The Brave Peter Tatchell

Amidst this winter's worldwide violent protests over the 12 cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed published in a Danish newspaper, the words of Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi did little to ease the tensions. "Let Friday be an international day of anger for God and his prophet," he proclaimed several days before a massive, February 3rd protest in which hundreds of British Muslims descended upon the Danish Embassy in London. They bore placards that read, "Butcher those who mock Islam," "Behead those who insult Islam," and, more generally, "Kill those who insult Islam." One protestor was arrested a few days later for dressing as a suicide bomber.

The man who called for the protest is not some obscure Imam known only to radical Islamists. The Egyptian born and Qatar-based Qaradawi is the head of the International Association of Muslim Scholars and one of the Arab world's most well-known television preachers. The Daily Telegraph observes that, "he is considered one of the most influential men in modern Sunni Islam." Qaradawi is most known to Britons for his cozy relationship with the left wing Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, who has praised him as a "leading progressive Muslim" and hosted him at a conference in 2004.

Following the London bombings of last summer, Livingstone again invited the man he has called a "moderate" to London with the hope of easing inter-cultural tensions. This, in spite of the fact that Qaradawi has called homosexuality a "disease that needs a cure" and the website of which he is the chief scholar, www.islamonline.net, suggests that gays be executed via "burning or stoning to death."

Following the Asian Tsunami of 2004, Livingstone defended Qaradawi after he said that "Tourism areas are areas where the forbidden acts are widespread as well as alcohol consumption, drug use and acts of abomination...Don't they deserve punishment from Allah?" by stating that the Sheikh was a victim of a smear campaign orchestrated by the Israeli intelligence service Mossad. Qaradawi has endorsed suicide bombings in Israel as "martyrdom operations," proclaimed that "We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America!" and is banned from entering the United States.

Despite the fawning he has received from Livingstone and the ambivalence that much of the British left has demonstrated towards his remarks, Qaradawi has had a vocal, liberal critic ever since he became a prominent figure in British debates over Muslim assimilation. He was right then and he is right now. But much of the left doesn't want to hear him.

Peter Tatchell can no longer meet with journalists in his home for fear of physical attack. Requesting an interview, I could have been one of his myriad political enemies out to entice him into a trap. It has happened before; a group feigning to be a black student television crew recently lured Tatchell into welcoming them into his office space only to assault him over his campaign against the Jamaican dance hall "murder music" which calls for gays to be maimed and killed. Had security guards not been in the building at the time, Tatchell says, he could have been seriously injured. There is something wrong with the state of liberal politics when many on the left are upbraiding the avowed socialist Peter Tatchell as a right-winger. But that is just the place where Tatchell, whom the reactionary populist Daily Mail once labeled a "homosexual terrorist," finds himself today.

Though born and raised in Australia, Tatchell is the most visible gay rights figure in Great Britain and part of a long tradition of English radicalism and social activism. For his entire public life he has been associated with the far-left reaches of the British political spectrum, a spectrum that stretches much farther left than it does in the United States. From forming the London chapter of the AIDS direct-action agitation group ACT-UP to standing up for the rights of those perennial targets of the British Conservative party, asylum seekers, Tatchell never deviates from a left-liberal perspective in his approach to politics. His noisy tactics, like commandeering the Archbishop's pulpit during the Easter Sunday service at the Canterbury Cathedral in 1998 to denounce the Church of England's hostility to gays, are a composite of Larry Kramer's self-righteousness and Abbie Hoffman's mischief-making.

