Leaving out the ugly part - Hakim Bey/Peter Lamborn Wilson

Hakim Bey/Peter Lamborn Wilson

This article is an exposé of Hakim Bey, aka Peter Lamborn Wilson's paedophilia. A fact which many commentators conveniently brush under the carpet.

The Brooklyn Rail (July-August 2004) has just published an interview of Peter Lamborn Wilson (Hakim Bey), that gives the reader a misleading and incomplete picture of the subject. The interview was then forwarded to the Research on Anarchism list-serve. "Wilson rightly became celebrated as a kind of urban prophet," the interviewer writes, "It was an identity to add the others he bears seamlessly and without contradiction: anarchist, poet, public intellectual, psychedelic explorer, artist, social critic, Sufi mystic."

The interviewer's special phrasing, "seamlessly and without contradiction," is where she begins, unintentionally, to mislead. I am writing to describe another unusual way in which Mr. Wilson has distinguished himself that may make a wrinkle or two in the average person's opinion: he is a public paedophile intellectual of international reputation, and one who mixes anarchist ideology into his paedophile discourse. Even though we're talking about a writer whose work has now been translated into French, Russian, German, Dutch, and other languages, I should like to emphasise that there is no reason why the interviewer should have already known this. The Rail's pages, however, have presented him as entirely respectable thinker, and I am writing to correct that mistake.

It was actually the very first thing I ever heard about the man: "Same person as Hakim Bey. Goes for little Boys," was the matter-of-fact comment from one of his New York City comrades, around 1991, when I was still new to anarchism, and living in Philadelphia. At first there was no special reason for me to make an issue of it. I have known people who have mentioned sexual encounters they had with adults when they were children, and which they considered to have been harmless. I've simply pointed out that the burden of responsibility lies only with the adult, and not with the child, and that was the end of it. I have not once been considered a prude by anyone who knows me, nor anything but blunt and heavy-handed when discussing in favour of one's right to choose the sexual lifestyle. But choices made by consenting adults is the realm of the discussion.

Peter Lamborn Wilson (who writes at least as often as Hakim Bey and makes no secret of the pseudonym), uses anarchism in an ethically warped, opportunistic way by pretending that adult-child sex is a natural freedom. It isn't, and not only would almost any anarchist disagree with him, but they'd also dispute a child-rapist's right to a non-violent remedy in many cases. As a person who is and always is, in both public and private life, as an anarchist, I feel the responsibility to simply put my disagreement on record. I do so now because the forwarding of the Rail interview creates an error of omission on the r-a list.

There is a periodical, preserved at the University of Michigan's famous Labadie Collection, that seems to make an unlikely fit with the purpose of that special archive, which is to preserve anarchist materials in particular, as well as those of other social movements, including sexual freedom and gay liberation. It is the NAMBLA Bulletin, which has been published monthly since 1983 by the North American Man-Boy Love Association. "Man-boy Love" is a term used by apologists of paedophilia. I hereafter use the term paedophilia where such people would object to its use. But why was a paedophile magazine acquired by an archive with such a charter? Most people would argue that "Man-Boy Love" is not an issue relating to gay culture at all, since paedophilia occurs no more or less frequently among gays than it does with straights. Very few people of any politics consider adult-child sex to be a legitimate lifestyle choice. But the former curator who added NAMBLA Bulletin to the Labadie was actually keeping to the central mission of the anarchist archive when he subscribed to the journal.

Beginning with the July-August 1985 issue, the magazine carried a long series of items by Hakim Bey, who was already a distinctly anarchist writer. Most of them were discussions of the paedophile obsession with a clear anarchist slant. Anarchist ideology was the mode of justification, the method of persuading children to have sex and to keep it secret. Take for example the following poem, "My Political Beliefs," from NAMBLA Bulletin's June 1986 issue, page 14:

barelegged on his bicycle in the park he rides beneath
a children's fountain droplets catch his hair which
the afternoon makes somewhat bronze, beaded with molten dew
--the sunset over Jersey like an industrial krakatoa:
Newark Gold, Secaucus Red, East Orange.
The button on his blazer: Anarchist Bicyclists
he's in the bathtub, I see
him through a crack in the door playing with himself, he calls me in, shows me
underwater push-ups and sit-ups, except for his gallic buttocks his skin is gilt as the air over the Hudson. The touch of his wet, bath-wrinkled fingers in my hand... but then...
one of his parents clumps down the hall... I suppose to make sure neither of us is raping the other...
[chorus of groans] Ohhh! for a
Buster-Keaton-bomb all spherical & black as coaldust with sweet sparkling with sweet sparkling fuse a mindbomb to
Drop on the Idea of the Family! O for a libertarian isle of runaways! O goodnight
Moon, I am lost, actually lost without him
But I didn't want this to be
Just another poem about hopeless love. Pretend it's a manifesto instead. Down with School! Boy Rule OK! In the land of dreams
No governance exists
But that of anarchs and kings, for dreamers have not yet learned to vote or think past the unfurling of the moment. He touches my cheek, runs delicate fingers through the hairs on my arm.
My liege shatters all Law for a triple kiss.
--Hakim Bey

Many of Hakim Bey's best-known anarchist pitches first saw print as paedophile apologies. NAMBLA published his "Association for Ontological Anarchism, communiqué #2" in July-Aug 1986, and a journal called Gayme ran "A Temporary Autonomous Zone" and "Pirate Utopias" in issues of 1993-95, along with his more obscure "Contemplation of the Unbearded."

