Connect with us

Opinions

Trump’s anti-immigration policies inspire similar efforts around the world

Individual rights, dignity, diversity now under threat in US

Published

on

President Donald Trump (Screen capture via Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies/YouTube)

My personal experience with the American migration system is quite peculiar.

I left Russia, where I was a refugee, in 2018 after I had a serious problem with immigration authorities because of my LGBT activism. I left Russia for Israel because the tourist agency told me that Tel Aviv is the best place for me to get an American visa. My wife and I had an invitation to speak at an American disability rights conference about intersectionality, but we were secretly planning to ask for asylum in the U.S.

The U.S. denied our request for American visas. This led to a situation when we were stuck in Israel without our belongings, money, any right to work, or a proper status. Finally, four months later we had to move to the UK to ask for asylum. I’ve never had a chance to come to the U.S.

I have dreamed of living in the U.S since elementary school, but now I’m extremely glad that I’m not there.

I have been a queer refugee in three different countries, including the UK, where I’m living right now. So anti-immigration steps taken by the Trump administration have felt very disturbing and personal to me; not just because the U.S. is de facto the country of immigrants that became great because of them, but also because of the potential influence that the U.S.’s anti-immigration politics could have on the UK and Europe.

Nigel Farage’s Reform UK is taking the lead in a recent British voting intention poll, and one of the reasons is the outstanding support that billionaire Elon Musk shows to the party. Despite the fact that Musk has quite a complicated relationship with Farage, financial and propaganda support from Musk is able to change the British political climate.

Ordinary British people I have met and political analysts are asking themself whether it possible that MAGA is spreading anti-immigration and aggressive ideas to the UK, and if so, what it would mean for the UK sovereignty.

Reform party supporters were involved in anti-immigration pogroms that were happening in the UK in August 2024 and is also known for their anti-LGBT and especially anti-transgender policies.

Farage in June 2024 released a pre-election party manifesto in which he pledged to “ban transgender ideology” in schools, including stopping social transitioning for trans youth, insisting that “transgender indoctrination is causing irreversible harm to children.” Ageism and xenophobia are once again walking hand in hand with anti-LGBT policies.

Reform UK also promised to leave the European Convention on Human Rights and replace the Equality Act 2010, and those steps would definitely harm LGBT communities.

So, under the Reform Party, the ones who live at the intersection — LGBT refugees, like me, and LGBT asylum seekers — will be in particular danger, not just in Britain, but also in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. 

The far-right is gaining more and more power in the UK.

Thousands gathered in Central London on Feb. 1 to support British far-right influencer Tommy Robinson, who the British government has jailed. Robinson is also famous for his anti-immigration campaigns and transphobia and also gets political and financial support from Musk.

Some people in the demonstration were wearing “Make England Great Again” caps, an obvious reference to MAGA.

I, on the other hand, never in my life felt safe on a street before I came to the UK. It doesn’t matter who was in power — Labour or the Tories — in the country. I have never faced even one percent of the discrimination I experienced in Russia and Ukraine as an autistic person. When I came to the UK, it felt like time traveling to the future where diversity is accepted and celebrated. I can hardly imagine that if Reform comes to power, British society will suddenly change their attitude toward LGBT refugees. The law could become worse, but the ideas of universal human rights in the UK are too strong to be messed up so easily. At least I hope so.

Now LGBT rights activists in the UK are even thinking about welcoming trans* asylum seekers from the U.S. and helping them to get status and support in the UK. I spoke about this during a break with representatives of the Rainbow Migration group in London, soon after Donald Trump signed his transphobic executive orders.

Because American trans* people who work in the military and government are losing their jobs while the UK has the NHS — a free medical healthcare system for everyone, including tourists and asylum seekers, free medical prescriptions for the poor — and a lot of social support like free housing for asylum seekers, free solicitors, strong community support provided by charities, and so on, it is possible that some trans* people would now become refugees here.

The UK and European countries are, of course, not the most obvious choice, according to PinkNews. Some LGBT Americans are considering a more geographically close destination, such as Canada, as their possible destination.

I think it could sound surprising for some Americans, but most of the European Union countries are much less friendly toward refugees than the UK.