Born in Melbourne in 1952, Tatchell founded an anti-Vietnam war group, Christians for Peace in 1970. He immigrated to the UK the following year in order to avoid being drafted to fight alongside American troops. In 1973 he organized a gay rights protest in East Germany but was assaulted by the Stasi and kicked him out of the Communist bloc country. He first came into national British consciousness after he stood as a Labor Party candidate in a 1983 parliamentary by-election for a seat in the southeast London constituency of Bermondsey. Tatchell lost by a large margin and the race has entered the annals of British politics as one of its most notorious because of its rank homophobia. Ironically, Simon Hughes, the Liberal Democrat who won the seat and just lost a campaign to be leader of the party, recently came out of a closet of sorts to pronounce himself bisexual. While most in Tatchell's situation might evince bitterness, Tatchell was astonishingly gracious. "That was 23 years ago-I don't hold a grudge," he told Britain's Independent. On his website, he even went so far as to write, "I don't support the Lib Dems, but if I was a member I would vote for Simon as leader."

Sticking so determinedly with his liberal principles, Tatchell has taken on a number of causes in recent years that are bete noires for many on the left and celebrated by the right. One of his most high-profile targets is Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, who has shut down independent newspapers, jailed political opponents and denounced gays as "worse than dogs and pigs." In 2001 the Belgium government feted the African dictator while Mugabe¹s goons beat Tatchell about the head after his second unsuccessful attempt at a citizens' arrest (the first was in 1999), leaving him with permanent damage in one eye.

In March, the Zimbabwean government accused him of helping to fund a coup against Mugabe, to which Tatchell responded, "I can't raise enough money to staff an office for my own human rights work, let alone fund an insurrection." Tatchell has found little solace from the supposedly anti-totalitarian left, which, at best views Mugabe as a side effect of Western imperialism rather than an intrinsic evil that should be directly opposed. "Mugabe has killed more black Africans than even apartheid," Tatchell says, an observation that while likely true, hardly represents a consensus in left-wing circles.

Tatchell has also angered blacks due to his lonely campaign against Jamaican reggae dance hall music, a genre whose most popular singers call for the mauling and death of gays in their lyrics. He felt compelled to raise the issue because many gay Jamaicans approached him and were afraid to speak publicly due to the violent homophobia so prevalent in their home country.

In late November, for example, the gay Jamaican AIDS activist Steve Harvey was shot to death just a year after the murder of Brian Williamson, a founder of Jamaica's gay rights movement. "We were deluged with denunciations from black and left activist groups who accused us of having a racist and imperialist agenda," Tatchell said of the black response to his campaign. A spokesman for the Black Music Council threatened, "Don't you even try to change us, because you can't change us. We will never, ever bow. We are ready and we are coming because what you are doing is racism to the extreme," and the New Nation, a black British newspaper, bestowed Tatchell with its "Pest of the Year" award in 2004. When Tatchell called upon the BBC to rescind its decision to broadcast the Music of Black Origin Awards due to its celebration of homophobic Jamaican reggae singers, black Guardian columnist Joseph Harker wrote, "Instead of seeing a sympathetic figure trying to engage with them, black people see only a white man acting like a modern-day missionary, trying to impose his views."

After Tatchell claimed that Malcolm X might have been gay, the British branch of the Nation of Islam branded him a "Godless sodomite." The Voice, a black British newspaper, wrote that "Unwittingly, Tatchell falls into a tradition of many white right-wing historians who have attempted to rewrite important chapters of black history that effectively disown people of the African Diaspora of their own heroes -- re-presenting them in ways that have little meaning or attraction to the young." Tatchell received enough death threats due to his anti-homophobia campaign that the London police placed him under their protection. Meanwhile, Amnesty International, Tatchell says, halted their support of his campaign out of fear of angering the black community. "If the neo-Nazi BNP [British National Party] was advocating the murder of black lesbians and gay men the left would be rising up in mass demonstrations," he says. "When some Jamaican reggae stars advocate exactly the same thing, large sections of the left run a mile."

In the spring of 2005, Tatchell again came out in opposition to Amnesty for their failure to recognize the grievances of gay Palestinians. The silence is caused by what Tatchell believes is the human rights organization's fear of engendering a backlash likely to come about by faulting a movement that holds a firm place in the pantheon of left-wing conscience. He has battled with pro-Palestinian groups -- whom he has frequently stood alongside protesting Israeli occupation -- over their failure to acknowledge the Palestinian Authority's militant homophobia. In 2005, Tatchell presented Amnesty with a dossier on Palestinian oppression of gays culled from interviews with gay Palestinian exiles. He characterized Amnesty's response as, "We're too busy and we don't have time."