Bey's best-known book Temporary Autonomous Zone (TAZ) describes spiritual zones in which anything goes, where the oppressive rules of the outside society need not interfere with what feels good to do. I realise that many honest people have read TAZ without taking any sleazy impression from it. I hope they'll forgive me for pointing out that paedophiles say these same things to children. In his essay "Obsessive Love" (Moorish Science Monitor, Vol. 7, #5, Summer 1995), in which he pretends to be quite the classical scholar, he talks about ancient religious views on romantic and obsessive love. "The Greco-Egypto-Islamic ferment adds a pederastic [i.e. paedophile] element... the ideal woman of romance is neither wife nor concubine but someone in the forbidden category..." He uses the term "spiritual alchemy" for witnessing the "Devine Beloved in certain beautiful boys," and remarks that, "since all homosexuality is forbidden in Islamic law, a boy-loving sufi has no 'safe' category for sensual realisation."

In fact, one of the commonest defence lawyerish lines about paedophilia is how "the Greeks did it," or how incredibly well Michael Jackson sings and dances; or how some long-dead and noteworthy author was also was in the habit of boning the baby. These are feeble and irrelevant ways to side-step the ethical issue. Knowledge is power, and children know almost nothing. But just so we go through the points, it was a minority of rich Athenian Greeks during the Classical period, not all "the Greeks," who accepted paedophilia, while, by the way, they were also proclaiming their misogyny in rhetorically gorgeous ways. Athens was a slave-owning society in which democracy was observed only between citizens not between everyone --and the use of slaves as sexual chattel carried no age-restrictions. Furthermore, in no way should artistic talent cause one to be forgiven a sexual abuse or rape. In fact, when a paedophile is very witty and well-spoken, this very same skill is used to attract young, gullible targets. To argue for paedophilia is imbecile when it is sincere. It is so logically pathetic, in fact, that one almost needs to be a child to believe that it's sincere.
Pressing the anarcho-paedophile cause in another way, Wilson (Bey) reviewed the reprint of the late 19th century German-based anarchist John Henry Mackay's book Fenny Skaller and Other Poems, etc.. Bey's essay was entitled " Man-Boy Love Novel Still Relevant 100 Years On." (NAMBLA Bulletin April 1989). In "Obsessive Love," Bey again invokes Mackay (1864-1933), whose paedophilia was never known to other anarchist writers during his life: "I admit to a philosophical preference for Mackay's position..." [which means the] " giving up of all false chivalry and self-denying dandyism in favour of more 'pagan' and convivial modes of love." He closes the essay with his clearest anarcho-paedophile statement: "it has taken on a tantalising reality and filtered into my life in certain Temporary Autonomous Zones an impossible time and space and on this brief hint, all my theory is based." What he means by this is that he really has sex with children, rather than leaving the matter to fantasy, and that this is his purpose when he preaches anarchism.

Hakim Bey is the pseudonym for 59-year old Peter Lamborn Wilson, who has been based in New York City for most of his life, but is now living upstate in New Paltz. The Brooklyn Rail's interviewer, has this mistakenly reversed, giving Bey as the original name, Wilson as the pseudonym. The guy was born a WASP, and perhaps became Sufi one day while prowling the mountains of Asia. He has no occupation, and in 1994 told an interviewer (Voice Literary Supplement, New York, Feb. 1994) that he "thanks God that a trickle of family money keeps him 'independently poor.'"[1] The name Lamborn is rare in New York, and it is where the Sugar industry magnate Ody Lamborn died in 1971. It's been my impression that Hakim Bey's trust fund was originally earned by tormented labourers on sugar plantations. Whether it's from sugar or from something else, this brings us to Wilson's touching concern, about what he called "a class war situation" in the Rail interview : "Where's our support for the Mexican migrant agricultural workers?"

I have operated dangerous machinery in factories, carried lumber up flights of stairs, and I have (like most anarchists) done other boring, low-paid jobs to feed myself, starting around age thirteen. Still, I have known several anarchists who come from wealthy families, and I've thought well of them because they make the choice to use their privilege (freedom allowed by their trust fund) in good faith; perhaps to heal wounds made earlier by their own relatives. But Peter Lamborn Wilson gives me an unquiet feeling when he pretends to understand and hold concern in his heart for that other world, where he's never paid a visit, and where people work because they must work. It has the very phoney ring of someone pouring syrup into a liberal ear.