Musk’s attempts’ to promote MEGA, Make Europe Great Again, has even more chances to succeed in Germany, especially considering the level of support he shows to the Alternative to Germany party. AfD is also known for its support of Russia, which is using openly homophobic and transphobic rhetoric in justification of their war in Ukraine. Russian state propaganda says it is acceptable to kill civilians to stop the spread of an extremist LGBT ideology. 

Musk’s ideas that Germans should stop condemning the Holocaust together with AfD sympathy for Russia is an extremely dangerous situation for LGBT refugees. Even straight refugees in conservative-dominated Bavaria are wary of mentioning their support of LGBT people to local authorities.

Elon Musk (Photo via Bigstock)


All authoritarian regimes began their persecution by targeting the most vulnerable and marginalized people before they move to restrict freedoms for the entire population.

I learned about liberty, individual rights, dignity, and diversity as a child by watching American movies, but these values are now under threat in the U.S. And the American government is beginning to spread a completely opposite idea that is threatening universal human rights in Europe and beyond. It is now possible to stop the process, but it soon may become too late. I’m not so scared of Trump’s actions, but I am scared that not enough efforts have been made to oppose them in the U.S. and beyond.

Editor’s note: The author uses trans* in order to be inclusive of nonbinary and gender queer people.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Opinions

D.C. is the place for the Democratic Socialists of America

Our endorsed candidates hold their affiliation as a badge of honor

Published

on

Members and supporters of the Democratic Socialists of America march in a 'No Kings' protest on Oct. 18, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

D.C. is the place for the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). We believe in a District where everyone can live a happy and dignified life. That means housing, healthcare, transit, education, and safety are treated as guarantees rather than privileges reserved for the wealthy and well-connected.

Our endorsed candidates do not hide what they believe. They engage in the democratic process openly, explain their politics clearly, and ask their fellow members to spend long nights and weekends doing the hard work of campaigning. And as the last six years of local elections have shown, including three successful D.C. Council campaigns and the overwhelming passage of Initiative 82, D.C. voters are often a great deal more interested in the endorsement of Metro DC DSA than in the handwringing of the Washington Post editorial board.

That is what makes Peter Rosenstein’s April 2 op-ed in the Blade so revealing. His piece was not just wrong. It was smug, unserious, and politically disconnected from the actual lives of queer people in this city. Worse, he used the platform of our local LGBTQ outlet to disregard Palestinian humanity while scolding democratic socialists for refusing to join him in that moral failure. Put plainly, Rosenstein has been publishing crank op-eds for years, and this one was no exception.

My name is Hayden Gise. I am a transgender, lesbian, Jewish, Democratic Socialist, and I am a union organizer. I do not speak on behalf of the national DSA organization, the local chapter, or any campaign. But I will not sit quietly while Rosenstein wraps himself in the mantle of queer Jewishness to sell the lie that anti-Zionism is antisemitism.

He packages that lie in the same kind of pinkwashing rhetoric used by Benjamin Netanyahu, who mocked solidarity with Palestinians by saying, “Some of these protesters hold up signs proclaiming ‘Gays for Gaza.’ They might as well hold up signs saying ‘Chickens for KFC.’” Rosenstein’s liberal Zionism is not thoughtful, brave, or nuanced. It is just a more polished way of telling Palestinians their lives matter less and telling queer people we should be grateful for the empire so long as it flies a rainbow flag. Which, by the way, is showing itself to be a losing strategy.

The ongoing genocide in Gaza is not some tragic deviation from the history of an otherwise peaceful Israel. The Nakba was the mass expulsion and displacement of Palestinians during Israel’s establishment in 1947–49, when hundreds of thousands were driven from their homes. My Jewish values tell me that is wrong. Rosenstein’s politics treat anti-Zionist Jews like me as illegible. No serious person should treat that accusation as an argument.

But the deeper problem with Rosenstein’s piece is that he has no real understanding of why Democratic Socialism resonates here. For queer people in D.C., Democratic Socialism is not an abstract theory. It is rent that does not consume half your paycheck, a union on your job, childcare you can actually afford, public transit that works, and a city where working-class Black and brown queer people are not displaced so developers and donors can cash in. Queer politics is not only about recognition. It is also about whether ordinary people can afford to survive.

