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


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.

Posted By

Oct 18 2005 14:39


Attached files


Jul 27 2012 21:19


Jul 28 2012 01:31

How big is bey still in the anarchist movement?

the button
Jul 28 2012 01:45

Not as big as he gets in playgrounds.

Jul 28 2012 12:32

lol he actually wrote this, what wank

Jul 28 2012 13:06

Jul 29 2012 15:00

Ever heard of John Henry Mackay? From Wikipedia:

"John Henry Mackay (6 February 1864 – 16 May 1933) was an individualist anarchist, thinker and writer. Born in Scotland and raised in Germany, Mackay was the author of Die Anarchisten (The Anarchists) (1891) and Der Freiheitsucher (The Searcher for Freedom) (1921). Mackay was published in the United States in his friend Benjamin Tucker's magazine, Liberty"

"Using the pseudonym Sagitta, Mackay wrote a series of works for pederastic emancipation, titled Die Bücher der namenlosen Liebe (Books of the Nameless Love). This series was conceived in 1905 and completed in 1913 and included the Fenny Skaller, a story of a pederast. Under his real name he also published fiction, such as Der Schwimmer (1901) and, again as Sagitta, he published a pederastic novel of the Berlin boy-bars, Der Puppenjunge (The Hustler) (1926)."

PLW-Hakim Bey's pederastic literary output seems a mere pebble, next to the life-long avalanche of pro-pedophile propaganda which Mackay was responsible for. Would you ban this rather formative Anarchist's writings, also?

On the other hand, I believe that PLW's accounts of his early life are at least 50% fiction. I can't find any documentation for a Peter L Wilson born & raised when and where he claims, nor can I find any independent confirmations of his alleged wandering around southeast asia and the middle east. I don't believe he was born "Peter Lamborn Wilson".

There was a school teacher who lived in New Jersey in the early 1970s, who had an intense interest in libertarian anarchist philosophy, and was involved in a large scale child pornography & prostitution conspiracy. When this person vanished, in 1975, he was a wanted fugitive accused of participating in the abuse of a 10 year old boy. There are startling parallels between this person and PLW-Hakim Bey, including very unique personal interests (far more unique than simply being "pro-pedophile").

Jul 29 2012 15:33
NARF wrote:
Ever heard of John Henry Mackay?


PLW-Hakim Bey's pederastic literary output seems a mere pebble, next to the life-long avalanche of pro-pedophile propaganda which Mackay was responsible for. Would you ban this rather formative Anarchist's writings, also?

Maybe, unless they had some sort of value that could be wholly separated from his promotion of pederasty. As best I can tell, Bey's don't.

(Incidentally, I'm not sure what you mean by "ban", unless it's a rather confusing way of saying "reject" or "want nothing to do with". It's not like gangs of anarchists are going off burning copies of The Daily Nonce or summat...)

There are startling parallels between this person and PLW-Hakim Bey, including very unique personal interests (far more unique than simply being "pro-pedophile").

Do tell.

Jul 29 2012 17:27

@jonthom -
In one of the many threads, here, devoted to PLW-Hakim Bey, there was some talk of asking anarchist booksellers not to stock PLW-Bey' writings and - should they decline to co-operate - removing the books by theft or force anyway. [I would be opposed to that, simply because it would be censorship of the written word].

If you've never heard of Mackay, you might be interested in a little research on the "Free Love" movement, circa 1850-1945, especially the late 1800s & early 1900s. Here's an interesting introduction:

Most Free Love advocates of that time were concerned to "get the state out of our bedrooms", in the context of consenting heterosexual relations between adults, decriminalization of birth control & abortion especially - but the movement included advocates for decriminalizing adult gay & lesbian relations, heterosexual relations between adults and adolescents, and pederasts such as Mackay advocating decriminalized relations between men and boys. [Pederasts are not the same phenomenon as Gay Men, a fact that was recognized even back in the 1800s!]

There should be no doubt, that a longing for 'sexual liberation' contributed substantially to popular support for the various radical movements of the 1800s & 1900s in Western European nations & North America (such as there was).

As for PLW-Hakim Bey...
I DON'T WANT my suspicions about him, [far more than suspicions, unfortunately], to be correct. That would be a propaganda disaster for several communities of persons that I like & have respect for. One reason why I have not been more direct, why I don't just name the person I believe PLW once was, is that I keep hoping someone will dig up verifiable data proving to me that I'm full of sh*t on this matter. I'd LOVE that to happen.
However, as that continues to NOT happen, I feel a responsibility to at least leave a trail in some public forum through which others could reconstruct my own research, so that I won't take this info to my grave if I were to kick the bucket in the near future. [I'm in the latter stage of my life]

Jul 30 2012 01:20

Thank you NARF for posting your very valuable opinion on this matter.