His use of his word-skills, of course, has me feeling still worse. As he conjoins his paedophile mission with anarchism, he knows very well that anarchism is now very popular among the very young. This is not "spiritual anarchism," as he entitled a public "Chaos Day" lecture in December of 2002. It is paedophile opportunism. Another device he uses a lot is exemplified in "Tectum Theatrum" (Fifth Estate, Summer 2003), in which he uses Latin phrases over and over, never to say something there's no English word for, but to impress the utterly naive reader. Having read Classical languages in college, this is especially tedious and transparent to me, but it certainly will have its desired effect on adolescent readers.

While he has no occupation, Bey/Wilson has not been idle. In Fifth Estate #363, just this past winter, he relates how, when he was in his mid-twenties, he was wandering around Persia and South Asia, smoking opium and "looking for traditional anarchism" in Sufism. Under his pseudonym (Bey), he's found some paedophile culture over in that region as well. His translation of Abu Nuwas' poetry, O Tribe That Loves Boys was published in Amsterdam in 1993.

When he was about thirty, Bey founded the Semiotext(e)-Autonomedia Publishing group in New York. It has since become one of the larger of the US-based anarchist publishers, and Bey remains with the group, which carries several of his titles. An early release was Loving Boys: Semiotext(e) Special (1980), edited by Bey. Thus he's been on this crusade, in print, for at least twenty-five years. For some time, he had a program on WBAI Radio, entitled "The Moorish Orthodox Radio Crusade."

In the letters column of Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed (#20/21, Nov-Dec 1989, p. 42), a letter announced a new a zine for contributors 17 and under. Wild Children, as the zine was called, solicited articles on "anarchy (of course!), sci-fi, sexuality & love, spiritual paths (or lack thereof), and anything else kids would like to submit." The letter gave Hakim Bey as the editor, at a Brooklyn PO Box. Lev Chernyi, the editor of Anarchy[2] replied that "Wild Children sounds like an interesting idea. I hope it works out. Any young readers interested?" In 1998, a 64-page anthology of this zine was published, switching over to the name Wilson as editor.[3] While the anthology is not considered a paedophile text and is carried by some anarchist bookstores without concern, it should be noted that its contents were solicited by a public anarchist-paedophile apologist during the same years (1993-1997) when he was contributing pieces of clearly anarchist-paedophile intent to the magazine Gayme, which was a bit more strident than other child-molester periodicals, and was once the target of a public prosecutor in Massachussetts. Due to legal issues relating to the its contents, in fact, the Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives in Toronto preserves the title but will not allow scanning or copying of its pages. I have been unable to locate original copies of the zine Wild Children, but in yet another NAMBLA publication, its Journal (#7; 1986), the age "ten-and-a-half" occurs as the age of a boy in a sketch by Bey. In typical paedo-style, everything is pushed to where he can't go farther without the expectation of some angry person attacking him. But Bey takes things to the next step by using a name by which he (Peter Wilson) is actually identified. He's safe in doing so because of the extreme toleration of anarchists in general, and the shallowness of many.

Paedophilia is not the only opinion for which Hakim Bey has irritated other anarchists. One example is his views on abortion. In "Communique #9" of the Association for Ontological Anarchy, Bey wrote: "According to Chaos Theory, it does not follow that we are obliged to like or approve of murder or abortion. Chaos would enjoy seeing every bastard love-child carried to term & birthed; sperm & egg alone are merely lovely secretions, but combined as DNA they become potential consciousness, negentropy, joy... If 'meat is murder!' as the Vegans like to claim, what pray tell is abortion?"

I will not offer any reason to be offended by the paedophile literature or the misogynist position of Hakim Bey as quoted above. The ethical idiocy of both are self-evident, and neither is part of anything that should be considered an anarchist idea. I am not surprised that these opinions exist, but I am most uncomfortable for realising that there is a discreet haven for both within the anarchist culture of the United States. It makes me wonder, in fact: why did the world-wide Catholic Church sex abuse scandal go by a few years ago, without any commentary from American anarchists? Is this another dirty little anarchist secret?

As for what I mean by a "dirty little anarchist secret," here's another example: when about 7,000 priests were killed, many Catholic churches burned, and many saintly cadavers mockingly defiled at the beginning of the Spanish Revolution of 1936, it was in pretty bad taste, but there were very logical and fair reasons for people (including a huge number of anarchists) to take their anti-clerical rage into action. Many anarchists have denied that any of this happened, saying that it was all just fascist propaganda, or that it's been wildly exaggerated. Actually, there is plenty of hard evidence that it did happen. Rather than a bizarre, revisionist denial, I would rather hear us say that the current craze for anarchist soccer-teams has its roots in Spain (Madrid, I believe), where teenagers played football with the skull of a saint, out in the plaza in front of the church named after him. Why don't we just talk about it? Why can't we talk about a fairly well-known anarchist author as the paedophile personality that he most certainly is? What's the point of calling oneself "anarchist" if there's some area of discussion where it's too disturbing to ever step?