That is why D.C. is fertile ground for Democratic Socialism. In the race for mayor, one of the leading candidates is Kenyan McDuffie, whose campaign already looks like a focus-grouped merger of Andrew Cuomo’s slogan and Donald Trump’s graphic design instincts, backed by big business interests and the super PAC money that follows them. The other has the endorsement of the major labor unions in the District. Who has a cohesive vision to make D.C. more affordable and childcare universal. Who puts people over profit and human rights over political expediency. Our next mayor, and our first Democratic Socialist Mayor: Janeese Lewis George.

D.C. is exactly the kind of city where Democratic Socialism should grow: working-class, queer, tenant-heavy, union-minded, and tired of being told that dignity is too expensive. Which side are you on? I know what side the queer people of the District of Columbia will be on.


Hayden Gise is a union organizer in Washington, D.C.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Now more than ever: the importance of LGBTQ activism

What would Jeffrey Montgomery do?

Published

on

Jeffery Montgomery in 'America You Kill Me.' (Screen capture via Gravitas Ventures/YouTube)

For half a century, the arc of LGBTQ progress in America has bent—slowly, imperfectly—toward justice. We fought for visibility, for legal protections, for the right to marry, serve openly, and live with dignity. Each generation built on the courage of the last.

And yet today, that progress is in peril. Across the country, lawmakers are rolling back protections, demonizing LGBTQ people for political gain, and trying to erase us from public life.

Opponents of our equality are working to erase us from the Constitution, and indeed, public life. In moments like this, based on my personal involvement working with one of the most effective leaders for LGBTQ rights I find myself asking a simple question: What would Jeffrey do?

Jeffrey Montgomery—the focus of a new documentary “America You Kill Me” and a long time Michigan activist and founder of the Triangle Foundation—was never content with quiet advocacy or compromise. He was a rabble-rouser, a strategist, and a relentless thorn in the side of powerful bigots. When politicians tried to marginalize LGBTQ people, Jeffrey didn’t politely ask for scraps. He forced the issue.

Jeffrey Montgomery started with his own determined voice and turned it into a movement. His story is living proof that personal courage can spark national conversations about justice and inclusion.

At a moment when the LGBTQ movement again faces hostility and regression, Jeffrey’s playbook offers lessons we would be wise to remember.

First, Jeffrey understood the importance of punching above our weight. In the early days of LGBTQ organizing, our movement was small, underfunded, and politically marginalized. But Jeffrey refused to let opponents see us that way. Through visibility, media savvy, and relentless organizing, he made LGBTQ advocates appear larger, stronger, and more unified than our numbers alone might suggest.

That perception mattered. Political opponents think twice before attacking a movement that looks organized, energized, and capable of mobilizing public pressure. Jeffrey knew that power is partly about reality—but also about what your opponent believes your power to be.

Second, Jeffrey never compromised on the value of our lives. Movements make compromises all the time. Politics often requires it. But Jeffrey understood that some things are not negotiable. The basic humanity of LGBTQ people is one of them. You can’t put our basic rights on the ballot. You don’t tell people to wait their turn. There are no turns. It’s now. It’s always now.

Too often, our opponents frame equality as something to be bargained over—as if the dignity and safety of queer people were a policy preference rather than a fundamental right. Jeffrey rejected that premise entirely.

You can negotiate strategy. You can negotiate timelines. But you cannot negotiate the worth of human lives.

And finally, Jeffrey understood the power of coalition. Today, one of the most effective tactics used against marginalized communities is division. If LGBTQ people can be fractured—by identity, ideology, generation, or strategy—our collective strength weakens.

Jeffrey instinctively resisted that trap. He worked with civil rights groups, labor leaders, faith communities, civic leaders and allies across movements. He understood that the fight for LGBTQ equality was never isolated from the broader fight for justice.

When opponents try to divide us, the answer is not retreat into smaller camps. The answer is to build broader ones.

If Jeffrey Montgomery were here today, he would not be discouraged by the backlash we are seeing. He would recognize it for what it is: the predictable response of those who feel their power slipping away.

And he would remind us that progress has never been linear. It has always required courage, persistence, and a willingness to challenge power directly.

