Blog has moved, searching new blog...

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Triangulating From the Right

During this past month has Lawrence Auster has expressed a considerable shift in rhetoric, fundamentally altering his depiction of "liberalism" by adopting, without explanation, ideas he had previously ignored, dismissed, or denounced.

In First thoughts on the PWC conference, posted on 8 Feb 2009, we see Auster was giving speeches "meticulously describing" non-discrimination and writing about "suicidal white guilt that results from ignorance of race differences".

In What is good discrimination?, posted on 24 Feb 2009, Auster wrote:
We need to distinguish between necessary/proper/good discrimination and unnecessary/improper/bad discrimination. This is something that liberalism never does, because liberalism considers all discrimination to be bad; moreover, it considers every type of discrimination to be equally bad.
At Oz Conservative, around 17 Feb 2009, something had changed. Suddenly Sailer's "competition between whiter people", which Auster had previously judged useless, was transformed into war and became his own idea. Auster wrote:
The signs are gathering that the Western societies are heading into an age of civil wars. Not between white and nonwhite, not between Christian and Muslim, but between liberal whites and non-liberal whites. That's shaping up as the major divide of our time.
Next he transformed "suicidal white guilt" into "murder". In The cause of the white race will not go away, posted on 5 Mar 2009, Auster wrote:
when I consider today's systematic campaign, organized and backed by all the ruling powers of society, to put down, demonize, disempower, and marginalize the white race, I think it is shaping up as the greatest crime in the history of mankind
Today, 10 Mar 2009, Auster posts The supposedly race-blind liberal media defines a "true American", finally realizing (or finally admitting) that non-discrimination isn't at all what "liberalism" is about. He writes:
Liberalism is not about making race unimportant. Liberalism is about elevating nonwhites, particularly blacks, over whites, and about turning whites into non-persons. Liberalism is pure racism under the guise of anti-racism. What "anti-racism" really means is simply anti-whiteness.
It is extraordinary watching Auster break so much new ground so quickly. Where on earth is he getting these insane ideas?

Here are three more major related pieces he has yet to cough up:
  • Note that "liberalism" does not turn jews into non-persons. Quite the contrary, both jews and "liberalism" sees jews as non-White and elevates them over everyone else, including blacks.
  • Note that "liberalism" has become more anti-White at the same time and in the same proportion as jewish influence over Western sociopolitical thought has increased.
  • Note that even in his own shifty estimation all of the above is "anti-semitism", move to israel to find himself and repent his sins, blog exclusively in hebrew from this point on, and never again try to command "the majority" (to which he is alien) what to say or do.

Labels: , ,

white

23 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Were you drunk when you wrote this? it makes no sense and is filled with typos.

3/10/2009 06:26:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Thanks Larry!

3/10/2009 08:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, not Larry, and your answer doesn't make your post any more intelligible.

3/10/2009 08:57:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

I suspect PEBMAC. And I'm sure that rhymes with some German word or another.

3/10/2009 09:15:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why do you get such a thrill out of going after Auster? I mean, he's just a blogger, so what if he's duplicitous or whatever it is you think he is. Since you're a committed anti-semite, why not pick on Bernanke or Sam Zell, the impact factor would be a lot higher. Of course, they'd ignore you.

3/10/2009 09:50:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

You have a general problem with comprehension then, don't you?

When I start taking advice from enemies I'll be sure to do exactly what you suggest.

3/10/2009 10:01:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bernanke or Sam Zell don't pretend to be on our side.

3/11/2009 04:14:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Note that even in his own shifty estimation all of the above is "anti-semitism", move to israel to find himself and repent his sins, blog exclusively in hebrew from this point on, and never again try to command "the majority" (to which he is alien) what to say or do.

That didn't make much sense.

3/11/2009 04:32:00 AM  
Anonymous apollonian said...

"Liberalism" Is Not Where It's At, Comrades: "It's Jews, Stupid"
(Apollonian, 11 Mar 09)

Once again I submit comrade "Tanstaafl" makes his only slight mistake as he gives any significance to Auster, Jews, or "liberalism," all of these so grossly discredited already and not worthy of much note--except of course for Jews in general who so much control the funding/financial sources within our culture still, this by means of that crass CRIMINAL COUNTERFEIT conspiracy known as fractional-reserve money and banking, like the US Fed (see RealityZone.com for expo/ref. on US Federal Reserve Bank [Fed] fraud).

Thus "liberalism" is mere function of that larger, underlying SUBJECTIVISTIC culture/mentality in general which rules by specific means of corrupted and bribed political establishment, including both legislative and bureaucracy, the judiciary, educational establishment, and esp. then the corporate mass "Jews-media," still powerful, though less and less as culture continues to reduce to absurdity, Jew parasite disease-of-opportunity steadily destroying the host-victim.