More directly intriguing to me is why I have been shut out of letters columns or declined for print in anarchist periodicals on about twenty occasions (and again now, in the Brooklyn Rail) when I cite the articles, name the issue, and express my disapproval for a man who presents child molestation as a point of anarchistic freedom. The reasons given by editors vary widely. Some reactions are hostile, taken very personally. Other cases express appreciation and some concern for the information. Certain editors have written so much thick, loving praise for Bey, and printed so much of his work that they find themselves cornered when the paedophilia item is raised. They have no sympathy for child-molestation but they frantically search for paths by which they can stay clear of its discussion, perhaps fearing that somehow, the stink of it would cling to them and their publication. They'll sometimes argue that it's unfair to link the person with the person's writings. I point to these editors, as I have here, that it's in the writings that all this is happening, with the less bold examples sometimes drooling out in their own anarchist pages.

In the present case, the writer who interviewed Lamborn Wilson recently at his green wood-frame house in New Paltz was glad to have been informed, and there was a short, respectful exchange between us. But the editors of the Rail merely tossed off a form letter: "Thank you for your input..." There was no evidence of any sort of concern, nor admission that the interview made a completely skewed impression of its subject, no hint that editors have an ethical responsibility for what they put on their pages.

Worse still is for there to be no reply, not even a private note. I was particularly disgusted by Andrei Codrescu, the (obviously anarchist) National Public Radio commentator who gave "TAZ and the Tazzerites" a glowing ten minutes of his voice on All Things Considered in July of 2003. I very respectfully wrote him about these concerns, then I confirmed that he'd received my letter, but I received no reply at all. The obvious message is that it's beneath Codrescu's consideration to acknowledge in a ten-second message - Yes the paedo-stuff is a drag but I like his other writings, sorry but I disagree or whatever he thinks. He means that Hakim Bey's 25 or more years as a public intellectual of anarchist paedophilia is not any problem for him when he tells seventy million people what cool stuff the guy writes, without reference to the paedophile origin and undercurrent of TAZ, the same item he recommended.

No one anywhere denies that Peter Lamborn Wilson (Hakim Bey) is paedophile, least of all the man himself. I state what I see on his pages, I offer my opinions as opinions only, and I make no accusation of criminal conduct. The citations are right there, for anyone to check for accuracy. Endlessly, anarchists have privately agreed that I am absolutely right, on-the-money correct, about this issue. The number who have written that opinion down where anyone else can read it is very close to zero. I am left with the impression that they are not taking responsibility for what they know. This does not speak well of the anarchists of the United States. I feel that with anarchism becoming ever more popular, the greater portion of new anarchists are just consumers of anarchist stuff. Since such people can't deal with a new ethical problem, they probably would not know what to do with that new, real revolutionary opportunity for which they pine so passionately.

The fact that a widely celebrated, living anarchist writer has smeared the anarchist tradition with a sugar-coated image of paedophilia is an issue that will continue to be raised. I feel that this is fair and relevant because I keep spotting distorted presentations of Hakim Bey and his motives, as in this last issue of the Brooklyn Rail.

-------------------------
Robert P. Helms is an independent historian of anarchism, now writing about the early movement at Philadelphia. He is editor and principle author of Guinea Pig Zero: An Anthology of the Journal for Human Research Subjects (1992). Formerly of Philadelphia, he now lives in a suburb of Paris. He can be reached at gpzero(at)earthlink.net

-------------------------

Footnotes
Anyone who wants a copy of the Hakim Bey paedophile bibliography (a work in progress) should just ask, and the author will email it to you.
1. Erik Davis, interviewer,"The Wandering Sufi: Itroduction to the Mystic with Peter Lamborn Wilson," Voice Literary Supplement, New York, February 1994
2. The same editor sometimes uses the name Jason McQuinn.
3. Wild Children: A Zine For Kids. New York, Scb Publishers, 1998. Peter Lamborn Wilson (Editor) and Dave Mandl (Editor).

Taken from The Research on Anarchism List (RA-L), which is an international forum which was started on January 1, 1996, and is devoted to book reviews, research and discussion of the theories, histories and cultures of world anarchist movements and to other topics related to anarchism.

Comments

Eastern Anarchist
Jan 24 2012 04:42

So am I a troll for pointing out how unanarchist the positions of some self described anarchists are? Then perhaps I am a troll, who knows. And yes, fuck off yourself. Good bye.

Eastern Anarchist
Jan 24 2012 04:44

Indeed, just aren't the words to describe how sexually repressed some "anarchists" are. Oh my word indeed.

Arbeiten
Jan 24 2012 10:43
Eastern Anarchist wrote:
Indeed, just aren't the words to describe how sexually repressed some "anarchists" are. Oh my word indeed.

Seriously? Your litmus test for sexual repression is how well an "anarchist" swallows paedophilia? wow.

Eastern Anarchist
Jan 24 2012 13:37

@revol68

Here is what I think. I believe that from a certain age, a person that can be called a child can indeed give consent. Young kids are usually very vehement about what they want and what they don't, so why not trust them to make a decision in this regard as well? It's their body, and they should have the right to decide what they do with it. Notice that I talk about CONSENT and in no way do I condone any kind of violence and misstreatment of young people. The fact that when hearing about an age gap between two people, everyone instantly jumps at the conclusion that somehow rape and violence are involved, is what I truly find to be disturbing.
There are countless examples of people that have been involved in their young years in such relationships and their oppinion abot this experience is nothing but positive. And mind you, all those experiences were CONSENSUAL, by their own statement.