Jul 30 2012 02:01

NARF wrote:

"Using the pseudonym Sagitta, Mackay wrote ... a pederastic novel of the Berlin boy-bars, Der Puppenjunge (The Hustler) (1926)."

I know nothing about Bey and have never had the slightest interest in reading him but I have read Mackays book, and it is in no way an apology for pederasty. As far as I remember, it shows the misery of being very poor in the Weimar Republic and the element of teenage gay sex was part of this misery and part of the need to get money to survive. If this is an example of this sites obsessive and almost prurient, slightly perverse, concentration on paedophilia and the need to attack it in the most inappropriate situations, then I begin to suspect you might have it wrong about Bey as well. Obviously if you have been the victim of paedophilia I can understand such an obsession, but I suspect that most of you have not and are simply disgusted by any attempt to discuss underage teenage gay sex except from a rather classical disapproving Victorian mentality.

Jul 31 2012 14:11

How does dealing with the pedageddon operate in a libcom society? Are pitchforks allowed or does that belong to an outmoded form of production?

Aug 20 2013 10:17

Mackay's anarchism was mainly based on Stirner and Tucker ... in Germany during the 1970ies, a number of radical papers ran a solidarity campaign with a pedophile writer (I forgot the name), pointing, that this was political repression by the bourgeois state sad ... among them e.g. the operaist Autonomie and Befreiung (which became in 1977 in a way today's Direkte Aktion)

addition 20/08/2013: the name of the writer was Peter Schult (1928-1984), he was convicted of false imprisonment for three years in 1971 and for eight cases of sex with children/juveniles in 1982 for 34 months, he already had some convictions for similar reasons during the 1960ies

Jul 31 2012 20:25
GerryK wrote:
I know nothing about Bey

Not much point in you speculating about others' objections about him, then.

Jul 31 2012 23:25
xslavearcx wrote:
How does dealing with the pedageddon operate in a libcom society? Are pitchforks allowed or does that belong to an outmoded form of production?

If one examines the transition of living pedo to dead pedo, i believe burning at the stake is another relevant socially necessary process.

Aug 12 2012 22:34
GerryK wrote:
I know nothing about Bey and have never had the slightest interest in reading him but I have read Mackays book, and it is in no way an apology for pederasty. As far as I remember, it shows the misery of being very poor in the Weimar Republic and the element of teenage gay sex was part of this misery and part of the need to get money to survive.

Gerry - I would agree with this assessment of "The Hustler", by & large. It does contain some of the myopic rationalizations characteristically employed by "boy-lovers", such as - that their primary motivation is to mentor & assist gay youth, (when in fact their primary motive is to sexually exploit kids in trouble) - nevertheless it is an important piece of historical fiction.

Have you read any of the Sagitta 'tracts' - as opposed to Mackay's novels? I think you'd find them very frank apologia for pederasty...

Aug 12 2012 22:30
Harrison wrote:
If one examines the transition of living pedo to dead pedo, i believe burning at the stake is another relevant socially necessary process.

Another example of why I have not made my considerable research into this matter entirely public. Vigilantes are scum, no better than police in my opinion. I'm not going to facilitate some self-professed judge-jury-executioner by providing facts through which they could justify murdering this man.

You'll have to figure it out for yourselves, I guess.

Sep 11 2012 21:58

Confirmation from Columbia University - there never was a Peter Lamborn Wilson enrolled at that institution. (He was enrolled at a different institution, under another name, at that time)

Sep 25 2012 13:35

Christ, this article really doesn't say "child rape" enough. Hakim Bey is a sick guy, and this article writer seems to use way too many euphemisms here. It's still a good article laughing at lifestylists, and that's just great.

Sep 7 2013 14:50

I will admit that Hakim Bey does have style in his writing, but his pedophilia and his defenses of it are indefensible

Aug 11 2014 18:48

I'm disappointed (though not surprised) at the level uncritical engagement.

I realize it might come from a well-meaning place, but you're doing no one a favor if you're just rehashing talking points, especially when they come out as very homophobic, which I'm seeing a lot of.

Let me say this: yeah, it's hella problematic for adults to engage with sexual activity with children, BUT not because of nature or some bullshit, but because of society's treatment of sex. If one does engage in sexual activity with children, you put the child at risk for trauma. So yeah, I don't condone sex-acts with kids.

