthening it's self-consciousness as a people. It would be helpful as well if our people would have the possibility to affiliate to any of our regional/international groups under the common agende of being one folk, independently on organizatory structures.

A (territorial) state requires a government, while a folk as such does not. A folk needs institutions, coordinating its cultural, political and economical developement and lobbying it's intersts on regional and international level. We must admit, that the GLBT-people already has many such institutions on national and even few on international level. What we need is to make the next step and achieve a new quality of this coordination - a true multi-lingual LGBT-community with one central library, one central archive and one common history. Private initiative is a wonderfull thing, but some large projects require a "national effort" for their realization. All this we could achieve, even without having a state of our own - the self-consciousness as a people and smart management would suffice fully.

Imagine, how great our potential would increase, if we would have full access to our ressourcess in form of taxes in a country of our own. Though the self-administered LGBT-territory is not necessary to be recognized as a people, it would bring us significant progress both in cultural and humanitarian aspect and therefore should be one of our central goals, as well.

We should investigate the possibility of cooperation with ethnographic organizations which might turn out to be helpful on our struggle for public recognition as a people like any other. For example, "The Society for threatened peoples", located in Göttingen/Germany, has a long history of human rights work in connection with endangered ethni - we should carefully contact them and ask for recognition as a people as well. This will be not easy, but upon some time we might succeed - and there are more organizations of this kind, and they form the public opinion step by step.

Website of "The Society for threatened peoples": http://www.gfbv.de/ (english version selector on the left upper corner);
List of peoples in question: http://www.gfbv.de/bedrohte_voelker.php
[/color]

Mogul:
Sure, the normal governmental work will have to be done - with all the usuall instruments known in the modern world. Personally, I am fond of the separations of powers - with legislative, executive and judicative branches. The people should elect their representatives to make laws, administrate the public resources and determin appropriate personalities to be judges. This system seems to be the best known for any progressive society of equal individuals.

On the other hand, the legal system in a country should relate to the actual needs of a society. For example, there is no need to discuss any legislation on nuclear plants, when none are to be built anyway, heh? All the paper-work we are acquainted with in our native countries derives from the complexity of these societies and the sheer amount of their citizens.  Probably, we would need a basic set of legislative acts - a constitution, a civil code and a criminal code. Some financial and administrative legislation might come additionally, but most arising questions could be decided depending on the real needs.

What would be our primary needs? Should there be a village of 500 people to be "governed", they would be pretty comfortably served with a chiftain, a council of the eldest (or smartest), and a medicine man. A city of 5.000 inhabitants would need a senate, some judges and small police forces. A Polis of 200.000 citizens would probably require the same level of administration as any western democracy - with all its complexity. We would have a small parliament, a government and a couple of courts then. A representative position with mostly moral power wuld be nice, too - a president, a mahatma or just an old chieftain.

As most of our people will stay in their countries of origin, an important task will be to care for those people. Just look that the strong ones come together with those who need help, and "spread the word". The rich ones should be asked for financial support, the smart ones for a good advice and the creative ones for cultural contributions. For such activities we will need representatives in the local communities, this would be our "foreign department". Not that much to perform high-level diplomatic meetings with chancellors and emperors, but to care for our people outside of the "homeland" and distibute the ressources.

At this point it might be suitable to remember, that any future government does not need to care for everything - a lot of the social work can be done by non-political public institutions. For example, the health care policy can be determined by a comitee which is independent from any current government. The members of such comitees can be appointed with years step-by-step, so they can act on their conscience and without regard of any political loyalties.

Again, the beginning will depend on the legal status of the "gay settlement" and progresses which it will be able to achieve on its way to the self-administration. It's rather unlikely we would be able to find a law-free territory and to establish there our regement from one day upon another. Most probably we'll start officially with a kind of a "local neighbour-helps-neighbour commitee", looking for encreasing role of our self-administration step by step. And, no revolutions, please! I'm very cautious about my life and would prefere to keep my body in one piece as long as possible.

Solo:
Yes, yes.  I second the motion of making Viktoria, the Imperical Empress of the Gay Empire of Earth.  Hehehe...  Okay, okay, okay...  joking aside:

I think a gay government needs consistency with the ideals it projects to its citizens.  I think secrecy, cover-ups and need-to-know-basis information are damaging to any/all societies in which they exist.  Granted, I can appreciate the protection of sensitive information that would otherwise be used as means to undo our efforts, there has got to be a system of government that keeps the citizens empowered, and not powerless and voiceless victims to legal maneuverings of a tasteless nature.  I, personally, am inclined to think we should focus our attention primarily on a basic structure.

My initial random thoughts:  Seven Branches of Government - 1) Internal Executive Branch, 2) External Executive Branch, 3) Judicial Branch, 4) Legislative Branch, 5) Economic Branch, 6) Community's Branch, and 7) Finalizing Branch.