PartyBucket
Jan 24 2012 13:48
Eastern Anarchist wrote:
@revol68

Here is what I think. I believe that from a certain age, a person that can be called a child can indeed give consent. Young kids are usually very vehement about what they want and what they don't, so why not trust them to make a decision in this regard as well? It's their body, and they should have the right to decide what they do with it. Notice that I talk about CONSENT and in no way do I condone any kind of violence and misstreatment of young people. The fact that when hearing about an age gap between two people, everyone instantly jumps at the conclusion that somehow rape and violence are involved, is what I truly find to be disturbing.
There are countless examples of people that have been involved in their young years in such relationships and their oppinion abot this experience is nothing but positive. And mind you, all those experiences were CONSENSUAL, by their own statement.

Are you aware of a monster called Tom O Carroll, who wrote a book in which he contended that the sounds made by a child of less than a year old could be construed as consent?
Do you think all 'age gaps' are the same? When I hear of a person of 40 and a person of 20 together, I dont conclude that 'rape and violence' are involved, is that the same as a person of 20 and a person of 10?

Eastern Anarchist
Jan 24 2012 14:23

@Arbeiten
So I gather this is all that you understand from everything that I said? Well, this is just sad, honestly. So from what I understand you are against youth liberation? Or do you believe that this integral part of the anarchist struggle refers only to those above 18? And do you also believe that youth liberation doesn't refer to sexual matters as well? Well think again!

Eastern Anarchist
Jan 24 2012 14:48

@revol68
And just where did I say that I am for "some dirty old cunt" to exploit a childs sexuality? You just repeat this nonsense over and over ignoring what I said.
Just like you, I say that the child is the only one who can decide what he wants, or doesn't wants. But to say that a kid cannot decide for himself and an authority figure should decide for him "because he knows better" is what I find objectionable in the harshest terms.
Now let me tell you something. Present society tries to present children as those asexual "innocent" creatures. You and I know that this is bullshit. Children from a very early age are very curious about the body and its functions. I can state this from my own experience as a child and I'm shure that if your honest you can recall similar memories from your childhood. It may come as a shock to many but yes, children are sexual beeings, just like everyone else, and they have desires and fantasies just like everyone else and I believe they should be free to explore their feelings freely, without intrusion from the state or anyone else. And if their desire leads them in a relationship with someone older then them, then that is their business and no one elses. As long as this is what they want and no coercion is involved.

flaneur
Jan 24 2012 15:44
Eastern Anarchist wrote:
As long as this is what they want and no coercion is involved.

And therein lies the problem. Any relationship a child or teenager has with an adult is never going to be on an equal footing, and as a result, they are bound to be manipulated if not coerced just to keep the thing going. How can that possibly be beneficial to them? There's nowt wrong with kids being curious, what's wrong is people old enough to know better getting involved.

Jason Cortez
Jan 24 2012 15:46
Quote:
. And if their desire leads them in a relationship with someone older then them, then that is their business and no one elses. As long as this is what they want and no coercion is involved

Can you explain why you are interested in having sexual relations with a child?

Eastern Anarchist
Jan 24 2012 15:48

@PartyBucket
Yes, I am aware of Tom O'Carroll, but unlike you I don't consider him a monster. But yes, if someone would have said what you imply he did, then that is of course condemnable. But alas, his writing has been taken out of context countless times and I feel this time is no exception. Perhaps the fact that in his books he has proved in many ways that relations with children are, for the most part, completely harmless is what in fact drives you and other people to hate him so much. I know, it doesn't feel good when someone blows away your warped worldview.

Eastern Anarchist
Jan 24 2012 15:53

@Jason Cortez

Did I said that? So for you, saying that children have sexual rights is akin to wanting to have sex with children? Interesting point of view. So according to you, you have to be gay to fight for gay rights, right?

Eastern Anarchist
Jan 24 2012 15:57

@flaneur

And here we go again. The voice of repressive heteronormative society in action.
Yes, sex is bad, indeed very bad. Forgive me father for I have sinned!

Eastern Anarchist
Jan 24 2012 16:00

@PartyBucket

Yes indeed, there is an irony, but unfortunately the irony is on you and the people that share your oppinions and who continue to cling to old discredited theories.

Juan Conatz
Jan 24 2012 16:09

I mean, what can you really say to someone who thinks children can give meaningful consent on sexual activity with adults. You already have placed yourself outside both most people's morals and even science itself. Consent means an understanding of what you're agreeing to. There's a development issue when it comes to comparing adults and children, this really doesn't even need to be mentioned. It's obvious.

PartyBucket
Jan 24 2012 16:16

If you don't consider Tom O' Carroll a monster you're one too.

libcom
Jan 24 2012 16:37

Paedophile apologist banned.