So, when the moment feels uncertain, when the political winds shift against us, and when our opponents try to make us feel small, the question remains a useful one: What would Jeffrey do?

If history is any guide, the answer would be simple. He would make some noise. And making noise, today, means refusing to let fear, fatigue, or false unity quiet us when our lives are on the line.


Sean Kosofsky was director of policy at the Triangle Foundation.

Continue Reading

Opinions

D.C. not the place for antisemitic Democratic Socialists of America

Candidates like Janeese Lewis George should reject its endorsement

Published

on

D.C. Council member Janeese Lewis George (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

D.C. is not the place for the antisemitic Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), who advocate for the end of the State of Israel from the ‘river to the sea.’ The candidates they endorse agree to their platform, which includes not talking to any Zionist organizations. Being a Zionist simply means supporting the existence of the State of Israel. It does not mean supporting the war criminal who heads the government, or what he is doing, including murdering innocent Palestinians, or bombing civilians in Iran and Lebanon. As Ron Halber, CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, wrote in a column in DC Jewish Week, the views of the DSA are totally unacceptable.

The Council is non-political, but I am not. I can say one candidate for mayor, Janeese Lewis George, has asked for, and received, the endorsement of the DSA, and by doing so agrees to its antisemitic platform. After her endorsement became public, George tried to ‘privately apologize’ saying she didn’t see the questionnaire submitted by her campaign, rather it was submitted by a staffer. Now George says she is both not antisemitic, and supports Palestinians. Well, that sounds good. But she, and anyone else who accepts the DSA endorsement, has to answer a series of questions: 1. Are you for a two-state solution and the continued existence of the State of Israel, contrary to the position of the DSA? 2. Do you support BDS? 3. What is your definition of a Zionist? 4. What is your acceptable definition of antisemitism? 5. Will you meet with Zionist groups in DC?  

Then, we must recognize if one candidate, like George, can go after and accept an endorsement from an antisemitic organization, it gives tacit permission for others to do the same with organizations that might be Islamophobic, racist, homophobic, sexist, or anti-immigrant. All unacceptable. I urge D.C. voters to reject any candidate, for any office, who has the endorsement of the DSA. That is not what we want the leaders of our government to represent.

Thankfully, there are many choices in this year’s Democratic primary elections for every office. There is a race for mayor, congressional delegate, attorney general, Council chair, two D.C. Council at-large seats, additional Council seats, Democratic State Committee seats and ANCs. D.C. political leadership will look very different after this election. 

I urge voters to whittle down their choices by first rejecting anyone endorsed by the DSA. The DSA’s platform, aside from being antisemitic, also includes suggestions to ‘Defund the Police.’ That is a slogan some of the candidates running adopted a few years ago, thinking the people wanted it. They quickly found the people of D.C. didn’t want fewer police, they wanted their police better trained, with better community oversight. They wanted to be sure the police were here to protect them, not to harass them. People should know the DSA at one point even withdrew its endorsement from Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) as she wasn’t strident enough in her opposition to Israel and actually met with a Zionist organization. There are many Zionists like me — a gay, Jewish man — who support the existence of the State of Israel, yet want to see Netanyahu, a war criminal, a murderer, tried for his crimes and in jail, and his government replaced. Zionists who support Palestinians and want them to have their own free state.

As you decide who gets your vote, one way to find out about a candidate is looking at their website. I would suggest you reject any candidate who doesn’t have a strong issues section. The least you can expect of a candidate is to tell you in detail what they intend to do if you elect them. That includes our delegate to Congress, even if they won’t have a vote. If Democrats take back the House of Representatives, we can expect our delegate to once again get a vote in committee, and that can be very important. 

In the next couple of weeks, I will make some endorsements and share them with you in the Blade, for anyone who might be interested. They will detail why I endorse a particular candidate. I will not suggest second, third, fourth, or fifth choices. That is for you to decide. No matter who you give your first vote to, even with ranked choice voting, you can still vote for only one person. If you decide to list more choices, make sure the views of your second, and other choices, coincide with those of your first choice. 

So here is to an honest election season, one in which we end up with candidates winning who really care about our city, who have proven track records, and who will make us proud. Your job is to VOTE, and I hope everyone will. 


Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.

Continue Reading

Popular