Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

If you always wanted to help us to spread the word but didn't know how - we have beatifull new Flyers for you, for printing out and distribution!

You can print out them in your local copy shop or order them online. Here are the files:

Flyer 2013 (US Letter 8˝ × 11, 216 × 279 mm)

Flyer 2013 (US Letter 8˝ × 11 with a "bleed" area, 222 × 286 mm)

Thanks to Jacob & Dan for designing!

Thank you for your stories. My experience parallels the stage by stage processes you have both described. I first became aware of separatism as a formal concept from source material I reviewed while researching an undergraduate thesis on the Stonewall riots in 2002. During the same timeframe, I was made aware that the concept was a reoccurring theme in the literature of Williams S. Burroughs by a heterosexual male friend with countercultural ties. I was intrigued by the idea but considered it part of a by-gone era. Nonetheless, I allowed myself to day dream about the possibility and ponder plenty of “what if” questions while making an effort to maintain objectivity regarding the pros and cons.

Though the idea of some sort of Gay centered society continued to enter my thoughts and fantasies for the next several years, it was not until I did some early graduate research on the Gay Liberation movement that I started to re-examine the concept in a serious way. I was aware of the Alpine project and decided to further investigate the topic which eventually became my graduate thesis. Also, while researching Gay Liberation I learned of more recent separatist movements that curiously all seemed to be omitted from history.

After several months of critical analysis, I concluded that the goal would be theoretically possible if a collective political will to achieve it existed. However, I had and still have some uncertainty with regards to whether any collective political will in the U.S. would ever reach the critical mass needed to make the possibility a reality. My specific mention of the U.S. is based on consideration of the nation’s population and resources rather than national centrism.   

I eventually concluded two things. One is that the rise of transnationalism may neutralize any essential need for substantial support within the U.S. for a nation building movement to reach the needed critical mass. Secondly, that even if the goal of an independent Gay nation is not achieved, there is potential that significant cultural, social, and political gains will nonetheless result from the process. Thus the goal is valuable either way regardless of the outcome and should therefore be pursued.

I guess that I was leaning to Gay separatism starting from 1997 -1998, when I realized that straight people are, on average, indifferent to our existential issues. I was in a relationship with a boy from Poland, and there was absolutely no country on this planet where we could settle down and live together. That was a time when I was thinking of a Gay country, too, but that was clearly on a level of "dreaming" and "wishful thinking".

In 2005, I found my way to this project via initial involvement with the Gay & Lesbian Kingdom discussion group. The GLK endeavour was reported in Gay media (both online and print) and caught my attention in 2004. That was a big story, with bold claims and lots of positive energy. After some initial scepticism, I had my "big conversion" and found the idea to be not only greate, but also feasible.

Had the GLK leadership at that time been serious about occupying Cato, I would have sold my few possessions to buy a ticket to Australia. Would we possess a significant portion of arable land now, I would move as well.

Late in 1980, while at university, I began to haunt the offices of a moribund chapter of the Gay Liberation Front. One of their more pleasant services to the community was the maintenance of a small library, since books on any subject touching upon anything Gay were rare and hardly positive. It wasn't that they didn't exist, it was that neither the public libraries nor the bookstores would stock them. That chapter of Gay Liberation spent the lion's share of their meager funds purchasing and replacing books. In one of those books, I read about the Alpine County project. I would have sworn it was The Gay Militants by Donn Teal, but I find that that book was not published until 1994. It must have been some other book, but I cannot rule out the possibility of a much earlier edition. Such issues were energetically discussed by the visitors to the office, and when the adventures of the followers of Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh in Antelope, Oregon began unfolding in the popular press in 1984, the conversations became more thoughtful. Unlike the Alpine County project, which was never actually attempted, the town of Antelope did, for a time, have its name changed to Rajneesh through the ordinary democratic processes.

The offices of the Gay Liberation Front were more of a social gateway than a political headquarters of any kind. At that time, it was one of a few places within an eighty mile radius where young men and women could go and 'come out.' Gays were completely invisible in those days, to a degree that is quite impossible to explain to anyone under twenty today. We were as invisible as fairies, unless you managed to rub magical fairy ointment on your eyes. The Gay Liberation Front had a handy jar of that ointment (we kept it in the third drawer from the top in the filing cabinet). People came and went. There was a continuous stream of people who came and went. Those who had any interest in radical politics stayed; those who had no interest read our books, accepted our introductions, and happily made use of the magical power to see the invisible Gay Kingdom that had always existed in the shadows around them. While they were in attendance, however, they did discuss Alpine County ("they would have killed us all," they said) and Antelope, Oregon ("Those were Rajneeshis--had they been Gay, there would have been open warfare.") That was before AIDS. The newcomers also said, "I didn't know there were any Gay people over fifty" when they were instructed to behave themselves around the older gentlemen (who were over seventy) they had the occasion to meet inside our magic circle. When people were less defeatist, they eventually came around to the idea of a nation, especially if they stuck around long enough to see the outlines of the invisible kingdom they were being initiated into.