Joseph Kay
Jan 24 2012 16:57

If libcom admins really had an anarcho-stalinist death squad that could trace peoples IPs and neutralise them, this thread would be the ultimate honeytrap black bloc

Chilli Sauce
Jan 24 2012 17:20

Now I have no problem with a 30 year old and a 60 year old hooking up, but defending a dude who writes poetry about spying on little boys taking a bath through a key hole as an "intergenerational relationship". You sick fuck, you think a small child could "consent" to that?

Arbeiten
Jan 24 2012 20:44
Eastern Anarchist wrote:
@Arbeiten
So I gather this is all that you understand from everything that I said? Well, this is just sad, honestly. So from what I understand you are against youth liberation? Or do you believe that this integral part of the anarchist struggle refers only to those above 18? And do you also believe that youth liberation doesn't refer to sexual matters as well? Well think again!

I don't mind teens having sex together etc, etc. What I do mind is predatory old men fighting the cause of 'youth liberation'. And no, I don't believe a young boy/teenager can have a meaningful and consensual relationship of somebody Bey's age. Anarchists are also AGAINST oppression as well as FOR liberation. You don't honestly think older men like younger boys because they have good things to discuss? No. It is an essentially unequal and predatory relationship.

This whole conversation sheds a very dark light on T.A.Z's doesn't it?

On the question of sad. The only thing I find sad is this topic being bought up time and time again and the circular nature with which the debate always takes.

'YOU GUYZ ARE ANARCHISTS WHY YOU NO LIKE BEY!'

Sinzer
Jan 25 2012 01:04

I can't really comment on Hakim Bey having never read any of what he's written (although him writing for NAMBLA seems incredibly worrying and something as an anarchist i definitely wouldn't want to be associated with) but i thought i might chime in with my 2pennies' worth about the general topic of "intergenerational relationship" (which sounds far too sinister for my liking, a bit too much like NewSpeak).

The whole argument that a child freely consents to sexual relationship reminds me too much of the claim that workers consent to be exploited by capitalists. Maybe in a reductionist way you could say a 13 year old can consent to sexual contact with a 30 year old through verbally saying 'yes' but is it freely consenting? Is it absent of any form of coercion, whether conscious or unconscious? I highly doubt it.

Personally i think with age gaps when it comes to sexual/romantic relationships it's quite relative. Up until a certain maturity level large age gaps become riddled with subtle and not-so-subtle coercion. Hell, even between teenagers one of them can feel coerced into sexual contact before they're comfortable with it ffs.

To equate opposition to adults having sexual contact with children to opposing youth liberation is disgusting and a logical fallacy.

Ethos
Jan 25 2012 02:54

@Eastern Anarchist and other pedophile apologists and enablers.

I'll repost what I wrote in Steven's blog a while back:

In humans, neural development continues (sometimes) until the very early 20's. Before that age you wouldn't be that far off to say that teens are more or less mentally handicapped (tongue firmly in cheek). The reason why people consider this behavior to be wrong is because an adult who has sexual relations with a minor is very much taking advantage of a person who's brain has not finished developing, i.e. they don't fully posses the capacity to exercise their autonomy in things like giving consent. You guys are deluded and/or sick. Luckily, either one is easily fixed by using your fucking heads for a second and consulting that mode of knowledge we now days refer to as "science".

Here's a nice article:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124119468

Jason Cortez
Jan 25 2012 13:57

@ Eastern Archist
For you sexual rights are akin to your wanting to be able to molest children without condemnation or guilt. I am sure you want to believe that children can give meaningful consent, as it makes it easier for you to look at yourself in the mirror. The very fact that you use terms like"intergenerational sex" exposes your complicity, as it is disingenuous, designed to 'normalise' such behaviour.

Wejale
Feb 6 2012 23:36

This is shocking and well written, and that's why people believe it without checking if the author really wrote all that. Please! Critically read everything, specially this kind of attacks: That's one of the few perfectly advices that Marx gave us, and by that i mean: Have you guys here tried to search and read the sources of this article? I bet you don't, i tried and i couldn't find them, specially the NAMBLA bulletins (the most direct supposed confessions of pedophilia) and the gayme zine that strangely "will not allow scanning or copying of its pages".

I'm not denying that Bey/Wilson may be a paedophile, i know that he has an strange fascination for historical pederasty without giving an academic and critical view of his investigations. I'm pretty sure he has anti-age of consent views, but i'm not sure how deep are his views because i can't find sources for that. I prefer to say that the author of this article is, maybe, a doctrinaire "social anarchist" that hates writers like Bey. Yup, in my opinion i don't like the kind of Bey, the people that mix anarchism with occultism, religion, and extreme individualism without giving anything to the society, maybe just trying to make "anarchists" reforms in the actual capitalist system. But all that is not a reason to write such a big attack on him based on lies, specially when he says that he is not a worker, that only because for his surname he may be the son of a bourgeois, or his attack on mexicans, that's unsourced and academically unethical, and don't give me your "anarchist" bullshit about ethics, because fuck you! We all have limits and that's named ethics (this applies to pro-paedophilia anarchists too).