[Please see the respective numbers below for the roles to be played by the Regent of each branch listed directly above.]

1) IEB - handles the matters involving writings/upholding of law within the nation, reviewing/confirming standards of living,
2) EEB - handles the matters involving the nation's interaction with foreign governents, defense,
3) JB - settles civilian court/law, upholds the legal systems, provides the truth to the people: pros AND CONS,
4) LB - reviews initial amendments/bills/laws (A/B/L) to be passed, establishes policies (includ. foreign), provides 1/5 of ruling in court rulings,
5) EB - provides required vote of approval for any A/B/L drawing from Treasury.
6) CB - a 3rd vote of approval on behalf of the people to carry forward a A/B/L, handles citizens' allegiances, relevant background info, tracks/ensures 100% voting, national health and fitness standard, education, monitoring standard of living,
7) FB - a 3rd vote of approval on behalf of the people to carry forward a A/B/L, redundant of the Community's Branch and that is its primary function - to act in the best interest of the people.

For certain A/B/L's to pass, I'm thinking three votes to pass, four for immediate implementation even if it makes it without Economic Branch's approval, while having to draw from Treasury (holding the CB and FB accountable).  In theory, every branch should be able to have its influential pull over its own branch by-passed with... 5? votes from other branches, except in matters of war and decisions of such, where 6 votes are required to have a drastic measure to take effect (if the EEB is not in support, otherwise its vote would constitute as 3 votes)...  Yeah, it's really not out of the brainstorming stages yet, but I thought I'd put it out there for discussion, as I see it being a Central Issue and I did my best to stay on topic. 

We require a lot of work and I had some thoughts in regards to money/currency, establishing economic security, government programs for the elderly, (medically/mentally) ill, families with children, salaries/compensation for elected officials, more effective/efficient/appropriate education system, as well as new structure in careers and subsequent requirements for each field, I am kind of toying with the idea of community service programs for citizens of all ages - appropriate compensation - effects to economy/morale - long-term effects.

It probably seems like it will be a nightmare due to excessive processes and complex base structures, but I think something along these lines would prove to be quite successful for many reasons.  A building with a strong, sound, reinforced foundation allows room for undetermined design structures, not to mention simplicity later on, due to covered bases on the ground floor.

Anywho, I'll give it some thought when I have some free time.  I'd love this to be shot down for an obvious oversight on my part, but more importantly... I'd love to hear any thoughts any of you might've had that can replace/improve/compliment a couple of other strings of thought I haven't yet explored.  I ought to do some research first, but I don't want to taint any of my ideas by revisiting existing influences and I urge you all to do the same. 

Have a winning day, my people!  Make today the best day of your life and try to make all that follow even better.

Mogul:
Me, me, me! ;D I am the one to be the first Mogul of the United Gay and Lesbian Emirates of the Coral Sea, Atlantic an Pacific! In doubt, my opinion is the only correct one! ;D

Ok, jokes put aside: Yes, we will have to start from the scratch. Will we personally ever meet a down in the independent gay country? I don't know - our ressources are very humble, and the way is stony. At least, we can initiate a steady process to the gay state and contribute our share to this tremendous task - when others follow, we may actually succeed. I also do not know the right way, perhapts the "right way" even does not exist at all. We will need both the pioneers ready to settle in tents were the pepper grows, and individuals in backround to support the process financially, legally and logistically. For sure, any kind of premature "independence declarations" would be rather contra-productive. It's always better to create facts before starting any de-jura discussions.

Money will be needed as well, and the way to make money grow. It's sad, but without money we will not be able to move even a single individual to the said strip of land, should we ever make decision to settle somewhere. Money will be needed for legal aquisition of the land, building infrastructure and initiating economic developement. Hopefully, some wealthy individuals will dare and invest in the local economy out of "national solidarity". The real difficulty will be to make the gay settlement an attractive place for GLBT people to live in - not just because of ideology, but out of really enhanced live quality. Safety, medical supply and jobs opportunities will be crucial parts of our way to successfull self-determination. One can see the current policy of the US-government critically, but if we could achieve US-standards in economy and social security, our (at the moment hypothetical) gay state would be not such a bad place to live in.

Gunnar:
Just as a reminder, guys: We are not to discuss US policy here. This is about a gay republic, which we dreaming of. A dream we all want to come true. To compare this our dream with a Federation of States like the US, is nothing but misleading. As some of the topics I watch here. The "Knowledge is Power" thingy usually works, that's true. And I state here usually. Can this be the case for the Gay Republic also? Well, who is the one with the very knowledge how to govern a gay country successfully? Any Idea?
I want to point out here, that we have to start from the scratch again.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page