We were separatists in those days. The idea of a Gay nation was an intellectual puzzle. The more pressing concern was how to maintain what little integration the community already had. In that corner of the world, at least, AIDS destroyed it all. Invisible networks do not tolerate removed nodes well, and cannot survive the extinction of vast swaths of contacts. I settled for being a good husband (which was my initial goal anyway) and getting on with my life.

Much later in life, the Spousal-Unit and I encountered the strange tale of Dale Anderson and the Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands. For some reason, the idea was electrifying. Cato Island is, of course, no place to set up a country. My interest in that project was more in the idea behind it than the Real Estate. Land is an essential element of any 'proper' nation, though. The peculiar circumstances of the Gay Kingdom led me to enter into discussions here. Unfortunately, my experience will be of little help to you. The Foundation was more or less created before my eyes; I cannot say that I ever learned of it.

I have a two part question. First, when did you begin to conceive of the idea of the possibility of a Gay nation? Secondly, how did you first learn of the Gay Homeland Foundation?

I ask this question in part to help determine what works in terms of promoting the idea and raising awareness of the Foundation.

Greetings to all!

After a few years of studying Gay nationalism and being inspired by it, I decided the time has come for me to formally "come out" for it. Below is a personal statement I prepared and am in the process of circulating among fellows and sympathizer in which I explain my reasons for joining the cause. 

Cheer!
Sage One


A Personal Declaration of Support for a Gay and Lesbian Nation

Allow me to begin by openly declaring that I am personally committed to the eventual establishment of an independent Gay and Lesbian nation. As the popular expression goes, “there, I said it!” To answer the first question that will probably come to most people’s minds, yes; I am absolutely serious. Now, before I explain, allow me to first assure you that I have not been radicalized over the internet nor seduced into some sort of gnostic sectarian cult.

As some of you already know, the idea of a Lesbian and Gay nation has intrigued me for some time. However, the formidable challenges presented by such an undertaking resulted in some serious internal reservations on my part. Though such a nation could theoretically be built and sustained, could the benefits ever outweigh the effort?  After devoting some time to research and serious thought, I believe the answer is yes.

Recent events in Russia have helped me put much in perspective. With things not going his way, Putin enacted a time tested method for promoting distraction and solidarity at the same time – going after the Gays. But Russia is really a dictatorship rather than a true democracy and therefore an outlier right? Such a thing could not possibly happen in a “stable” democracy like the U.S. correct? Well, considering the events of the 2000 election and that in reality the U.S. is a plutocracy masquerading as a democracy, I’m not so sure. Do we underestimate Tea Party supporters and the armed militias growing along our southern borders?

Contrary to our Western progressive bias, progress is not sustained in a linear fashion. In the context of multiple victories for Gay rights during the past few years, the temptation among Westerner Gays to believe that the battle has been won once and for all is understandable. However, Gay and Lesbian people have repeatedly lost and gained status throughout history. One would be naďve to believe that these oscillating trends will not continue. History has shown that attitudes and circumstances can shift very rapidly, even in developed nations. Examples are abundant. Under the mistaken impression that their German nationality would protect them, homosexuals in Berlin, once the Gay Capital of the world, went from celebrations to concentration camps practically overnight. Cold War paranoia ended the practice of “looking the other way” often used during the War years in both the U.S. and U.K. and brought McCarthyism and persecution crashing down. The later 20th Century brought us neo-con political posses and the relentless rabid radical Right. Also, let’s not forget centuries of inquisitions and heresy trials often initiated to help satisfy the political ambitions of theocratic fascists.

What I have realized is that without a sovereign Gay and Lesbian state, one way or another, Lesbian and Gay people will always be a minority subculture at the mercy of a dominant majority. The resulting dynamic of course may vary from nation to nation and from one era to the next. The relationship between Gay minority and non-Gay majority in a given nation state may be one of cooperation and shared agendas or one of oppression and resistance. Regardless of whether the relationship within a given nation-state between the non-Gay majority and the Lesbian and Gay minority is a positive or negative one, the Gay and Lesbian subcultures will always be subject to intervention from the dominate majority. This worldwide status quo prevents Gay and Lesbian people from being able to truly assert themselves as independent agents when promoting their own collective interests in global affairs.

Let us not forget that homosexuality is still regarded as a serious crime throughout much of Africa and the Islamic world. A crime that is punishable by execution, imprisonment, lashings, or the vigilante practice known as “corrective rape.” A sovereign Gay and Lesbian nation could mean refuge from these violent persecutions.