But it has been Tatchell's latest crusade against the Mayor of London's favorite imam that has divided the left in a way that is indicative of a much larger trend in European politics, that is, the problem of Muslim integration. Tatchell was amazed that Livingstone, whose political career he had endorsed from his first race for leader of the Greater London Council in 1980, would carry the water of a man the left ought to have condemned as a bigoted theocrat. "I was utterly astonished that this longtime left-winger and supporter of gay rights was prepared to roll out the red carpet for a fundamentalist cleric who believed in the execution of apostates, unchaste women and gay people," Tatchell says. "It went against everything he's ever stood for." Livingstone had always been a prominent and outspoken leader for gay rights, and supported Tatchell in his 1983 race when the leadership of the Labor Party (including Party leader Michael Foote) opposed his running out of a fear that he was too radical and too gay.

Livingstone, known affectionately and derisively (depending on your politics) as "Red Ken," has long been a thorn in the side of Prime Minister Tony Blair and has been a rallying figure for the party's left wing. He is also something of a thug. In March, he called the US Ambassador to Great Britain Robert Tuttle a "chiseling little crook" after Tuttle requested that US envoys not be forced to pay London's congestion out of respect for diplomatic tradition. Livingstone was temporarily suspended from his duties as Mayor in February, after a 2005 incident in which he compared a Jewish journalist to a Nazi. Approached by Oliver Finegold, a reporter for the Evening Standard, outside an event, Livingstone said, "What did you do? Were you a German war criminal?" Informed that Finegold was Jewish, Livingstone added that the reporter was acting like a "concentration camp guard."

Bob Pitt, a member of Livingstone's official research staff who has worked in Britain's Marxist political circles for decades, regularly derides Tatchell and other Muslim moderates on his blog, Islamophobia-watch.com. Late last year he wrote that, "Tatchell, along with many of his fellow self-styled defenders of Enlightenment values, takes refuge in mindless sectarian bigotry." Tatchell points out that Pitt, in the run-up to the NATO invasion of Afghanistan following the September 11 attacks, wrote that, "It is perfectly principled for socialists to defend the Taliban against imperialism." On March 25, Tatchell headlined a Freedom of Expression rally in London's famed Trafalgar Square to protest Muslim demands that the cartoons not be printed. Though some right-leaning British organizations like the Libertarian Alliance and the Thatcherite Freedom Association co-sponsored the rally alongside Outrage!, some of Tatchell's left-wing and Muslim critics ("preferring to remain pure and marginal," Tatchell said at the rally) alleged that he was colluding with the fascist British National Party, which he and the rally organizers emphatically deny.

In January, Tatchell was denied an invitation to attend a conference held by a bi-partisan Parliamentary caucus on equality whose stated purpose it is "To raise awareness of the need for measures to provide parity of protection from discrimination and promote equality and dignity for all." On January 31st, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Equalities held a seminar on "potential conflict between different kinds of rights" and one of the panelists was an adviser to the Muslim Council of Britain, a group which has called for a boycott of Holocaust Memorial Day and whose leader supported the Fatwa on Salman Rushdie, and of which Tatchell has been a perennial target. The organizers claimed that the event was only open to Members of Parliament, but when Tatchell asked an MP who attended the event if such a rule was applied, he found otherwise. "Tatchell now suspects an orchestrated plot to prevent him attending the bash," the Independent reported.

A regular target of verbal and written attack, Tatchell has become used to physical abuse as well. He has been beaten up, threatened with murder, and his house has been vandalized countless times. Yet up until recently most of these assaults came from far right groups. Now, the threats that Tatchell receives come from those normally assumed to have left-wing sympathies: blacks and Muslims. Several years ago he placed bars on his apartment windows.