The real, best place to attack present Judeo-conspirators (see TheNewAmerican.com and AugustReview.com for expo/ref. on CFR-Bilderberg conspiracy) is, for thematic example, via the recent Bishop Williamson (ck Dinoscopus.blogspot.com) controversy regarding holohoax lies.

For the stinking pope is simply a traitor in not defending the dear bishop who merely sticks up for TRUTH against Jew holohoax lies. And this papal treason is because Jews have literally BOUGHT and blackmailed the "Vatican" offices (no less than they've bought the political establishment of the West in general), these mere offices never forget, NOT being the real Church, properly understood. For "church" refers first to people, NOT mere offices.

Hence note "liberalism" is not any longer really liberal in this empire of lies, but mere buzz-word for FASCISM, now merely styled in fashionable way, esp. for queers who want to get their grubby hands upon the civilization's children. Pope then is mere collaborator with Jews, fascists, and queers, the scum.

So I say again, Auster ought to be largely ignored while patriots concentrate attention upon FALSE CHRISTIANS who fail for Christianity, hence anti-semitism. For if u're not anti-semitic, THEN U'RE JUST NOT CHRISTIAN, pilgrim; it's simple as that.

Christ was not a "Jew" (Talmudist), and indeed was foremost anti-semite (anti-Talmud, as Gosp. MARK 7:1-13). Thus "Judeo-Christian" (JC--see ) hereticalists are gross WEAK-POINT of Judeo-conspirators and should be vigorously, joyously attacked and castigated most intensively.

And this then (attacking JCs and non-antisemitism) is the way to best attack that fundamental subjectivism which underlies such putrid "liberalism"--EXPOSING THE APOSTACY OF present-day "Christian" establishment which fails to uphold and defend TRUTH, hence the necessary objectivity which must underlie such truth.

CONCLUSION: And don't forget: it isn't a mere matter of mythology or speculation as it's central and fundamental--UPHOLDING TRUTH against Jew lies, criminal conspiracy, and foul murder of the truth. Imagine those filthy queers salivating, like Pavlov's dog, as they contemplate getting their hands on the civilization's youngest innocents. Honest elections and death to the Fed. Apollonian

3/11/2009 08:29:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Bernanke or Sam Zell don't pretend to be on our side."

Sure they do. But what is it about Auster exactly, other than ethnic Jewishness, that you dislike? I mean, suppose he is "pretending" to be on our side. What does he say that would be any different if he were "really" on our side? As far as I can see, nothing. You believe that Jewish influence is the deep source of our problems, Auster doesn't so he doesn't say that. So I guess you believe that Auster's analyses fail to get at the root, that they only describe symptoms. I fail to see how that makes him an enemy; if anything, that should help people to see your allegedly greater truth.

"You have a general problem with comprehension then, don't you?

When I start taking advice from enemies I'll be sure to do exactly what you suggest."

Nice comeback, with answers like that, you guys will always lose. If you think "enemies" are those who fail to see your deeper truth, then you'll do nothing but make enemies. And what is it that I've failed to comprehend?

3/11/2009 10:58:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

That didn't make much sense.

The paragraph you cite alludes to Auster's I am attacked for not being an anti-Semite (which I linked) and is a restatement of a comment I made at Mangan's in November:

I would prefer Auster aim all his criticism and advice at the jewish community he obviously cares so much for, and stop issuing commands and attacking "the majority" that he obviously values only to the extent we serve jewish interests.

It addresses what Auster wrote at Oz Conservative, which I discussed in A Censorious Debate (also linked in the essay):

On another subject, I note that the comment by Tanstaafl that Mr. Richardson has deleted is very mild compared to his usual anti-Semitic outpourings. Tanstaafl has written, "Jews are my enemy," and criticized me for, among other things, not directing "all" my criticisms against Jews. The basic Tanstaafl position (and the Darwinian anti-Semitic position) is that everything that Jews or people of Jewish background do and say (including everything that I have ever written) is directed at undermining white gentiles in the interests of Jewish power. The only good Jew, in the anti-Semites' book, is one who agrees with the anti-Semites' position that I've just summarized.

The overall purpose of the essay is to illustrate Auster's essential mercurial fruitloopiness, talking as he does out of both sides of his mouth about what is or isn't acceptable to say about jews. It is also to reiterate what I desire of him, and why, since he is so wont to distort that.

3/11/2009 11:40:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

But what is it about Auster exactly, other than ethnic Jewishness, that you dislike?

You mean other than his disingenuousness, dissimulation, duplicity, double standards, and hypocrisy? There's more, but I think those are my most significant dislikes. Google "age of treason auster" for details. To the extent these behaviors I dislike are an expression of Auster's ethnic jewishness I suppose I don't like that either.

you guys will always lose. If you think "enemies" are those who fail to see your deeper truth, then you'll do nothing but make enemies. And what is it that I've failed to comprehend?