BUT, that doesn't excuse persecution of people for fluid desires. Some people have have consensual force fantasies, which people call rape fantasies. Can it be problematic, yeah, but it doesn't mean crucify anyone who does.

Children have sexuality, but in this culture you can't even talk or thing about it. I agree that children should explore and express that sexuality. I think it's too risky for adults to get involved, but I think sometimes in history, past or present, when yeah, there's adult-child sensuality and no one gives a big fuck. It happens. Children don't explode because sexual energy is too much for them to handle. Sex is like a drug. It has the possibility of being an intense, scaring experience if one doesn't have the right framework/grounding and even as adults this isn't always the case, even when we do consent.

I don't give 5 year olds psychedelic mushrooms; i wouldn't even take them hunting (having them kill food); i wouldn't want them to do a lot of things. the risk is just high, especially given cultural taboos.

So I'm not defending sex-with-kids, but i'm saying these gross stereotypes and puritan values popping up are preventing a more honest approach.

We live in times of international sex trafficking of kids as well as people being given federal crimes and lifetimes of policed harassment because they had sex with someone a year or two too early (when they're in very close age groups). The two are part of one global culture of fucked up attitudes regarding sex and we can't approach that with views we've inherited from the culture that created this mess.

Aug 11 2014 19:01


but I think sometimes in history, past or present, when yeah, there's adult-child sensuality and no one gives a big fuck. It happens.

Will you please, kindly, just fuck off and die.

Signed by me, a childhood sexual abuse survivor.

Aug 11 2014 21:56

This thread is one hell of a honey trap for paedos...

Aug 11 2014 22:48
Fleur wrote:

but I think sometimes in history, past or present, when yeah, there's adult-child sensuality and no one gives a big fuck. It happens.

Will you please, kindly, just fuck off and die.

Signed by me, a childhood sexual abuse survivor.

I'm very sorry to hear that, Fleur sad

this revolting nonce-apologist is now banned.

Aug 11 2014 23:07
ghostrail wrote:
Let me say this: yeah, it's hella problematic for adults to engage with sexual activity with children, BUT not because of nature or some bullshit, but because of society's treatment of sex. If one does engage in sexual activity with children, you put the child at risk for trauma. So yeah, I don't condone sex-acts with kids.

Its not about the risk of trauma, it's about exploiting minors for your own sexual gratification and ends. No one is going to be subjected to this shit and grow-up reflecting on it well, and that has nothing to do with society. The power relation between adult and minor is exactly why its abusive and should be anathema to communists.

Has someone who has had loved ones subjected to this vile behaviour, I would echo fleurs sentiments.

Aug 12 2014 08:18

I think it was the late German marxist sexologist Günter Amendt (who sadly was killed in an accident a few years ago) who wrote on the topic that it is true, that some children develop sexually relatively early. But he added that this authentic children's sexuality only very rarely involves adults and it never involves those adults who are "interested" in children

Aug 17 2015 20:19

So disturbing.
I did a search for HB after reading T.A.Z.--among other things, because of the repeated references to "boy love,' and my eye jumped to this article. I have nothing to add beyond that, but one point, relevant to "Leaving out the Ugly Parts."

Reference was made to the murder of priests by Spanish anarchists--coming after many paragraphs documenting Bey's pedophilia, I anticipated some connection--beyond this being another example of ugly parts anarchists don't want to talk about. I was asking myself... given the recent exposure of pedophilia and priests--how much of this might have been revenge? Was at least some of the violence driven by memories of traumatic abuse as children? Is there another story buried beneath this buried story? Has pedophilia ever been cited as justification for what otherwise appears as a level of violence that defies all reason?

The suggestion of an association is inescapable. Whether there is any historical evidence is another matter.

Dec 28 2016 13:20

Could the writer of this article or someone please tell me where Emory Wilson (Hakim Bey's father) got all the money to leave him a trust fund for life? I know he was the general editor at Harvard Press and published many books. I'm wondering if he also inherited money from Bey's grandfather, and how the money was made. Would he have made enough money for Bey's unemployment and world travel with his editor's position? I am looking for deprogramming information for my son who was radicalized by his reading starting at 13 years when he was diagnosed as schizophrenia and antisocial personality disorder and is now an unemployed druggy. Thank you. This article about his pedophilia will also help. I could find no bio on Emory Wilson anywhere. dlarue@lsus.edu

Dec 28 2016 14:08


As vile as Hakim Bey and his nonce loving acolytes are, I can guarantee you that your son's schizophrenia and substance abuse problem was not caused by reading his shitty writing. As for anti-social personality disorder (also known as sociopathy) there is some contention if it exists as a stand alone mental illness, as it generally presents in teenage people who have been brought up in a troubled and or abusive family. In addition, somebody's employment status is no indicator of a person's worth.