A sovereign Gay and Lesbian nation could mean an independent Lesbian and Gay voice in the world during this Global Age. It could mean the uninhibited growth of a unique culture. It could mean continuity of traditions and heritage free of hegemonic intrusion. Harvey Milk once referred to us as a “global tribe.” Perhaps it is time for our tribe to become a nation?

Hence forth, I intend to shift the focus of my activism toward working with the Gay Homeland Foundation; a think tank devoted to the founding of a Gay and Lesbian nation. I am under no illusions of the monumental task I am committing myself to. My hope is that an independent Gay and Lesbian state will one day take its place among the nations of the world. This may not happen in my lifetime, but perhaps a future generation will be able to see what we begin through to completion. Perhaps the task will prove impossible. The effort will not have been in vain. Even if the goal is only met half way, we will arrive at a better place because of it.


“We must get outside the system of mechanized insanity and we must manifest our own world.”  – I Am: Oracle of Gay Emmaus

“God save the Stonewall Nation” – Don Jackson

Gay State: An Analytical Aproach

Hi folks, in 2 weeks I will make a presentation at the the Hay Centennial Conference in NY, in the section "New Directions for Contemporary LGBT Politics":

http://radicallygay2012.sched.org/print

Date: September 28, 2012
Time: 15:30
Location: GC C-198, The Graduate Center, CUNY (New York)

The conference itself will take 4 days (September 27-30). Registration is required.

ABSTRACT

The present work deals with the issue of suggested establishment of a Gay State as a safe haven for Gay refugees and a central hub for Gay culture and politics. In this paper, I evaluate whether the creation of such an entity is necessary and feasible in current age. Harry Hay’s fundamental concept of Gays being a „cultural minority“ is extended towards the conception of Gays being a diasporic people worthy of political and cultural self-determination. I also evaluate some contemporary scholar views on the question of what constitutes „a people“, and which peoples are usually considered to posess the right of self-determination. The question is considered whether Gays can be legally regarded as a „people“, as well as the question whether an uncontested recognition of „peoplehood“ is indeed a necessary precondition for the legal establishment of the Gay State. In accordance with the work of Jorri Duursma on European Microstates, and the study on the creation of States in International Law by James Crawford, I show that neither the criterion of permanent population, nor a minor size of the territory or population constitute obstacles on the way to Gay statehood. The important legal precedents of the Order of Malta and the State of the Vatican City enable the establishment of the Gay State as a „State for special purpose“. A workable strategy would consist of an initial formation of a non-territorial sovereign entity taking a lease on a small territory from an existing State, followed by a legal purchase of a sovereign territory at a later time point. In summary, I show that the creation of a territorial Gay State is a realistic and a promising strategy to address the many chances and challenges for the Gay people in the 21st century.

Never thought the land in Iceland was ever so cheap... They have a Lesbian Prime Minister, btw.

Source: http://www.france24.com/en/20110830-china-tycoon-buy-part-iceland-ft

China tycoon to buy part of Iceland: FT

A Chinese tycoon is trying to buy a huge tract of land in Iceland for a $100 million eco-tourism project that will include a golf course, the Financial Times said Tuesday.

Huang Nubo, a real estate investor and former government official, has sealed a provisional deal to acquire 300 square kilometres (about 200 square miles) of Icelandic territory, the newspaper said.

Iceland occupies a strategically important location between Europe and North America and has been touted as a potential hub for Asian cargo should climate change open Arctic waters to shipping.

Forbes ranked Huang as China?s 161st richest man in 2010, with a net worth of $890 million. His company, Zhongkun Group, owns resorts and tourist facilities across China and around the world.

The Financial Times said he had previously worked at China?s Central Propaganda Department and the Ministry of Construction.

The Iceland Review Online reported last week that Huang signed a deal with land owners including the Icelandic government last Wednesday, and that the deal was dependent on approval by both China and Iceland.

Iceland's booming economy collapsed in 2008 when its hugely overstretched banking sector plunged suddenly into crisis and its three major banks collapsed within a matter of weeks.

Since then, the country has gone through much soul-searching and a string of painful changes to put its house in order, helped by an International Monetary Fund rescue.

On Friday last week, the IMF approved the final release of funds in its $2.25 billion bailout programme for Iceland.