His lonely work is not only thankless; it also leaves him close to penniless. His is not the glamorous life of many high profile, media-savvy activists. He does not charge expensive lecture fees or have a massive fundraising operation like established, American gay rights organizations. He makes next to nothing (earning a few thousand pounds a year from donations and journalism) and lives in public housing. His is a one-man, thankless, human rights organization

"There are large sections of the left who have now twisted the virtues of multiculturalism into a new form of moral relativism whereby anti-humanitarian practices in non-Western cultures are ignored or even defended in the name of 'cultural sensitivity,'" he says. "It's an ethical and political acrobatics on a monumental scale." But he has found little support amongst his social democrat peers for his political courage. For much of December and January, the Outrage! Website was down, and Tatchell suspects that any number of his new found enemies on the left could be responsible for the hacking. "It was a highly sophisticated cyber attack," he confirmed. "The huge effort involved could only have been politically motivated, with the aim of putting us out of action for a long time. Our site was mined with hundreds of viruses and some curious bits of Arabic script, which may be a pointer to the culprits."

Though Tatchell was, and remains, an opponent of the Iraq war, he had a credible, anti-statist alternative to the Bush-Blair plan that would have warmed the hearts of neo-conservatives like Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. Just a few days before Coalition troops commenced hostilities, Tatchell was arrested for jumping in front of Prime Minister Tony Blair's limousine in Piccadilly Circus with a sign that read, "Arm the Kurds! Topple Saddam." After his arrest, he said, "The Left's do-nothing, oppositionist stance borders on appeasement. It colludes with Saddam's oppression, and is a shameful betrayal of Iraqis struggling for democracy and human rights." He points out that he has been a vocal opponent of Saddam and the Ba'ath party for decades, joining protests outside the Iraqi embassy in the 1980s, long before the left, (or the right, for that matter), took any interest in Iraq. One would be hard-pressed to find another anti-Bush left-winger of Tatchell's prominence holding such nuanced views.

Though conservatives might like to claim him as a convert, Tatchell is hardly a member of their ranks, in either the philosophical or practical sense. He opposes the "assimilationist" approach of gay conservatives like Andrew Sullivan, because "my agenda is about liberation...I don't want queers to fit in with society as it is, I want them to take the lead alongside liberal progressive straights to fundamentally transform society for the benefit of everyone." He supports lowering the age of consent to 14 and the disestablishment of the Church of England. He is a political radical on nearly every issue and in 2004 defected from Labor due to its rightward drift under Tony Blair and joined the Green Party. "Go red and go green," he wrote in the run up to the 2005 parliamentary elections. This is no Log Cabin Republican.

Many of his former comrades have decried Tatchell as an opportunist and a right-wing dupe seeking support from a public rendered amenable to anti-Muslim arguments by fears of terrorism and cultural incompatibility. But Tatchell has not changed his values one whit in his over four decades of activism. It is not Peter Tatchell who has left the left. It is the left who has left him.

5 Comments for “The Brave Peter Tatchell”

  1. posted by kittynboi on

    “There are large sections of the left who have now twisted the virtues of multiculturalism into a new form of moral relativism whereby anti-humanitarian practices in non-Western cultures are ignored or even defended in the name of ‘cultural sensitivity,'”

    Exactly.

    This si just why I’ve had it with the left.

  2. posted by Ed Brown on

    So again, all liberals are bad and all conservatives are good. Islmaic fundamentalists should be opposed, except in Iraq, where they should be ignored…..

  3. posted by David Valentine on

    Pithy – Mr.Brown. Those two lines of yours, and remarkably effective because they illicit quite a strong response from me. It?s amazing how 24 words can say so very little, and yet so very much.

    Your sub-tone seems to be “I’m barely typing this, why am I even bothering” and indeed I ask myself, why did you even bother.