Good luck with getting a bunch of anarchists to help you with "deprogramming" your son. I assume by "deprogramming" you mean the physically coercive, often violent, psychological torture, in which you detain your son against his will and harangue and abuse him until he recants his opinions? If your son does have mental illnesses, what the fuck do you think you're playing at? "Deprogramming" is a pile of bunk to start off with, it rarely works except to imbue the person organizing it with a sense of power that they are proactively doing something.

Get your kid some actual psychiatric help. He may not be receptive to it though. Stand by with substance abuse and recovery program information for if and when he's ready to quit.

Jan 1 2017 15:11

"Get your kid some actual help"....reflects a total ignorance about how hard this is to do. I have been trying for over 25 years to get some actual help. Actual help is not a panacea, a guaranteed cure. Rx consists of more prescribed second generation benzos. Psychiatrists are necessary evils to me. Much current research indicates that an abusive environment does not cause schizophrenia, but that schizophrenic children are more likely to be abused. Chicken or egg? Second, Watson of DNA fame is studying schizophrenia intensely as he has an adult child with it. He leans toward having an old father's moldy dna, which my son did. If you go on Youtube you can also hear Watson lecture on marijuana causing schizophrenia and his research about that. My son started smoking when he was 13.. My son's diagnosis is drug induced psychosis, but he was diagnosed tentatively with schizophrenia when he was 13.There is also research on alcoholic fathers, which he had, affecting DNA. Also the mother having a virus during pregnancy, which I did. Also brain damage, which he may have had when he crashed his bike and hit his chin on the pavement. HOWEVER, I am not concerned with causes at the moment except to address your smug know it allness. Just gently inserting the information that to live Hakim Bey's philosophy requires a trust fund, and his trust fund came from his father who was an editor of Harvard U press, is hardly abusive. And I'd like to find out if generational money was made in an exploitive way contradicting all Hakim Bey's "compassion" concerning slavery. I do NOT think Hakim Bey caused his schizophrenia, but provided a rationale. He seems to be ready to quit (for the 5th time) and I have done nothing but research various new rehabs and detox programs the last three weeks. Sorry "deprogramming" was such a trigger for you. You seem programmed by the word deprogrammed. I don't see how pointing out Hakim Bey was a moocher is such a dastardly act. My son has gone three weeks not using. He is seeing all kinds of decisions he made that did not serve him in his best interests. Perhaps one day you will have a schizophrenic child and not be so quick to judge. Perhaps you one day too, will have an antisocial disordered child, and you can pay for his lawyers, and his detox ($10k a week) and his college because he doesn't believe in working, and his graduate school because he doesn't believe in working, and his bails, and expunging arrests from his records and for you, all the while singing the praises FOR antisocial behavior. And watching him slowly kill himself. And I am not asking a bunch of anarchists for help deprogramming my son. I just want one question answered HOW DID AKIM BEY'S OLD MAN GET HIS FORTUNE, AND HOW DID THE OLD MAN'S FATHER GET HIS FORTUNE? Excuse my shouting. I see I could have asked that without sharing personal information and not been a target for Mr. Cool Armchair Psychiatrists.

Jan 1 2017 17:39

Aren't you the charmer, wishing mental illness on someone else. Fwiw though, I do have an adult child with a psychotic mental illness, as well as a couple of other co-morbid mental health issues, as well as recently been registered as physically disabled on account of her physical illnesses. I am aware of the genetic causes of mental illnesses, between my partner and I schizophenia, bi-polar disorder, ASD, and ADHD doesn't run in our families, it gallops, so spare me the lectures on genetics. I am more than aware of the struggles involved in getting medical help. What I do know though is that having her kidnapped, contained and shouted at by some bullying snake oils salesman will not cure or help her in any way. It would just be a cruel thing to do.

Also spare me the referencing to James Watson. The man had one good idea, largely off the back of the research he stole from Rosalind Franklin, and lives on the grace of that, hanging about at Cold Spring Harbour working on such theories that African people are less intelligent than white people, that libido is linked to skin colour, that you should genetically engineer people, stupidity is a disease, girls should be engineered to be prettier and that it would be a valid choice to be able to abort a gay child. As for his cannabinoids and schizophrenia theories, they've been debunked like the rest of his stupid ideas.
The man's an idiot, living off his stolen glory.

By the way, it's Ms Armchair Psychiatrist to you.