There are a few interesting articles about Patri Friedman from the Seasteding Institute being funded by the Gay enterpreneur Peter Thiel (Thiel is the guy who gave money to make Facebook grow):

http://www.details.com/culture-trends/critical-eye/201109/peter-thiel-billionaire-paypal-facebook-internet-success
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2024761/Atlas-Shrugged-Silicon-Valley-billionaire-reveals-plan-launch-floating-start-country-coast-San-Francisco.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

"It goes like this: Friedman wants to establish new sovereign nations built on oil-rig-type platforms anchored in international waters—free from the regulation, laws, and moral suasion of any landlocked country. They'd be small city-states at first, although the aim is to have tens of millions of seasteading residents by 2050. Architectural plans for a prototype involve a movable, diesel-powered, 12,000-ton structure with room for 270 residents, with the idea that dozens—perhaps even hundreds—of these could be linked together. Friedman hopes to launch a flotilla of offices off the San Francisco coast next year; full-time settlement, he predicts, will follow in about seven years; and full diplomatic recognition by the United Nations, well, that'll take some lawyers and time.

"The ultimate goal," Friedman says, "is to open a frontier for experimenting with new ideas for government." This translates into the founding of ideologically oriented micro-states on the high seas, a kind of floating petri dish for implementing policies that libertarians, stymied by indifference at the voting booths, have been unable to advance: no welfare, looser building codes, no minimum wage, and few restrictions on weapons."

There is a lot interesting stuff on the website of the Seasteding Institute, the guys have also been busy to evaluate the legal aspects of swimming / artificial islands:

http://seasteading.org/research/law-and-politics

It seems that the Pink money has found its way to this kind of projects.

Hi Kendrick,

please let me offer some suggestions.

The sovereignty / independence is an issue separate from the settlement projects. Sovereignty not necessarily needs territory, and a functional settlement can exist on a territory of another nation – with a local self-administration.

Starting a settlement with the intention to overcroud and overwhelm the locals will certainly meet hostility and resistance, thus is not what we should aim at. Establishing a settlement in agreement with the locals, and for mutual benefit, is certainly the better way. We can, of course, consider negotiations for a gradual improvement of concessions to our settlement, but in an amicable way – this is essential, and shall be made clear to the local authorities.

It is probably better (and certainly easier) to start the resort you are thinking of somewhere closer to civilisation. Such locations might have higher ground prices, but one also needs to consider such factors as costs of transportation, attractivity to tourists/residents/industry, political stability etc.

Hotel owners know that people usually come to a place for a variety of reasons: some enjoy sight-seeing or bathing, others visit the Trade Fare, some go to a concert, and a few take the burden to participate in a sport competition. The more reasons a city offers, the more people will come.   

There have been suggestions to implement a settlement in a form of a „business park“, which would include industrial, residential and recreational areas. There we can have a hotel (or many of them), production sites, agriculture... The charming advantages of this idea are:

1) the political organization (=“administration“) needs to concentrate on central issues only (streets, water, energy, canalization, fire protection, security), while all the business activities can be entrusted to the care of private investors;

2) the costs for the management of the settlement are limited to the initial purchase of the (cheap) land, step-by-step development of the infrastructure, and the administration of the site;

3) the start can be made with the establishment of some industrial plants, which are often satisfied with basic infrastructure in an otherwise undeveloped area;

4) the population structure will have a higher ration of working individuals, thus increasing the productivity and agility of the community;

5) the various businesses will mutually advance eachother, e.g. hotels will profit from the Trade Fare, whilest the local industry can sell more products to the tourists etc.;

6) the administration of the business park will take a share in the profits produced on the territory of the business park – through ground rent, joint venture stipulations, etc. The more private profit, the more income for the communal infrustructure.

Such a „business park“ should be planned particularly with regard to the cross-fertilization potential of the industries to be invited. The waste materials of one industry can be usefull raw materials of another industry, thus a neighbouring would offer additional cost advantage. For example, a fishing industry will not only provide fish for local residents and gastronomy, but ist remainders can be revamped into nutritious food for a chicken farm. The latter one not only produces eggs and cull hens, but also lots of the chicken shit – which, in turn, is a precious fertilizer for the agriculture. The agricultural products – say, ananas or dates, can not only be sold as food, but can also be fermented into pricy alcohol to be served at local bars or be exported. The wood and cellulose from the date palms can be used for paper production, or some local handycraft – and so on. Depending on the local circumstances, a number of such material currents can be discovered and local economy be helped in the right direction.

So, what initial businesses could be settled in such a business park? You already mentioned the accomodation industry. There was also a suggestion to invite an investor for sport / fishery boats – that’s a work-intensive industry, just exactly what we need to employ our people. Not only can be the local boats be used by the local fishery industry, but an annual trade fare / exhibition of sport boats could be envisioned. The tourists might be animated to rent such boats, and to participate in recreational activities on the nearby artificial reefs. Annual special gatherings for all kinds of varieties of Gay people can be staged – a song contest, sport competitions, theater plays marathon, cinema festival, rocket constructors competition, hemp and orchid gardeners yearly exhibition...

A business plan for such a settlement can be refined step-by-step, once there is clarity about the location and the available ressources.