Liam redux

,

Soviet mole in the Democratic Unionist Party?

  There was a short lived flurry of sexual liberation after the Russian Revolution which was finally quashed when Stalin signed a decree in 1933 criminalising gay sex. If caught men would be sent to prison. In the latter period in the Soviet Union gays and lesbians were often sent to hospital for psychiatric treatment.…

Liam
2–3 minutes

Member7-763031  There was a short lived flurry of sexual liberation after the Russian Revolution which was finally quashed when Stalin signed a decree in 1933 criminalising gay sex. If caught men would be sent to prison. In the latter period in the Soviet Union gays and lesbians were often sent to hospital for psychiatric treatment. The idea was that they were so obviously sick in the head that some sort of medical intervention was required.

Now to be fair it was not just the Soviets who had fairly illiberal views on the subject. Those mysterious references in James P. Cannon about why the party should not recruit men who wear green corduroy trousers was his way of saying that it should be a heterosexual proletarian vanguard.

Iris Robinson, who is the chair of the health committee in the colonial Belfast assembly, has been strongly influenced by the Soviet view. When asked about a homophobic attack in the city she had the good sense to remark that this sort of thing is not very nice. The odd thing was that she went on to betray her Stalinist background by adding “I have a very lovely psychiatrist who works with me in my offices and his Christian background is that he tries to help homosexuals – trying to turn away from what they are engaged in. I’m happy to put any homosexual in touch with this gentleman and I have met people who have turned around and become heterosexuals.”

Disregard the Christian stuff. A highly trained KGB plant would have been trained to use the vernacular of the organisation they were trying to infiltrate.  It’s obvious that her true ideology just slipped out under the pressure of a live interview. In another nice Stalinist detail there stands in east Belfast a Peter Robinson leisure centre named in honour of Iris’ undead husband. Now that Paisley has been sent out to pasture it’s only a matter of time before a large swathe of Belfast is flattened to make way for the Peter and Iris Robinson Palace of People’s Culture. It’ll be one of the Fenian swathes.

An uncharitable school of thought suggests that anyone who chooses a man with the charm of Peter Robinson as a life partner should be put in touch with “a very lovely psychiatrist” but let’s not explore that avenue.

 

34 responses to “Soviet mole in the Democratic Unionist Party?”

  1. Andy Newman Avatar
    Andy Newman

    Blimey, i always though that James canon had a sincere and understandable averesion to green coduroy trousers.

    Shows how naive I am.

    Like

    Reply
  2. Another little vignette from our rainbow province « Splintered Sunrise

    […] on this from Liam. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Iris Robinson – did I read it […]

    Like

    Reply
  3. splinteredsunrise Avatar
    splinteredsunrise

    The corduroy trouser thing was far from the worst manifestation in the Cannon movement, and at least JP was of an age where you could understand him being less enlightened that we are now. My favourite was Barry Sheppard’s bright idea in the 1970s of requiring all the gays in the US SWP to go back into the closet.

    Oddly enough, you hear this sort of thing on local radio all the time. They aren’t as careful in their own backyard.

    Like

    Reply
  4. Liam Avatar
    Liam

    Andy there’s a lot to be said for green cords. You don’t have to iron them and the pair I bought seven or eight years ago are still going strong apart from a hole in one of the pockets.

    Like

    Reply
  5. Ray Avatar
    Ray

    “apart from a hole in one of the pockets.”

    As we’re speaking of euphemisms is that code for something rather rude?

    Like

    Reply
  6. charliemarks Avatar
    charliemarks

    My mother made me wear green corduroy trousers when I was a wee boy. I’m not sure she was aware of the effect they’d have on me… seriously, though. What’s this stuff about green cords?

    And I love that she says ” I’m happy to put any homosexual in touch with this gentleman” as if she’s some kind of match-maker…

    Like

    Reply
  7. stroppybird Avatar
    stroppybird

    I saw this, and posted on it, in Pink News. They also reported what she said in the HFE bill debate about lesbians and fertility treatment :

    “Envisage, down the road, a child going to primary school and being collected by two females or two males, and the bullying and abuse to which those children will be exposed; or going into their parents’ bedroom, as is natural for a child to do, and finding two women or two men making love?” said Mrs Robinson.

    wtf, do her kids pop in and watch her at it then ??

