"WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE FOR PEACE AND SOCIALISM"
This was on the banner of the Dulais Valley Lodge, and it really stinks.
If I have to be a socialist to be gay, I'd rather be straight.
What??????
share[deleted]
Gay men shouldn't be taxed to pay for the babies of those who reproduce without control. Gay men shouldn't be taxed to pay for clothing, food and shelter for others. Gay is a statement of individuality, not a cloned response to a socialist agenda. Before you start calling others ignorant, consider how much of what YOU earn is taken by others, most of whom think you're a pervert!
In the film, gay men and women went out in the streets and solicited PRIVATE voluntary donations. Then, they DONATED what they collected to the Miners. There was no government largesse involved, it was all PRIVATE giving, and it worked just fine. Why such a worthy effort must be included in a broad description of "socialism" I will never understand. It is a failed system, all it does is distribute poverty and discourage personal responsibilty.
Cuba is a great example of socialism - the communist sort - where people have lived for years frying banana peels for food. They are SO POOR they can't get anything else. And THIS is the kind of political system to which gays aspire?
I hope not.
I have no problem with my "gay" dollars paying for "babies, clothing, food, shelter," or anything else that helps those in need. One main objection I have about my taxes is the obscene amount that goes to the military-industrial complex, except for veterans and their families, and care for those maimed physically or mentally/emotionally by their service. Our taxes also subsidize giant corporations that use loopholes to pay nothing, outsource work to other countries where workers are paid pittances and treated horribly, and do anything possible to make the rich richer and let the rest of us slide further down the socioeconomic scale into poverty.
Cuba still has a totalitarian government so, like China, N. Korea and the former USSR, doesn't really represent socialism or communism. Maybe you're mistaking Cuba for North Korea since many reputable accounts of life in Cuba document the basically decent standard of living the citizens enjoy. I am glad some sanctions are finally being lifted since they should have been lifted decades ago and, if anything, made living conditions worse for the poorest on that tiny island.
The UK and many European countries have socialism to thank for lower poverty rates and better standards of living than the USA. Even Canada, the Maple Menace, has socialized health care and other services which afford their citizens a more secure existence than that of many U.S. Americans.
"Gay is a statement of individuality" is one of the goofiest declarations I've ever read about homos, especially since many younger gay men are so busy distancing themselves from "them (i.e., the nelly stereotype)" and self-describe as "masculine" and, worse, "straight acting (the only real difference between the actions of straight men and gay men is straight men have sex with women)" as if our homophobic society gives a crap -- we're all disgusting perverts to them no matter how butch, not deserving of job security or "special rights" like marriage or raising children.
Gay is a statement of nothing except sexual orientation.
"I write Stargate fan fiction so I think I know what I'm talking about..."
You wrote:
"Gay is a statement of nothing except sexual orientation."
That's why I was sorry to see Gay Rights linked with socialism.
And that's all I really wrote initially. Gay shouldn't be a political agenda.
BTW, I thought George McKay, who played the part of Joe, was just delicious.
Gay rights weren't linked with socialism, they were linked with the striking miners. The Dulais banner is what it was, the banner of the Dulais miners. They believed in socialism because it allowed them to unionize and have rights not afforded to non-union workers. Even long after The Iron Lady crushed the miners socialism still provides benefits we don't have in the USA. "There is power in a Union!"
George MacKay is a cutie pie but at 58 I'd feel like a pedophile if he were so blind and lacking all tactile senses as to be attracted to me. Ben Schnetzer is delicious as well but the same rule applies. I can't believe he's the same young man from The Book Thief.
"I write Stargate fan fiction so I think I know what I'm talking about..."
Cuba is a great example of socialism - the communist sort - where people have lived for years frying banana peels for food. They are SO POOR they can't get anything else. And THIS is the kind of political system to which gays aspire?Okay, simply because Cuba happens to be one of the Socialist countries I have learned quite a lot about:
Is that why, for decades, Cubans have risked their lives in rafts and boats and whatever it took to escape the abundance of Cuba to travel to the impoverished, racist, capitalist U.S.A.?