uhu
Feb 7 2012 11:16

i am against the banning of "eastern anarchist". he articulates his point of view, which noone has to applause. seems that people who think similar will remain silent in future, which does not mean that they would think different. it is an authoritarian manner to ban him.

radicalgraffiti
Feb 7 2012 11:25

@Wejale if you use the search function on this site you will find this article http://libcom.org/library/paedophilia-and-american-anarchism-the-other-side-of-hakim-bey

Quote:
Bibliography

Books & Articles
Wilson, Peter Lamborn. Kings of Love: The Poetry and History of the Nimatullahi Sufi Order of Iran (with Nasrollah Pourjavady), Tehran 1978.
_____, Angels, Thames & Hudson, London 1980.
_____, Weaver of Tales. Persian Picture Rugs (with Karl Schlamminger), Callwey, Munich 1980.
_____, The Drunken Universe. An Anthology of Persian Sufi Poetry (with Nasrollah Pourjavady), Phanes Press, Grand Rapids 1987.
_____, Scandal. Essays in Islamic Heresy, Autonomedia, Brooklyn, NY 1988.
_____, Radio Sermonettes (with the Moorish Orthodox Radio Crusade Collective), The Libertarian Book Club, New York 1992. Reprinted as Immediatism, AK Press, Edinburgh/San Francisco 1994.
_____, Sacred Drift. Essays on the Margins of Islam, City Lights Books, San Francisco 1993.
_____, Pirate Utopias. Moorish Corsairs & European Renegadoes, Autonomedia, Brooklyn, NY 1995.
_____, "Shower of Stars" Dream & Book: The Initiatic Dream in Sufism and Taoism, Autonomedia, Brooklyn, NY 1996.
_____, Escape From the 19th Century. Essays on Marx, Fourier, Proudhon & Nietzsche, Autonomedia, Brooklyn, NY 1998.
_____, Ploughing the Clouds: The Search for Irish Soma, City Lights Books, San Francisco 1999.
_____, “Sakhra-l'Assal Interviews Peter Lamborn Wilson” [in Dutch] in Buiten de Orde, Utrecht, vol. 13 # 1, March, 2002. (“Sakhra -l'Assal is independently unemployed. As a member of the Amsterdam collective for applied schizophrenics, ZZ Produkties, he was involved with translations of work by Peter Lamborn Wilson and Hakim Bey, among others. He spends his spare time drinking beer.”)
_____, (editor with Robert Anton Wilson) Semiotext(e) Science Fiction Anthology (Semiotext(e) n.d.)
Bey, Hakim. TAZ, The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism (Brooklyn, NY: Autonomedia, 1991)
_____, (contributor) Poems of Love and Liberation (New York: NAMBLA, 1996)
Articles in the NAMBLA Bulletin
[NAMBLA Bulletin is published by the North American Man-Boy Love Association. This is a partial list of Bey’s articles for the magazine. Original copies were examined by me at the Special Collections Department, University of Michigan at Ann Arbor (United States).]

Bey, Hakim. "Japanese Scarf" (poem, reprinted from Seditious Delicious) NAMBLA Bulletin, Jul-Aug 1985
_____, "Poem" NAMBLA Bulletin, Jan-Feb 1986
_____, "Five Conceptual Art Projects" NAMBLA Bulletin, Apr. 1986
_____, "My Political Beliefs" NAMBLA Bulletin, June 1986.
_____, "Association for Ontological Anarchism, Communique #2." NAMBLA Bulletin, Jul-Aug 1986
_____, "The Face of God" NAMBLA Bulletin, Dec. 1986
_____, "The Eroticism of Banal Architecture" NAMBLA Bulletin, Jan-Feb 1987
_____, "Chaos Theory and the Nuclear Family" NAMBLA Bulletin, Mar. 1987
_____, "China Sea Post-Card" NAMBLA Bulletin, Mar. 1987
_____, "Divine Folly Indulges Pagan Passion" NAMBLA Bulletin, Nov. 1987

Articles in Gayme
[This is a partial list of Bey’s articles for the magazine. Further citations are difficult to gather due to legal issues relating to its contents (Gayme was involved in obscenity lawsuits). The Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives at Toronto preserves the title but will not allow scanning or copying of its pages.]