    Like

    Reply
  8. PhilW Avatar
    PhilW

    The first pair of trousers that I bought for myself was a pair of green cords, purchased in Caranby Street in 1967, along with an orange/brown cheesecloth shirt. I was very proud of this fetching combination, but then I had yet to read “The Struggle for the Proletarian Party”…..

    In terms of sustainable development, an equally pressing issue is the matter of Liam’s trouser pocket. This serious matter should be the subject not of trivial innuendo, but of the most rigorous Marxist analysis. Such an effort would lead to the inevitable conclusion that the premature wearing out of trouser pockets (an affliction which also affects my trousers) is a classic example of planned obsolescence and is the result of a conspiracy between the pocket manufacturers and the makers of keys.

    There are only two ways to overcome this crisis. You can adopt the social democratic approach of mending the pockets. In my reformist, individualist days, I actually kept aside a spare pair of jeans to cut up and replace worn pockets with ones made out of denim. This meant that the pockets were now the LAST part of my trousers to wear out. Or, you can pose a series of transitional demands for the manufacturers to reinforce the pockets and to redesign keys. Such a demand can only be met by the overthrow of capitalist relations of production and the institution of a planned economy under workers’ control.

    If the wearing of green cords leads to the understanding of such political awareness, then I’m all for it, quite apart from the revolutionary aesthetic statement they make.

    Like

    Reply
  9. stroppybird Avatar
    stroppybird

    Don’t know about green cords, but cords generally to me signifies geography teacher .

    Like

    Reply
  10. Clive Searle Avatar
    Clive Searle

    Sorry Stroppy but times have moved on. As a Geography teacher I can categorically refute the allegation of cord-wearing – we don’t even have leather patches on the elbows of our jackets anymore.

    Like

    Reply
  11. Liam Avatar
    Liam

    Stroppy – thanks for ruining my weekend. I’m now going to be haunted by images of Iris and Peter Robinson in flagrante and they are neither exciting nor comfortable.

    Like

    Reply
  12. ray Avatar
    ray

    liam
    I am having problems with your site yesterday on my work computer and today at home. There seems to be some instability with it.

    Like

    Reply
  13. Jason Avatar
    Jason

    Clive, it’s my understanding that times have moved on again and cords are back in fashion, though you never know they may have moved back out again!

    Far more disappointing if true is Cannon having homophobic views- I suppose he was a man of his time and people are contradictory but much of his writing and politics seems dedicated to standing up for the oppressed and countering prejudice even when entrenched and popular.

    Or was thta one of Liam’s infathomable (to me at least) jokes?

    Like

    Reply
  14. almata Avatar
    almata

    It’s not just corduroys the SWP was in fear of. The US SWP was notorious in trying to dissuade inter-racial couples in the organization as well (in the 40-50’s). The following was written by Dick Fraser and should be taken with a grain of salt but it lines up with much of what I have heard:

    “Probably the most disastrous of all the consequences of the nationalist theory was in the problem of interracial marriage. The party operated upon the following theorem: If the black movement will, when it matures, become a nationalist-separatist and anti-white movement (like the Garvey movement), any black revolutionary who marries whites will be ostracized.

    During the years under consideration, 1942-48, ours was an interracial party, and in these circumstances close personal relations developed interracially, both in the organization and its periphery. Such relations sometimes easily developed into marriage. The leadership did everything it could to discourage this practice, from friendly reasoning, to pleading, to pressure and social ostracism.

    Milton Richardson, our candidate for Governor or Lieutenant Governor in one of our post-war elections in New York, married white. She was socially ostracized and he was highly pressured. He finally left the country a broken man.

    Joe Morgan was hounded out of the Party.

    Louise Simpson, candidate for New York Lieutenant Governor in about 1944, married a white sympathizer. When persuasion was to no avail, harassment began, and became so intolerable that the husband threatened to go to the NAACP with a grievance. Jim finally told one of the offenders in the leadership to for Christ’s sake leave those kids alone. Finally, at the 1949 Convention, an announcement was made by the N.C.—through the presidium—that the SWP does not oppose interracial marriage. The damage, however, had already been done. It was just too little and just too late.

