I think the simplest answer may be that we do not, as a people, yet have the will to implement such a plan. [..] Denneny was absolutely correct when he said that the ghetto needs to be consolidated and expanded. He was not referring to some ideal (and hypothetical) gay state, but merely the places where we live today. In the decades since Denneny first published his propositions many of the gay ghettos have largely dissolved--sold off and transformed into trendy neighborhoods for yuppies. [..]
I have been reading around in the research of nationalism a little bit, and one thing seems to be widely accepted by the scholars: nationalism, and the very idea of a Nation, has always been the issue for elites, never for "peasants". It is always the elites, who begin to form national identity - they indeed
are the nation. Not that the "peasants" were a priory a stupid bunch of fellows - but their everyday interests and realities are much to distant from thoughts about "self-determination" and "distinctive cultural goods" - they are working hard to earn their daily bread and gain some little pleasures. Certainly, the "simple people" suffer as much as the elites under the "foreign rule", and by times they take a bloody revenge on their oppressors - but only the elites can make a "national movement" out of this spontaneous anger, and indoctrinate the masses with the new ideology of a national self-determination.
It is therefore in vain to complain about the masses and their irrationality - it simply is like it is. Whom we can not dismiss from responsibility, are our elites - our philosophers, writers, media editors, restaurant and bar owners, and any kind of wealthy individuals who make money with gay folks. All these people belong in that way or other to our elites - intellectually, morally or economically. They can
directly influence the quality of gay life, and they are in duty to contribute to our developement as a people. The normal boy from the flat land comes to the gay village not because he has some ideas about gay emancipation, but simply because he finds there places to meet other boys, a job opportunity and some gay bookstores and video stores. Unlike him, the gay businessman can freely decide,
where he establishes his business, for
whom he establishes it, and whom he
employs. The gay writer can choose by himself, what kind of books he writes - and make the decision to contribute or not to the gay culture. To make it short - the ones with money and ideas have the choice to create a cultural and economical environment for our communities, or not.
If our wealthy brothers sell their gay locations in the "gheto" to heterosexuals to make "straight" location out of it, they also sell out part of our cultural space. Certainly, an individual has the freedom to sell his property, but he must try to find another solution first - even if it means that he must wait a little bit longer till he can cash in. This is the way how it functions in any other (ethnic) local community - the property usually stays "within the family", and this tactics poved to be very efficient. Unfortunately, gays often feel superiour to such "primitive" tactics, and loose at the end.
It took European nations several centuries to develop separate and distinct national identities.I assume it must be the same process with any human group,including us gays.
While this is certainly true for European peoples in general, it cannot be claimed for
every one of them - many never got the chance to develope into nations, and were either eradicated or assimilated. I am afraid, that we as a people might miss the right time slot to develope into a nation - and repeat the sad fate of so many other peoples before us. You say, that we existed through thousands of years - but what kind of existence was this? Our people were fiercely hunted, and, once found, they were staked, beheaded, hanged, burned or stoned - one can imagine what kind of life the
unseized fellows were having. The sparse contacts to the antic literature certainly induceced some of our predecessors to intellectual activities about the "love which dares to speak her name not", but these sparks were rare. Now we have the unique opportunity to freely develope an entirely new gay political philosophy - and plant the seeds while it is still possible. I have little doubts that the Internet as we know it will soon cease to exist -censorship and governmental control have all the technical means to stiffle the free exchange of information. We must seize the opportunity for awakening national self-conscience now - history might offer us no second chance.
[..] It is a very special form of self-hatred that causes people to take upon themselves the responsibility for provoking their own persecution. The source of any conflict with "them" lies within the hearts of "them." "They" have historically demonstrated a certain passion for this conflict.
Yes - the separation into "us" and "them" has a very long historical tradition. The wish to belong to the majority has also a very long tradition and many historical examples. To recall one of them: the progressive assimilated Jews were also at war with their religious brothers, and were looking with contempt to the poor Jews emigrating from Russia or Balkan. These progressive Jews were altho suggesting that these unconformist Jews were the source of the hatred and antisemitism, and were best happy when these poor fellows would "disappear" in some way. At the end, the wealth, the progressivenes and assimilation were of no importance - the only thing which mattered, was their being Jews. In our case, it is absolutely equal whether we are rich or poor, "straight-looking" or swishes - we have only ourselves to rely upon. As sooner
all of us understand this, as better.
[..] But when someone does decide to start buying properties, I would recommend that they focus on smaller satellite cities instead of the urban metropolises the people have favored thus far. [..] There is but one reason only why the gay people find themselves in the minority everywhere that they exist: they will not move. Ultimately, they will not move because they find they do not deserve to move; they find that "they" don't even exist.
The very idea of gay political emancipation is some 150 years old, the modern gay movement might be some 85 years old. Gay separatism might be 35 years old, and the idea of a souvereign territorial state might be walking through gay minds for some 5 - 15 years. In historical dimensions, this is very little time - theoretically we could put our hands into pockets and wait until things take their course by themeselves. But as single human life is short, we can accelerate the process a little bit, and try to influence minds of our folks. Actually, gay people often proove that they can re-locate to a better place, e.g. from a countryside in Bavaria to the city of Munic, or from flatlands of Texas to New York. This means, the potential is there - it must be used. As I depicted above, the primary responsibility for creation gay environments lies in the hands of our intellectual and economic elites. If a sufficient number of gay businessmen lend an ear to our philosophers and moral leaders, they could work out a plan for how create a gay town or even a gay state. As businessmen rarely act solely out of altruism, the plan must include some advantages for them as well - this would be only fair. Our problem is, that we scarsely have moral leaders, and our businessmen often fight eachother instead to cooperate for the mutual benefit. The Christians have their priests and churches, the Jews have their rabbies and sinagogues - we lack similar institutions of local communal leadership entirely. Not that we are in need of a "gay church", but people like Larry Kramer should definetely have more opportunities to talk to local communities.
As for taking over a smaller satellite town - this might function very good, if at least few people with money would decide to back such an enterprise, and build a community center with a library, a video store etc. In Germany, we are confronted since few years with neo-Nazis buying lots of property in small towns via proxies - and establishing their operative bases there. The same strategy is practiced by some ethnic groups, who
are certain about their wish to live close to each other. Are we as a group so much self-loathing that we
do not want to live with our likes in neighbourhood? Or are we simply too "individual" to realise what's good for us? The time has come for a change in the minds of gay folks, and positive prospectives of this new life must be increasingly brought into discussion. Or else we are at risk to loose orientation and disappear after we have reached all the "equality".