Bey, Hakim. "Contemplation of the unbearded." Gayme vol.1, no.1, 1993, pp. 16-21.
_____, "Temporary Autonomous Zone." Gayme vol.2, no.1, 1994, pp. 26-28
_____, "Pirate Utopias." Gayme vol.2, no.2, 1995, pp. 20-23
_____, "What do we do now?" Gayme vol.3, no.1, 1996, pp. 8-11
_____, "The music of what happens." Gayme vol.3, no.2, 1997, pp. 6-9

Translations
Bey, Hakim. O Tribe That Loves Boys: The Poetry of Abu Nuwas [translation and biographical essay by Hakim Bey] (Amsterdam: Entimos Press, 1993)

Reviews:
Bey, Hakim, "Boy-Love Novel Still Relevant 100 Years On" [a review of Fenny Skaller and Other Poems from the Books of the Nameless Love by the German anarchist John Henry Mackay] NAMBLA Bulletin, Apr. 1989

_____, "Japanese Romance on The House of Kanze by Noboku Albery"
NAMBLA Bulletin, Apr.-May 1987

Editorship:
Bey, Hakim (editor) Loving Boys: Semiotext(e) Special. New York: Semiotext(e), 1980

Press Exposure:
Program 33 (production group of Paris), program title : "Tracks," segment title : "Pirates," broadcast on ARTE TV network, October 28 and 30, 2004 ; [also transmitted in German?]

Bleyer, Jennifer, "An Anarchist in the Hudson Valley" The Brooklyn Rail, July 2004

Knight, Michael Muhammad, “Green Tea With Imam of the Age” Muslim Wakeup! January 2004 (“Michael Muhammad Knight is author of The Taqwacores, a novel available through the punk label Alternative Tentacles.”)

Codrescu, Andrei “Location and Activities of TAZ and Tazzerites” (commentary) July 16, 2003, network ; National Public Radio ; program : All Things Considered. [Codrescu is a very well-known poet, definitely an anarchist, who teaches at Baton Rouge, Louisiana. All Things Considered is the leading radio news show in the United States, with many million s of daily listeners.]

Davis, Erik (interviewer),“The Wandering Sufi: Introduction to the Mystic with Peter Lamborn Wilson,” Voice Literary Supplement, New York, February 1994

Quote:
Sample text

My Political Beliefs
by Hakim Bey
This appeared in NAMBLA Bulletin, June 1986, page 14 (published by the North American Man-boy Love Association).

barelegged on his bicycle in the park he rides beneath
a children's fountain -droplets catch his hair which
the afternoon makes somewhat bronze, beaded with molten dew
--the sunset over Jersey like an industrial krakatoa:
Newark Gold, Secaucus Red, East Orange.
The button on his blazer: Anarchist Bicyclists
he's in the bathtub, I see
him through a crack in the door playing with himself, he calls me in, shows me
underwater push-ups and sit-ups, except for his gallic buttocks his skin is gilt as the air over the Hudson. The touch of his wet, bath-wrinkled fingers in my hand... but then...
one of his parents clumps down the hall... I suppose to make sure neither of us is raping the other...
[chorus of groans] Ohhh! for a
Buster-Keaton-bomb all spherical & black as coaldust with sweet sparkling with sweet sparkling fuse -a mindbomb to
Drop on the Idea of the Family! O for a libertarian isle of runaways! O goodnight
Moon, I am lost, actually lost without him
But I didn't want this to be
Just another poem about hopeless love. Pretend it's a manifesto instead. Down with School! Boy Rule OK! In the land of dreams
No governance exists
But that of anarchs and kings, for dreamers have not yet learned to vote or think past the unfurling of the moment. He touches my cheek, runs delicate fingers through the hairs on my arm.
My liege shatters all Law for a triple kiss.
--Hakim Bey

@uhu this site is not in any way obliged to give anyone a platform for there point of view, and its not authoritarian to ban people who advocate politics incompatible with those of the site, its a site for about libertarian communism, not a free for all, there are other sites for that

Harrison
Feb 7 2012 12:18
uhu wrote:
i am against the banning of "eastern anarchist". he articulates his point of view, which noone has to applause. seems that people who think similar will remain silent in future, which does not mean that they would think different. it is an authoritarian manner to ban him.

Fuck you, no platform for paedophiles

Wejale
Feb 7 2012 17:23

@radicalgraffiti It's really easy to write a poem, post it on the internet and sign as "Hakim Bey", the source of that poem is still this site and if you try to find that number of NAMBLA or any other you'll get more sites reposting this same thread.

I think that these "sources" are fake.

Chilli Sauce
Feb 7 2012 18:30

Well, I guess you can believe that, but you have no more reason to believe they're fake than you do your true--except that Bey's views on pederasty are easily available. As to the poems, the author says he saw them in an academic archive. Do you disbelieve every academic paper you read because you personally haven't seen the archive they used for research?

jonthom
Feb 7 2012 20:26

Well there is always this (from his "COMMUNIQUES OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR ONTOLOGICAL ANARCHY"):

Quote:
3. Paste up in public places a xerox flyer, photo of a beautiful twelve-year-old boy, naked and masturbating, clearly titled: THE FACE OF GOD.

And this (from his "The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism")

Quote:
Many people assume that because I sometimes express myself as an anarchist boy-lover, I must also be "interested" in other ultra-postmodern ideas

[...]

My position is this: I am all too well aware of the "intelligence" which prevents action. I myself possess it in abundance. Every once in a while however I have managed to behave as if I were stupid enough to try to change my life. Sometimes I've used dangerous stupifiants like religion, marijuana, chaos, the love of boys.

Arbeiten
Feb 7 2012 23:53