    When Dobbs’ daughter married Clifton DeBerry and finally moved to New York, they were, of course, tolerated, and probably escaped the pressures exerted upon other like couples. However, this occurrence did not ameliorate the problem in New York to any appreciable degree, even spreading westward when Tom Kerry invaded Los Angeles in the ’50s—witness the case of E. Banks.

    Under the impact of all of these factors, our black membership eroded. False strategic concepts, false theory and program made it impossible for the SWP to change its social base, a factor which might have prevented the ultimate degeneration which eventually overcame it.”

    Like

    Reply
  15. Jason Avatar
    Jason

    Terrible and just goes to show what contradictory bundles of influences go into people and parties. Still though Notebook of An Agitator was one of my formative influences along with some other texts of the 30s SWP e.g. Teamster Rebellion by Farrell Dobbs(written long after but about the 30s) and other works by Cannon http://www.marxists.org/archive/cannon/works/1934/mpls02.htm

    Like

    Reply
  16. stroppybird Avatar
    stroppybird

    “Stroppy – thanks for ruining my weekend. I’m now going to be haunted by images of Iris and Peter Robinson in flagrante and they are neither exciting nor comfortable.”

    My pleasure:-)

    Mind, think about how traumatised their kids must be as She seems to consider it ok for them to watch fod fearing types shagging within marriage .

    Like

    Reply
  17. stroppybird Avatar
    stroppybird

    Oops, god fearing, not fod fearing !

    Like

    Reply
  18. Nick Fredman Avatar
    Nick Fredman

    Whatever the faults of Cannon and his generation (and I thought he was talking about some kind of proto-hippy in a corduroy suit , BTW not just pants, and colour unspecified, in History of American Trotskyism), splinteredsunrise above seems quite unjust to Barry Sheppard, and is perhaps confusing two things.

    At one point in his memoir The Party Sheppard relates his shame at his one instance, in the 60s, of enforcing the SWP’s (and not particularly his) then policy of not allowing members to be out. He later relates how the SWP rescinded this formally in 1970 and supported the liberation movement, but abstained from it for several years. About the latter I happened to write the following a little while ago on the Marxmail list when someone asserted the SWP in the 70s coerced its members into arguing that homosexuality was not normal.
    ——-
    Barry Sheppard provides a detailed account of the discussion in the SWP in 1971-73 in his book The Party, pp. 319-324, that is somewhat different from Louis’ summary. I’ve no reason to doubt that it is in fact as it reads, like the whole book, carefully objective, quoting as it does from different contributions, as opposed to Louis’ rather splenetic summary (Anyone at all interested on the radical politics of the 50s-70s and in building a socialist group in an advanced capitalist country should get this book IMO).

    If I get a chance I’ll scan the most relevant couple of pages – though Tom can pop over to Swanston St and buy a copy, or online at
    http://www.resistancebooks.com/ 🙂 . But the nub is that in preparing a resolution clearly opposing gay oppression and supporting the liberation movement, Sheppard reluctantly agreed to concede to a prejudiced section of the SWP that opposed any active involvement in the movement, and took this out of the resolution. The resolution clearly opposed the idea that homosexuality is a disorder (i.e. it did not appear to oppose the idea that “being gay is as normal as being as being straight” or coerce anyone into arguing that) – and he says “I also rejected taking any position on the relative merits of homosexuality or heterosexuality”. He says at the 1973 convention “The great majority of comrades agreed with it, including gay and
    lesbian members. Some didn’t and over time left the party. We lost some good people as a result”.

    He argues the concession to the prejudice of some older members was a serious error, and points out that within a few years the SWP was actively involved.

    He sums up: “As a party in the late 1960s and early 1970s we were marked by the time. Prejudices in the society and the working class were reflected in the party, as were the new forces breaking down those prejudices. On the question of the liberation of gays and lesbians, the International Socialists and Workers World were ahead of us. But we were way ahead of most other socialist groups, especially those who were of a Stalinist origin, whether of the pro-Moscow or pro-Beijing variety”.

