Eric Lively Books

From the DJ: Li Yu was born in 1611 and died in 1680 or shortly thereafter. He led a busy, turbulent, and productive life, during the course of which he became one of the principal literary figures of the early Ch'ing dynasty. One of the most versatile and inventive of all Chinese authors, Li Yu's work possesses a special buoyancy, ease, and humor. This book takes the reader into the mental life of seventeenth-century China by allowing him to participate in the jokes and fantasies, the yearnings and antagonisms, the skepticisms and enthusiasms, contained in the plays of Li Yu.

The fact that there is not even a photo for this book, and the fact that it is so hard to find anymore, lends a comical credibility to the authors' points!

This is no work of scholarship.

In the preface to the 4th edition, Lively points out that historians have not commented on this book. The reason is simply that this is not a work of history. It is a mix of facts, half-truths, and blatant falsehoods combined to form illogical conclusions about homosexuality and the Nazis. Neither of the authors are historians, as evidenced by their amateurish analysis of sources and blatant ideological bias throughout.

The book reeks of ignorance and discrimination. The Nazis did persecute homosexuals; this is not a "revisionist claim," it is a historical fact. Unfortunately, homosexuals and other groups persecuted by the Nazis continue to be discriminated against by misguided fools like Lively and Abrams.

For a legitimate scholarly perspective on the history of homosexuality in Nazi Germany, visit the National Holocaust Museum's online exhibit about the persecution of homosexuals. Despite what bigots like Lively and Abrams say, it represents commonly accepted historical analysis.

The authors of this book provide some facts about the Nazi system and its leaders in their book, but they leave out crucial information, make loads of mistakes (some of which seem disingenuous), and spin what they do include to support their anti-homosexual agenda. This is not objective history, but a polemic. For example, the authors claim that, because "sodomy" was a crime in Germany and many other countries both before and after the rise of the Nazi regime (true), it's perfectly acceptable that homosexuals were placed in concentration camps during the days of the 3rd Reich. By that reckoning, people today shouldn't be upset about slavery in Colonial America, because it was "legal" at that time. The authors point out that there was never a directive to murder all homosexuals in Germany, as there was against Jews. This is true, but, as they admit, homosexuals were killed in the camps, and through violent attacks on the outside. Yes, the number of gays killed by Nazis was miniscule compared to the number of Jews murdered, but so what? Does that mean no one can talk about it, or that we should pretend it never happened? Discussing the topic of Nazi homophobia in no way lessens anyone's respect for what Jews, political dissidents, Catholics, Romany, degenerate artists, etc., suffered under the 3rd Reich, unless you're hysterically homophobic, as these authors appear to be.

In an effort to make their case that the Nazi leadership was "poisoned" by homosexuality, the authors leave out masses of evidence and documentation that prove Hitler's minions purposely targeted homosexuals for arrest and harrassment, and that Germany's laws supported this. The authors claim that the Nazi government's anti-homosexual policies were selectively applied, or covers for other purposes. I'll just list a few of these policies here, and you can decide for yourself whether this conclusion is logical: 1928: the Nazi party publishes a pamphlet containing its response to the idea of repealing the anti-homosexual law known as Paragraph 175, "Anyone who thinks of homosexual love is our enemy"; Feb. 23, 1933: 24 days after being appointed Chancellor, Hitler bans all homosexual-rights groups; October 24, 1934: the Gestapo secretly orders local police to collect names of all homosexuals in Germany; June 28, 1935: Paragraph 175 is amended with broader language, so that a mere touch between men can be interpreted as an arrestable offense; October 26, 1936: the Reich's "Central Office to Combat Homosexuality and Abortion" is established.

It is true that a few Nazi higher-ups, such as SA leader Ernst Röhm, were homosexual, but that does not invalidate official Nazi homophobia, just as Goebbels' clubfoot did not prevent Hitler from having "cripples" euthanized. One can make a good case that Röhm's homosexuality was part of the reason Hitler ordered him killed. (Though one can make just as good a case that it was a mere pretext for removing a man who was becoming too powerful for Hitler's comfort.) There is no evidence for the authors' claim that "most" of the Nazi leadership was gay.

One major failing of the book is that the authors have no true understanding of what homosexuality is. They make no distinction between sadistic prison camp guards who sometimes raped male prisoners, and men who are sexually oriented towards other men. They also foolishly lump pedophiles into the mix, as if gay men are just waiting for the chance to prey on children. I caught a number of assertions that are completely unproven, such as the authors' belief that there is less homosexuality among American boy scouts than among members of the Hitler Youth, due to the Boy Scouts' "Judeo-Christian" underpinnings. This is just one example of the authors' weak historiography.

It is true that victims of crimes or social attacks can sometimes read history with an eye that focuses too intensely on issues that affect their own group. The authors of this book think that some writers have been too emphatic about the sufferings of homosexuals in Nazi Germany. But it remains a proven fact that gays were one of Hitler's many targets, and this book does not change that fact. If you were convinced by it, I suggest you read some other books on the topic, such as "The Pink Triangle", and general surveys of the Nazi period.

BTW, I would have preferred to give this title no stars, but Amazon requires that I assign at least one.

Judging from the other reviews, it is clear that people either fully accept or fully reject this book wholeheartedly.

"The Pink Swastika" put forth a thus far unique thesis, namely that the Nazis persecuted only one kind of male homosexual (the effeminate ones), while the other kind (the "macho" ones) weren't persecuted at all and some even held high positions in the Nazi hierarchy.

As with any new thesis, this one should be analyzed in a scholarly, objective manner, with any and all valid evidence (either pro or con) freely presented, thereby increasing our knowledge of this controversial subject.

Unfortunately, the atmosphere on today's university campuses is so characterized by fear of being out of step with political correctness, that no scholar will touch this book (an obvious "hot potato") with a 10-foot pole. As far as the politically correct world goes, this book simply does not exist.

Well of course The Pink Swastika is a bunch of drivel. It has to be. If there is one thing the atheistic and totalitarian liberal left agrees upon, it is that there is no God or devil, no heaven or hell. All truth is relative and only cultural. BUT exception will be made for Hitler. If anybody or anything was evil, Hitler was.

But Hitler's occult and pagan regime promoted sexual perversion (along with socialism of the fascist variety, rather than the communist. It's all big government in principle though, just like the socialism Big Sister and her Little Brothers, Democrat or Republican want to sell us in the current campaign apart from the one real presidential candidate.) Horrors. It cannot be. Well, for those who can follow a reasonable argument and understand that history has some relation to reality and facts, the typical smear is not good enough. Rather, just like "racist" or "sexist", the use of the h word merely indicates someone is losing an argument.

But what do we know? We are after all, suffering from homophobia again, that mythical disease dreamed up by those with the moral version of AIDS and like all others tarred with that perjorative, have just recently been enlisted in the evil Hall of Shame previously only occupied by Hitler. In a perverse sort of way, it sort of an honor.

Yet there is nothing new under the sun. Neither sexual perversion or apologies for and promotions of it. The authors exercised their rights in organizing a political petition and found out just how "tolerant" evil is. They then researched and wrote this book. It speaks for itself. Likewise the homophiliac reactions to it. Only too eloquently.

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
Psalms 2:1,4