    That you respond Mr.Kirchicks’ well crafted and thought provoking piece with such effortless oblivion ( I hope it was effortless Mr.Brown ) is briliant. That you non-answer the extremely important questions raised by Mr.Kirchick with a world-weary “So again,..” is genius. Pure parody! Your response is a pitch perfect example of the very dynamic Mr.Kirchick describes. Bravo!

    However, I do have a couple of questions. Did you actually read Mr.Kirchicks’ article? Are you denying that the we on the Left and Liberals in general haven’t painted ourselves into an ideological corner with the multi-culti brush? Are you too defensive/intellectually lazy to consider what Tatchells’ shocking treatment might mean for all of us still interested in civilized progressive discourse. You and I might not agree with Tatchells position – but for pities sake the mans’ track record on progressive/liberal/leftist causes earns him the right to be treated with basic respect.

    That Tatchell was one of a few lone voices raising an alarm for the Iraqi people while so many of us across the political spectrum slept means we owe him our individed attention. In this light, your determination not to listen is beyond arrogant.

    Yes! fundamentalism should be opposed, Islamic or any other kind, or are you suggesting that we make exceptions in our own communities, where they should be ignored…!?

    And why are you making these exceptions – even defending the religious and political violence promoted by the likes of Sir Iqbal and his Ilk ? What does Peter Tatchell actually have to do to enjoy your respect and support. The question is of course rhetorical -I can guess what ‘qualities’ a person must posses in order to secure your ‘respect’ and uncritical support Mr. Brown. Those ‘qualities’ are racial/ethnic and economic. Your approach to the Islamist problem is misguided at best and at it’s worst a racism of lowered expectations.

    I?m sorry you find Peter Tatchells situation too tiresome to muster any real response. I?m sure the attention seeking antics of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh must have rendered you comatose, as it did many liberals.

    The eagerness with which you impale our (presumed) shared liberal ideals on a sword of Western race guilt is embarrassing Mr.Brown and as a gay man, and as one of those aforementioned racial/ethnic and economic profiles I would politely ask you to find a different way to do your penance. One that doesn’t involve feeding myself and the likes of Peter Tatchel to the fucking wolves.

    With a Left like this who needs the Right.

  4. posted by Craig2 on

    Excuse me, but Peter is not the only leftist who won’t condone Third World social authoritarianism. Most of the Left regards Zimbabwe as a corrupt dictatorship, and many of us share his concerns about the rights of Iraqi gay men in a rapidly deteriorating national situation (which is one reason that we oppose the Iraq War).

    However, all Muslims aren’t radical populist Islamists, and surely we should encourage Muslim social liberals to speak up against abuses of their faith.

    I applaud Peter for his sterling work against homophobic Carribean music, and he has always struck me as having an even-handed approach to homophobia and other forms of social injustice.