    Like

    Reply
  19. Ray Avatar
    Ray

    The whole of the left during the 60’s and 70’s was still influenced by the reactionary ideas of Stalinism towards gay people. The notion that it was a bourgiouse deviation affected even the Trotskyist groups. Yet that didn’t stop communists forming the Mattachine Society in the US during the 50’s.
    It’s important to remember that socialists were at the forefront of fighting for gay rights internationally and specifically in the GLF in tthe UK.
    Considering that the prevailing ideologay before (and after) Stonewall was antagonistic towards gay people it’s understandable that the left had to develop it’s understanding of how to fight gay oppression.

    Like

    Reply
  20. splinteredsunrise Avatar
    splinteredsunrise

    Perhaps I was a bit hard on Barry – I have his book sitting about and must refer to it. But he at least did do a good self-criticism.

    Important to remember, if we’re talking about the 1930s, that even someone as clued in as Reich had views on homosexuality that we would find a bit backward today.

    And not just time but space. Listen to Talk Back on Radio Ulster, and hardly a weekend goes by without some caller getting stuck into the ‘sodomites’. Could you get away with this on lunchtime radio in London? I think not.

    Like

    Reply
  21. Ray Avatar
    Ray

    Yes, I think the left can be a bit too hard on itself when looking back and judging how it related to liberation movements. Especially as it is clearly obvious when examining the historical information that leading members of this movement were socialists. Reactionary ideas did exist in the left but when this is placed in context with the hegemony of Stalinism on the left at the time and the prevailing reactionary ideas in society then we need to give a little lattitude. Which doesn’t mean apologising for those ideas but understanding why they predominated.

    Like

    Reply
  22. Ray Avatar
    Ray

    “Which doesn’t mean apologising for those ideas but understanding why they predominated.”

    Sorry, should have said, “Which doesn’t mean excusing those ideas but understanding why they predominated.”

    Like

    Reply
  23. a very public sociologist Avatar
    a very public sociologist

    Isn’t it true the Sparts – they of pro-NAMBLA fame – recommended their lesbian and gay members remain in the closet as late as the late 80s so they wouldn’t be susceptible to blackmail. Excuse me, where’s the logic in this position?

    Like

    Reply
  24. Andy Newman Avatar
    Andy Newman

    Ray

    Can you justify your claim that homophobia derived from Stalinism, rather than from reflecting the then contemporary norms of society.

    Have you any evdince of orthodox communists having more reactionaly positions than those prevailing in bourgeois society?

    Like

    Reply
  25. splinteredsunrise Avatar
    splinteredsunrise

    Actually, in Belfast one of the leading gay rights activists used to be an active member of the CPI. May still be for all I know.

    Like

    Reply
  26. PhilW Avatar
    PhilW

    In the 80s, the Sparts were still telling new members with kids to get them out of the way if possible (e.g. to an ex-partner etc.) Is it true that they used to recommend their members go into therapy, or was that only particular members?

    What is NAMBLA?

    On the question of homophobia and Stalinism: the idea that homophobia was acceptable in the workers’ movement, and indeed in that section that called itself Marxist, was sustained by the policies of the USSR. This represented a regression from the pre-stalinist period. Let us say, they didn’t exactly fight homophobia.

    Reactionary politics are expected in reactionary organisations and institutions. When ones claiming to be “progressive” carry out thoroughly reactionary policies, for a sustained period (sixty years? more?), perhaps it is time to ask a few questions?

    Like

    Reply
  27. a very public sociologist Avatar
    a very public sociologist

    NAMBLA = the North American Man-Boy Love Association. Yes, the Sparts really did support an organisation with this name.

    Like

    Reply
  28. Ray Avatar
    Ray

    The Stalinists believed that homosexuality was a bougeoise deviation and viewed it as an aspect of the moral decadence of the bourgeoise that would wither away under communism. This is in direct contrast to the perspective of the Bolsheviks pre Stalinism. In Russia homosexuality was recriminalised in 1934 by the Stalinists and methods such as blackmail were used to persecute and eliminate gay people. There were both prison/forced-labour sentences and enforced psychiatric treatment.
    While Stalinist persecution of gay people was possibly no worse than the persecution gay people experienced in the rest of capitalism it distorted Marxism and forced the majority of the left into a reactionary direction. As socialists we need to be extremely clear that Stalinisn encouraged the persecution of gays by distorting Marxism and that we stand for a different tradition.

