Kunstler, Long Emergency, "gender confusion"

If Kunstler wants to see his party become "more active on restoring the U.S. passenger rail system", he may be encouraged to know that Obama actually makes that part of his platform. I haven't been in this country long, but when was the last time a major Presidential candidate even mentioned mass transit? McCain, on the other hand, wants to destroy Amtrak, as reported in the Boston Globe on Tuesday ("McCain's agenda on Amtrak" by Derrick Jackson if anyone wants to Google it - I don't think we're allowed to post links here).

Kunstler's novel World Made by Hand, depicting the aftermath of a peak oil/global warming collapse is one creepy, compelling read.

Kunstler's novel World Made by Hand, depicting the aftermath of a peak oil/global warming collapse is one creepy, compelling read.

Both that book and the Long Emergency are in popular demand at my local library (and at all the sister libraries in my region). There are holds on all copies and I'll be lucky if I get my hands one before September.

Yeah, that should be "now see" instead of "know see" in the first sentence of my comment. It would be good if Beliefnet added a Preview function to the comments sections, while they do the other website changes they are obviously doing.

Simply stating the opinion that rebuilding our rail infrastructure ought to be a higher national priority than gay marriage doesn't make one a homophobe. I can see how the term 'gender confusion' might upset some people, but is it homophobia? It doesn't seem to me like he's saying, 'gays don't deserve civil rights'.

Mike and Rod - if it were just a matter of Kunstler saying that he thinks there are other issues of more pressing importance than gay marriage, I wouldn't suggest that he is a homophobe. In fact, I'd agree with him, and I suspect most gay people would also. But I'm not gay so I won't claim to speak for them as a group.

However, his other comments are straight from the anti-gay playbook. The idea that the Democratic Party has been "preoccupied with homosexual issues" is ludicrous and can be disproven by simply showing what issues the Party has put at the forefront of its agenda in the past few years and in this election. To claim otherwise is evidence that (a) Kunstler doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to the Democratic Party's emphasis on issues, (b) he's a homophobe who has a visceral negative response to any promotion of gay rights issues, or (c) both of the above. Also, his sneering tone regarding how "those suffering from gender confusion to take their problems out of the political arena and work them out in private" is the sort of thing one hears from anti-gay bigots, not sincere progressives who think we need to focus on some other issues in the short run.

If someone can come up with some evidence that Kunstler isn't a homophobe, or at best indifferent to issues of GLBT civil rights (and that evidence has to be something more than "I have nothing against gay people, I just wish they'd keep it to themselves" comments), I'll say that I stand corrected on that point, but his comments in the interview lead me to a less favorable conclusion for now at least. Though I still would not back off from the general hysterical crank point, even if one could show that Kunstler is as pro-gay rights as Barney Frank.

"When did the T get added to GLB? or the B for that matter?"

At the last Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy meeting. It was the agenda item after we voted to ban Christmas. Didn't you get the memo?

As a gay Democrat, I might disagree a bit with Mark, in that the truth is that it's been the Republicans who have been obsessed with "homosexual issues" and won the 2004 election based on them. Personally, while I support same-sex marriage, it was never the first item on my agenda. Perhaps that's a generational thing (assuming Mark, that I might be a bit older than you)

I agree with a lot that Kunstler said, especially about the rail system. I just feel that he gives the Democrats either too much credit or blame, depending on how you look at it, for carrying the glbt rights agenda. They've ALWAYS been resistant to touch that wedge issue and have had to be dragged kicking and screaming (while of course, willing to take our money.) Our issues have usually proved more useful for Republicans who tap into anti-gay bigotry to win elections.

Incidentally, this news item is just so Kunstler:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laland/2008/07/analyst-sees-gh.html

I think he's overplaying the subprime mortgage debacle, which is a much more esoteric mess than a generational indictment. Laws meant to extend lending into low-income communities and bugs that improperly rated some of the resold contracts at AAA made it much worse than it normally would have been; and I'm not sure the whole thing can be linked into a generational indictment.

Also, saying that gay issues are some sort of key thing for Democrats is ridiculous.

"Far more Republicans than Democrats continue to rate moral values (by 21 points), gay marriage (19 points) ... as very important."
"Democrats give greater priority than Republicans to several domestic issues, including health care (by 20 points), the budget deficit (19 points), jobs (15 points) and energy (15 points)."
"Gay marriage ranked lowest in importance among 16 issues in October 2004. It remains the lowest-rated issue in the current survey""
"White evangelical Protestants continue to place greater importance on gay marriage than do voters in other religious groups."

(Cite). The right is far more invested in such things than the left. Kunstler's remarks are standard get-back-in-the-closet crap.

Part of the problem is while both sides think the budget deficit is more important than gay marriage (for Democrats, 80% of say the former is "very important", 22% the latter; Republicans 61-41), gay and "culture war" issues in general have a news cycle advantage. Things change; laws are passed; events can be easily tied back into the "culture wars". So more news happens, which feeds more opinion columns, which feeds more news. As a result it gets coverage disproportionate to its importance. The budget deficit doesn't have a news cycle apart from once a year; it just sits there and gets bigger.

Kunstler doesn't seem to know what he's talking about, re: "gay issues." Who does he think has been on the forefront of urban rehabbing and revitalization *for the past 30 years?* Who does he think (among others) brings small businesses, shops, restaurants into marginal or depressed areas and *adds value?* He likes to throw these economic terms around, but when he has real life economic examples in front of him, in real cities, where real business owners (who happen to be gay) are generating real dollars, he resorts to a few snide remarks.

I don't care whether he's a "homophobe" or not. But if he's going to talk all anti-suburban, then he needs to understand how the alternatives to suburbia - the small towns / rural areas *and* the cities - are going to get built up. And when you're talking about cities, you have to consider / include in the conversation the gays who are actively rehabbing, both alone and in concert with wider neighborhood associations, etc.

Sorry that last post was me. Apparently the new beliefnet format wiped out my personal info and I hadn't noticed.

Kunstler simply seems to be saying that homosexual issues have been driving politics more than is warranted, relative to what he feels are other more pressing concerns. Agree or disagree, it certainly should be considered a reasonable point of view.

It has drive politics. Republican politics.

Repeatably attacking a single point causes that point to be defended more than other places. It's not rocket science.

In fact, Republicans have spent a good deal more time fighting homosexual issues than Democrats have spent pushing them. The 'Democratic' pushes have almost always been single lawsuits by one or two people, unsupported by the party and not part of some plan to get people elected, whereas the Republicans force stupid constitutional amendments on the the ballot and run ads against gay marriage and all sorts of things.

But, like I always say, whenever Republicans claim the Democrats are doing something, that might be true...but it's almost certain that the Republicans are doing it more. It's you guys who are focused on teh gay, not us. Compare this blog to any left-blog not specifically aimed towards homosexual issues.

And I would bet that at least 80% of Democrats would agree in general with his sentiment.

I certainly would. I don't really give a damn about gay people. They're nothing special. I don't understand why the Democrats don't just give them full marriage rights and move on. They'll be happy, us Democrats can concentrate on other things so people pushing those issues are happy (Me, I want health care reform.), everyone is happy.

If only I could remember why we hadn't done that...

Call me a homophobe, I don't care. The economic meltdown/mortgage mess/peak oil/inflation/budget deficit problem is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more important than gay rights. I think that there is something very accurate in the observation that Democrats have become the party of gay rights to the exclusion of more important issues. And of course, gays themselves have to take some of the blame for thinking that they are the center of the universe.