    Craig Young

    Wellington, NZ

  5. posted by Jarrow on

    Craig2, I am completely at a loss to understand your comment that, “…many of us share his [Tatchell’s] concerns about the rights of Iraqi gay men in a rapidly deteriorating national situation (which is one reason that we oppose the Iraq War).” Huh? Is the deteriorating status of gays in Iraq your concern? I assure you it had to be far worse under saddist Saddam and his ghoulish sons. The problem is Islamic period. They call it “honor killings.” As for Iraq today, it is in many ways getting better and I heartily suggest you follow the progress reports in http://www.memri.org and other sources that are not hell bent to beat the drums for an American loss, which is the crapleft press in general. Also, Craig2, “all Muslims aren’t radical populist Islamists” is a meaningless statement because it is their general SILENCE that is DEAFENING. Read Oriana Fallaci’s “The Force of Reason.” You need an education on just how radical Islam qua Islam is. It is NOT a liberal faith. It is by nature theocratic, dogmatic, intolerant, unaccepting, etc. I will not attempt to “prove” it to you in this short note. I ask you merely observe Moslim dominated countries and cultures and come to your own liberal conclusions. In that regard, I voted for George Bush — PROUDLY! Gay marriage doesn’t matter if you’re dead and the REAL enemy KILLS GAYS! And I’m disgusted that gays don’t get it YET! The little mamby pambs would rather have a hissy fit over their mortal “OFFENSE” over W not wanting us to marry — then deal with the reality that those fuckers in Iran HANGED two boys for BUTT FUCKING! The mass murder the theocrats would perpetrate mean nothing to you leftist crapheads because you don’t want anything to interfere with anti-Western and, more importantly, neo-anti-Semitc (anti-Israel) agenda, your devout desire to see Israel annihilated one way or the other. The only argument for the CrapLeft in this regard is whether it should be by an Iranian nuke or its equivalent or by a “just peace” swamping the Jewish state with Arabs such that they repeat what they did to the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century: Make it Judenrein, that Nazi phrase “clean of Jews’: No Jews; it’s clean. Like what the Moslem world has been doing to its Christians for decades. (Ahhh…the other dirty little secret you leftistfuckheads won’t acknowledge.) And that goes for gays when they get the chance — you IDIOTS! Your worse than the pre-WW2 Chamberlain idiots were about Hitler. At least Hitler wasn’t already gassing the Jews en masse — not en masse, anyway. Now we’ve plenty of evidence against the Jihadis and you shit-for-brainers STILL don’t care! (I’m not accusing Craig2 of all of this because I don’t know all his views. But Ed Brown and his crowd belong in this sewer.)

    Also, Craig2, “encouraging” Muslims to speak out…might get them killed. Just bear that in mind. So if you are going to have a hissy fit about the U.S. flexing it’s military muscles, then keep your mouth shut and your email off on this score because those people are going to need protection that you won’t give them — and you won’t support those that do give the support — and you’ll call the support supporters like me “fascists.” So get a little reality, kid. You’re NAIVE! I mean it, read Fallaci.

    As for Ed Brown, I have no idea if he’s queer or not. Seems maybe not but he might as well not be so little does he care for the evil these TheoNazis do — which is why Dave Valentine’s attempt to reason with the schmuck is a waste. No, Idiot Ed, IslamoNazis need to be opposed everywhere but we also don’t need to have a war within a war with al-Sadr. There are forces within Iraq that we hope will modify that creep. For one, the leading Shia cleric is not a fan of Sadr and we have to leave it to them to work out their turf battles amongst themselves. If they don’t, they will end up in a civil war for sure and then the U.S. will decide when and how to take sides. Certainly, we will aid the Kurds and the Israelis (eat it, you leftist bastards) will be helping us on that account. In fact, they already are — as they are doing in Azerbaijan, but you ideologues (which means idiots with an idea) wouldn’t know anything about that either. (Ignorant neo-anti-Semites….) The fact is that Ed Brown-Nose-the-Islamofascists probably hates George Bush more than he does Saddam. HE ignores Islamonazism — not that the U.S. conveniently does so in Iraq — because he agrees with the Ayatollahs of Iran, that America is the Great Satan.

    Yes, I left the “left,” that is, the Democratic Party. I loathe pacificism, socialism and (trial) lawyerism. They are all frauds.

    You people will never understand: Freedom isn’t free. Our civilization IS superior. One of the duties of civilization is to civilize. And it is your philosophy that is degenerate and likely to bring about the downfall of the West. It is, after all, the consummation you so devoutly wish. Ironically, only in the West can fags butt fuck to their hearts content. But it is not the sodomy of this breed of sodomites that is so perverse; rather, it is their own self-loathing. It is difficult to believe that as a gay activist in the early ’70s, I would live to see the disgustingly slothful thinking and suicidal descent of queers into leftist self-destruction. I wasted those years of efforts — damn you all, you degenerate ingrates! I truly helped give you your freedom and you just throw it away in your hatred of your culture and nations. Frankly, go fuck butts in your precious Islamic lands and see how long you last. I certainly won’t lift a finger to rabble rouse for your decent treatment. You have a lesson to learn — and maybe it’ll be noted by the next decade of queers. Perhaps they won’t be such damned fools.

Comments are closed.