Cuba is REAL close to the U.S. When I was a kid living in the Southeastern U.S., the missiles 20 minutes away were a very, very bad introduction to Castro, communism, and the USSR. Imagine being 12, living within the strike zone, and hearing that Cuba had Russian nuclear missiles ready to fire! Maybe it was all right-wing nonsense, and we never really landed on the moon, either.
The U.S.A. supports a huge debt to cover sick and old people, we pay for millions of babies, and we give still more to others! For this, the Communists would call Americans "imperialists".
America is the biggest philanthropic organization in the world. This is not only because we are rich. There is nothing wrong with being rich, only with expecting you are entitled to it. Truly "Rich" people can afford to be generous, that's part of being human and successful and happy! Capitalism is the game that gives everyone a chance. Not a guarantee, not an equal outcome, just an equal opportunity. I would want my gay friends to feel the same way - but I'm very old-fashioned.
Is that why, for decades, Cubans have risked their lives in rafts and boats and whatever it took to escape the abundance of Cuba to travel to the impoverished, racist, capitalist U.S.A.?It's mostly the wealthier Cubans who have fled, actually, not the poorest. Don't believe that because SOME of the population decided to leave, that means those still living there are living such horrible lives. And again I mention: if there are some poor people there who left to come to the U.S., that would most likely be because the blockade was keeping them from being able to fully thrive.
The U.S.A. supports a huge debt to cover sick and old people, we pay for millions of babiesthe U.S. in fact has one of the highest infant mortality rates of all the first world countries, and we also have one of the most widely known poor, ineffective health care systems of any first world country. We spend a freaking ton on healthcare, but that's not for the PEOPLE, it's because the big pharmaceuticals turn a massive profit by keeping people alive, but very sick so that they have to take all kinds of medication. And because so many people can't afford healthcare that they end up just waiting until they have to go to the emergency room, which costs a ton of money that they can't pay and they can't be turned away. It does not mean our system is working for anyone but those at the very very top.
Capitalism is the game that gives everyone a chance.Not those whom the system relies on the be poor so that big capital can profit off of their labor for the cheapest possible price.. it doesn't give those people a chance at all. The problem is that it's fundamentally a system that places profit before anything else. And I cannot get behind that. I want to see our system start putting its PEOPLE first, and then whatever's left over, we can talk about how that works. But first make sure that all those tons and tons of empty luxury apartments sitting empty all around New York City and Brooklyn (where I live) because no one can afford them while I pass easily 10+ people out on the streets every day going to and from work? That those apartments start housing people who actually need them at a price they can afford, and that healthy food is affordable enough for people and their kids to not go to bed hungry. THEN we can talk. Until then... nope, I can't see how on earth Capitalism is working for anyone but the mindblowingly wealthy.
Thank you! Someone who knows what they're talking about!
shareCommunism and Socialism are not the same thing. It's like saying Christianity is the same as Judaism. Or Islam is the same as Judaism. Since both Christianity and Islam are rooted in Judaism doesn't mean they are the same. They're not. Stop using Socialism and Communism as synonyms.
-Nam
I am on the road less traveled...
Actually they're variations on a theme, only anarchism is qualitatively different from the statist dogmas of the various forms of far rightism.
Marlon, Claudia & Dimby the cats 1989-2010. Clio the cat, July 1997 - 1 May 2016.
Socialism isn't, by itself, right or left. Actually, if used properly it's right dab in the center. Also, Communism has never been used properly because Marx himself stated that it would or could only be used in the small scale and only after basically creating utopias could it be implemented. But like with everything else, including films like this: people usually only see what they want to and corrupt it to their particular vision.
-Nam
I am on the road less traveled...
You miss the point, socialism is as statist as liberalism or nazism. All statist ideologies are variations on a tyrannical theme.
