Two points are essential in discussion of this issue:Owing to our particular demographic structure,we do have a problem of transmission of cultural assets from one generation to another.But
- How can we prevent our cultural goods from being physically destroyed and be therefore lost forever?
Now certainly one must acknowledge and face the negative, but there's a danger (by habitually ignoring or downplaying the positive) of elevating the negative to a level that simply doesn't exist.
It is true that some theaters in Utah refused to show ‘Brokeback Mountain.' But it is also true that this decision (though heartily approved in some quarters) was received overall with ridicule and disapproval. That point, Vicky, you failed to mention as well. It's always critical to look at the overall picture in order to accurately gauge our situation. If one doesn't, than you are in constant danger of distorting reality; and in extreme cases of even falling into a form of paranoia.
Rictor Norton (http://www.infopt.demon.co.uk/suppress.htm) has written a fine essay detailing the scope of the cultural genocide that Denneny refers to.
[..] My preference would go to some online political academy,where young gays having a computer and internet access could receive at last a civic formation.Not having to start all over what was probably thinked,but lost,by precedent gay generations.Such a modern destiny we gays have ! [..]
It is not enough that whatever constitutes our cultural and political heritage reaches gays of the future,which it has a good chance to achieve with the internet.Whatever reaches gays of the future will also have to be acceptable to them.For they could themselves censor it,and not necessarily in the way we might first imagine. [..] So,it would be better that we censor ourselves now,before we are censored later by other gay generations who might not like what we are writing now.We should avoid writing defeatist stuff.
In the distant future, if/when the gay state shall be established, we should probably consider laws restricting copyright to, let's say 10 years after production date (like patents). Alternatively, the gay state (or our foundation) might buy the rights from the rightfull owners after 10 years of commercial use and distribute the works freely or for a symbolic fee. Some works may be performed with the funds of the gay state (which is one of its important tasks).
Unfortunately, the copyright laws prohibit any project which is intended to supply less wealthy individuals online with original material. Therefore we are currently doomed to offer bibliography lists and self-written reviews, in the hope that people can either buy the stuff on their own or find it in a local library. As the copyright-laws in our countries are unprobable to change in the next future, it would be a good and realistic solution to entertain gay libraries/film archives, spread over the world sufficiently tightly. All this is solely a question of ressources and organization.
And why couldn`t we run together a propaganda mill of our own in this forum,without claiming any copyright ? Do you claim a copyright for what you post here ? Do I claim one ? I am happy to contribute without copyright to this forum.I am interested only in producing effects and reactions,in the direction of self-determination and among gays.The hell with the copyright.
In the meanwhile, we are clearly in the duty of gathering previous ideas, re-thinking them, and introducing new ones. Simple archiving of material in digital form and catalogization clearly belong to the fair use and can be performed already now.
Once we have effective and legal control over our own territory, we are free to introduce our own legislation on this subject, in the wa which serves our people the best.
We could try to persuade gay authors to transfer their copyrights to the gay State by way of their wills once the said State is in existence.But not compel them to do so by way of nationalization. [..]
Therefore I would suggest that the Gay State shall respect the copyright of living authors, whereas all works of deceased authors shall be regarded as public domain. This rule would both enable protection of authors and at the same time serve our cultural needs. In case the government decides to spread any particular work of art for free, it can pay the authors for the right to do so.
To get the bow back to genocide: the actions toward our people might actually be interpreted as general genocide. Just let's look onto definition of the genocide, as it is included in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/genocide.htm) :
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
( a ) Killing members of the group;
( b ) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
( c ) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
( d ) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
( e ) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
I would say, all the attempts to forcibly turn gays into straits, as well as the well-considered hate speeches of many political and religious leaders clearly fall into categories (b) and (c). Regarding the calculated effect of these speeches on the poorly educated and religiously blinded masses, category (a) is readily accepted as well. The brain-washing of gay kids and imposing straight culture on them, also the wide-spread custom of taking away children from the "bad influence" of their homosexual parent fall into categorie (e). To make the list complete we remember the US- and Italian legislation prohibiting lesbian women from fertility medicine.
[..] 2) Exclusive national property over the human offspring coming out of those reproduction facilities 3) Exclusive national competence of ours over the education over the said offspring,including the determination of a gay sexual orientation 4) Exclusive moral and national authority over gay youth,wether originating from the above mentionned reproduction facilities or from immigration,along with social and historical role models for the gay youth.
[..] *Complete independence* would be possible in a world where the UN would have no available State capable of enforcing its decisions.For example in a multipolar world with no global superpower. [..]
[..] As a culture and regardless of the fate of specific individuals,we will always exist.We have the ressources,but there is no gay country for them to go to. [..]
Therefore we must abandon the idea that the ballance of powers in the world wouls affect us directly: no one would send a single soldier to us out of concern about the fate of poor heterosexuals persecuted in the gay state.
Smart diplomacy and pacting with the right allies would enlarge our safety. Spreading some rumour that we have inventeg the "gay bomb" turning brave heterosexuals into vicious faggots, we would protect our borders for millenia. =))
Sure, the Vatican and other bigots would make much noise, but they wouldn't spend a penny to improve the situation of that poor devils.