As a homosexual, he [Christopher] had been wavering between embarrassment and defiance. He became embarrassed when he felt that he was making a selfish demand for his individual rights at a time when only group action mattered. He became defiant when he made the treatment of the homosexual a test by which every political party and government must be judged. His challenge to each one of them was: 'All right, we've heard your liberty speech. Does that include us or doesn't it?' The Soviet Union had passed this test with honors when it recognized the private sexual rights of the individual, in 1917. But, in 1934, Stalin's government had withdrawn this recognition and made all homosexual acts punishable by heavy prison sentences. It had agreed with the Nazis in denouncing homosexuality as a form of treason to the state. The only difference was that the Nazis called it 'sexual Bolshevism' and the Communists 'Fascist perversion.' Christopher - like many of his friends, homosexual and heterosexual - had done his best to minimize the Soviet betrayal of its own principles. After all, he had said to himself, anti-homosexual laws exist in most capitalist countries, including England and the United States. Yes - but if Communists claim that their system is juster than capitalism, doesn't that make their injustice to homosexuals less excusable and their hypocrisy even viler? He now realized that he must dissociate himself from the Communists, even as a fellow traveler. He might, in certain situations, accept them as allies but he could never regard them as comrades. He must never again give way to embarrassment, never deny the rights of his tribe, never apologize for its existence, never think of sacrificing himself masochistically on the altar of that false god of the totalitarians, the Greatest Good of the Greatest Number - whose priests are alone empowered to decide what 'good' is.
About this quote
- What does it mean?
- The quote explores the tension between personal rights and collective political action, using Christopher's experience as a homosexual to highlight how governments treat minorities.
- In plain terms
- Individual rights matter, but leaders are judged by how they protect the marginalized.
- What can you take from it?
- Hold governments accountable for including everyone in their promises of liberty.
Where it applies
Putting it to work
Questions to consider
- How do we measure a government's commitment to liberty?
- What does true inclusion look like in policy?
Another view
The quote simplifies complex historical shifts in Soviet policy regarding sexuality.
More from Christopher Isherwood
I doubt if one ever accepts a belief until one urgently needs it.
Permalink to quote #16 Suppose, Christopher now said to himself, I have a Nazi Army at my mercy. I can blow it up by pressing a button. The men in that Army are notorious for torturi…
Permalink to quote #18 Christopher, like many other writers, was shockingly ignorant of the objective world, except where it touched his own experience. When he had to hide his ignor…
Permalink to quote #15
Related quotes
Note the difference between a right and a privilege. A right, in the abstract, is a fact; it is not a thing to be given, established, or conferred; it is. Of t…
Voltairine de CleyreVoltairine de Cleyre quote #5 But I want to stress again that human rights are not peripheral to the foreign policy of the United States. Our pursuit of human rights is part of a broad effo…
Jimmy CarterJimmy Carter quote #6 The UN took a strong stand against apartheid; and over the years, an international consensus was built, which helped to bring an end to this iniquitous system.…
Nelson MandelaNelson Mandela quote #6