Marlon, Claudia & Dimby the cats 1989-2010. Clio the cat, July 1997 - 1 May 2016.
Gay men shouldn't be taxed to pay for the babiesThere's someone who didn't get anything from the film. share
Gay (and straight) women shouldn't have to pay forever for your selfishness and misogyny,
shareIt's not made clear in the film, but Mark Ashton was actually a member of the Young Communist League.
However, the events in the film led to gay rights eventually being rolled out by the Labour Party. The Conservative Party were generally opposed at the time, although they have changed their tune under Cameron.
And you don't have to be a socialist to be gay. David Starkey is very conservative and also gay.
Thanks, epa101, for the post -- I was about to write something similar.
I read another review of Pride which mentioned Mark's membership in the YCL and the writer inferred it was not in the story (unless the jeer "Commie!" at the gay bar counts) to avoid alienating audiences in the USA, where mere mention of "communism" elicits rabidly negative reactions. Since many, if not most, U.S. Americans equate socialism and communism as identical it's quite likely this aspect of Mark's life was omitted for that reason. What a load of bollocks...
In 2014 we are still so well brainwashed you'd think it was the middle of the Cold War. Ebola is raging in Africa but you'd never know it here since the media riled everyone up a few months back. We've moved on to the next infobits which remain in our collective memories for 14 minutes.
Just don't interrupt a football game with a news bulletin even if nuclear missiles are heading to the heartland. If that's the case we want to see as much of the game as possible before we evaporate...
"I write Stargate fan fiction so I think I know what I'm talking about..."
.... Because Capitalism has worked so well for the people who aren't, you know, the owners of multi-billion dollar corporations who make their money off the backs of the poorest people of the world and so purposely have mechanisms in place to keep those people in their state of poverty??
As someone who's had a pretty extensive education on the different economic systems, as well as learned a lot about some of the so called "evil dictatorships" (or so the Western media likes to claim) that are actually completely democratic Socialist countries making some very significant strides in raising the living standards for their poorest people... I think we could USE some more people who don't buy into the lies about how "Capitalism is the only system that can work and god forbid anyone be a ~Socialist~!".
At the end of the day, I'm not necessarily sure that the ideal economic system is exclusively anything- I don't think there's inherently something wrong with making some money. It's just that far, far too often you have a very select few making massively more money than they could ever possibly need on the backs of people like the miners in this movie- the people who are doing dangerous work in horrid conditions and barely making enough money to live. Ensure that every person has their basic needs met, and THEN once that's happened, then we can talk about how anything extra can be divided. But it's fundamentally not okay with me that there are SO many people even in the advanced industrialized countries that go to bed hungry or without a roof over their head, while right next door you have Wall Street billionaires with so much wealth it's unimaginable, and for no other reason than that they've been willing to make all their wealth at the expense of others, and that the system we live in encourages/rewards such behavior.
Aaaanyway, I'll get off my soap box now haha. I just like to try and break through some of the misinformation and misconceptions that are still being spread Cold War style about Socialism to this day.
Oh Bambi, I cried so hard when those hunters shot your mommy. - Kurt Hummel
Actually, the miners in the film earned decent wages for working people in 1984. They weren't rich, but they earned a lot more than the typical factory worker. This is one of the reasons why there wasn't much sympathy for them in 1984. A lot of the public felt that the miners had decent salaries and would get decent redundancy packages.
You can contrast this with their strike in 1972, when the engineers of Birmingham came out on strike to support them and assisted in the picketing of a coking plant at Saltley Gate. Back then, the miners really were badly paid.
As someone who experienced living in a communist/socialist country (not Cuba), I must tell you that you don't know first thing about communism, socialism or humanism, for that matter.
People weren't enormously rich but no one was poor, crime rate was very low, unemployment rate too, NO homeless people! ALL citizens had decent wages, health insurance and retirement plans guaranteed by the government.