    Like

    Reply
  29. Ray Avatar
    Ray

    One point I didn’t address is that I never claimed that homophobia was developed by the Stalinists. It developed in the late 19C when sexual orientation was medicalised and the ideology of the nuclear family consolidated in capitalism. The Stalinist co-opted homophobia as part of their arsenal of reactionary ideologies to persecute and eliminate political opponents and to validate their propaganda to promote childbirth and the family.

    Like

    Reply
  30. Andy Newman Avatar
    Andy Newman

    But Ray

    It is also true that opposition to homosexuality was completely prevelent in trotskyite organisations, including the IS.

    In all sorts of other areas, the trot left prides itself in having defiantly opposed the politics of Stalin; but over this issue there isn’t a rizla between them.

    The IS changed its position towards supporting gay rights only in the early 1970s, IIRC, when members of the Gay Liberation Front joined the IS. And the CP changed its position toeards supporting gay rights no later than the trot left did.

    Like

    Reply
  31. Ray Avatar
    Ray

    Andy I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. As I stated, Stalinist ideology affected all of the left in some form or other. I know you are dismissive of the “Trot left”, as you describe us, but when it came to the GLF we helped found it. Which is a lot more than can be said for the Stalinists reaction to gay liberation at the time.
    Individual members of the US Communist Party founded the Mattachine Society but the Stalinist ideology towards homosexuality was one of hostility.
    You don’t seem to have a very accurate grasp of the the historical information which leads you to lump everything together in an unhelpful and unmarxist manner.

    Like

    Reply
  32. Alex Avatar
    Alex

    Trot groups might have had backward ideas about homosexuality but as far as I know, no trot ever supported criminalizing homosexuality or subjecting gays to forced ‘medical treatment’. Stalinists did. I’m suprised Andy doesn’t think this difference is worth anything.

    Like

    Reply
  33. Nick Fredman Avatar
    Nick Fredman

    A couple of points. I think Sparts as well as DSP members were involved in the first Australian gay rights march, in Sydney in 1978, that became the massive Sydney Mardi Gras (which still seems to always have some political edge, if only from contingents rather than organisers). Oz developments as well debates in the early German Social Democrats, Bolsheviks etc are covered in a fairly substantial DSP document, unfortunately not online but available from here.

    In the early-mid 90s when I was still in Sydney rather than a Spart-free smaller place, I recall when the Sparts mobilised their whole 15 or so for May Day etc there seemed to be a lot of prams amongst them. This I found disturbing.

    Another tidbit from Sheppard’s book is that NAMBLA was founded by one of those who split from the US SWP due to the above-mentioned diasagreements with their 1973 resolution on gay rights (obviously this doesn’t necessarily reflect on anyone else opposing this resolution).

    And to tie things together even more oddly, I just noticed that this undoubtedly unsavory person (or someone also called David Thorstad), posting on the Marxmail list a mind-numbingly workerist attack on Besancenot, for among other things supporting gay marriage http://www.marxmail.org/msg42867.html

    Like

    Reply
  34. Nick Fredman Avatar
    Nick Fredman

    I believe Sparts were involved, along with the DSP, in the first Australian gay rights march in 1978, that became the massive Sydney Mardi Gras. That’s if I recall correctly the fairly extensive history of the orientation of socialists to lesbian and gay rights in a DSP documents, unfortunately not online but available from here.

    NAMBLA was in fact set up by one of those who left the US SWP over diasagreements with their above-mentioned 1973 resolution, according to the bit of Sheppard’s book I quoted from above.

    Actually I just noticed that this person, or someone else called David Thorstad, recent posted on the Marxmail a quite stupidly workerist criticism of Besancenot, including the fact that the latter supports gay marriage http://www.marxmail.org/msg42867.html

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Clive Searle Cancel reply

Trending