I'm not trying to convince you what is better for you, but you need to know more about subject you're bashing that hard without any reasonable arguments.
TO THE OP: Why do you assume that, because this film shows a SPECIFIC group of gay people (in a specific time and place in history) supporting a labor union, that ALL gay people are therefore socialists? That's a pretty big leap, dude.
shareI made no such assumption. I certainly don't believe all gay people are socialists, leftists, collectivists or democrats, for that matter. My concern was that the movie suggested that "gay rights" required taking up the hammer and sickle and marching for Marx.
shareIn 2015, there's a lot of cultural space available in which to be a gay conservative. In 1984, however, that's not who was coming out and fighting the gay fight -- being gay put you on the margins of society in a way that's not so true anymore, so it was the socialists (i.e. the people who were already "outsiders" to begin with) who were actually open about their sexuality, and actively organizing pride parades and community events and Lesbians and Gays Support Stuff committees and the like.
The film isn't suggesting that LGBT rights and socialism are always permanently linked; it's simply depicting a historical moment in which that link was more true and unavoidable than it is now.
The socialist movements have usually been in the front for defending and demanding rights for people of any gender and etnicity and rights as of whole. Liberals and conservatives are trying to wash that away, even gay pride and other that does identity politics does that. They should pick up a damn book or something and read, I love the way Pride showed that these people were socialist/communist.
shareIt doesn't stink at all. Learn your history.
Egalitarian political movements were the ones standing up for us, back to 1800s Germany. That's not putting any requirement on you to hold any economic stance, but it would be foolish to ignore history. Those people fought for your right to hold the stance of your choice as an out gay man or lesbian.
All roads lead to truth if you're willing to travel honestly.
I was going to watch this movie, but am leaning against it after reading this post. Socialism is a political movement used to undermine the RIGHTS of individuals for the NEEDS of society. In order to understand RIGHTS and NEEDS, we must be able to distinguish civil liberties from civil rights. Civil liberties refer to rights that cannot be taken away (the right to self expression, the right to defend yourself in a court of law, and the freedom to defend yourself, family, and property with the most technologically advanced weapons, firearms, just to name a few). On the other hand, civil rights are about achieving social equality. Marriage, for example, is not a right. Marriage is a ceremony to celebrate the unity between two private individuals. Socialists (in America) support gay marriage, but go even farther by forcing pastors to marry gay people even if it is against their religion. I have nothing against gay marriage as long as it does not intrude on the religious convictions of others. I will go even further to say that government should not be sticking its big, fat nose into contracts between two private individuals, regardless if it is a traditional or homosexual marriage.
I dream of an America where everyone, including gay couples, can protect their marijuana crops with fully automatic rifles.
No. You have to understand that 'socialism' is one of the most abused words out there. The specific context it's used in is important and, in the movie, it's an egalitarian one.
Beyond that, plenty of well-meaning but simplistic takes have been rallied around but still produced some good. You'd be hard-pressed to find any good that didn't come out of a dynamic with some bad baggage. And it's the specific human story that's the thrust of the movie, without whitewashing out what some might find a stain on the history. It is an actual event, after all. The movie is about actual people and if the label transcend people for you, you may have a problem with it, but if you can watch the human story in play, you might enjoy it.
I've never heard of any pastors being forced to marry gay people against their religion. Care to share specifics there?
All roads lead to truth if you're willing to travel honestly.
I can see where the OP is coming from but this is a movie from a very specific time and place. The Thatcher government did go out of its way to pick fights and demonize specific minority groups in order to galvanize some of the nastier elements of their base. So gays, because who doesn't like bashing queers right? The miners- due to them striking ten years earlier and bringing down the previous tory Govt.
Not saying everything that govt did was wrong policy-wise but the way they went about it was very "Them and Us" and it did damage the UK is still recovering from.
There are gay conservatives in the UK now- there were none (out of the closet) 30 years ago.