You said you didn't understand what I was saying three times. Auster goes out of his way to distort and defame me. I know I'm not drunk or writing unclearly, and I don't believe you or Auster really have any problem comprehending. The explanation for your behavior is that you recognize that our interests are in conflict, and rather than dealing forthrightly with this conflict, as any friend or potential ally would, you choose instead to put the blame for it and the burden of relieving it entirely on me and mine. Thus we are enemies. It is more your fault than it is mine. I was an unassuming, unaware, and totally pliant philo-semite until I realized this "deeper truth".

You question why I focus on Auster because you say there are better things I might be doing, but you yourself spend time here. Why is that?

3/11/2009 01:36:00 PM  
Blogger Rosie said...

I would wager that the anonymous interloper is Mangan, Oz or someone who posts regularly at one of their sites.

Sounds like their language.

3/11/2009 02:41:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The overall purpose of the essay is to illustrate Auster's essential mercurial fruitloopiness, talking as he does out of both sides of his mouth about what is or isn't acceptable to say about jews. It is also to reiterate what I desire of him, and why, since he is so wont to distort that.

Yes, I understand all that. The paragraph I quoted just didn't make grammatical sense. Read it again. If you still think it makes grammatical sense you and I differ irreconcilably on the rules of English grammar. If you'd replace the first comma with a period and begin what follows after it with "I just wish he'd..." it'd make sense.

(I'm not the other anon -- drunk/zell/bernanke etc.)

3/12/2009 06:39:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

If you'd replace the first comma with a period and begin what follows after it with "I just wish he'd..." it'd make sense. `

Apologies for my ungrammatical style. The bullet list begins with "Here are three more major related pieces he has yet to cough up", in other words I intended each bullet item to be understood as beginning "I just wish he'd...".

I would like Auster to acknowledge his fruitloopiness on "anti-semitism". I know it won't happen, but I can still call for it.

3/12/2009 07:09:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

In National coalition of Jewish organizations demands end of immigration law enforcement Auster finally notices Progress by Pesach and writes:

Perhaps, just as Islam is not a religion but a political ideology aimed at the destruction of our country, secular liberal Judaism ought to be seen in the same light. People who stand for America, as distinct from people whose primary identification is with a distinct minority group, need to say to these Jewish organizations, "This is wrong. You as Jews, a tiny minority, have no right to be trying to impose your alienated liberal Jewish agenda on this country. If you want to be accepted by us, the majority, then you must accept this country, accept its laws, sovereignty, and culture, and stop trying to undermine it."

This is what I have come to recognize as the classic Auster bullshit sandwich. It sounds at first insightful and revolutionary, especially to someone who has spent their life marinating in "liberalism" but who is now fatigued by cognitive dissonance and searching for understanding and relief.

He goes on to write:

The fact that Jews will not support any immigration restrictions, even against their mortal enemies the Muslims, because they think that white Christian Americans are more dangerous to them than Muslims, is highly objectionable and immoral, and grounds for severe criticism of Jews and a demand by the Christian majority that the Jews change their attitudes.

Auster has frequently demonstrated his fanatic dedication to protecting the distinct minority group he is criticizing. He confirms once again that he criticizes jews mainly because he believes they are harming themselves. It is not mainly because they are harming us. Otherwise Auster would acknowledge that "secular liberal judaism", AKA neoliberalism, causes more harm to us than islam. Muslims and other aliens wouldn't be swamping the native populations of the West if it weren't for the neoliberals who first pathologized and are today criminalizing the White racialism we need to protect ourselves from invasion. The founders of the US were racialist classic liberals who warred against muslims, refused to merge with mexico, and banned asian immigration. A segregated army led by racist generals helped defeat Nazi Germany. These men would be aghast at the non-White invasion the genocidal neoliberal usurpers have inflicted upon their posterity during the past 50 years.

The current regime is thoroughly judaized, dominated for the past 16 years by a single globalist party alterating between neoliberal and neoconservative administrations. What Auster euphemizes as "the majority" has already been largely subdued, so much so that the regime now brazenly welcomes the fast approaching day when we will no longer be the majority. And yet there Auster goes again giving commands to "the majority". Why don't he and his philo-semitic peanut gallery speak directly to the jews they're criticizing? Why is he telling the rest of us to do it? We know what happens when any of us actually does anything like what he suggests. We get heaped with insults and removed from any position of responsibility or authority. Auster and his philo-semitic sycophants know this. They are among the lynch mob that enables it.

Unlike the other changes I noted in the blog post, Auster's big idea here hasn't changed for years. "The majority" must treat his favorite harmful minority as if they were our own petulant children - who we may not in any way sanction or punish, but may only lecture and scold.

It's time to update this portion of your rhetoric Auster. We're talking here about "the greatest crime in the history of mankind". It's "murder", not suicide. Remember? Stop telling us all we can do is say "please". Stop telling us what to do, period. If you have something to say to your tribe, tell them yourself you two-faced fruitloop.

3/12/2009 11:15:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Consider the lengthy, painstakingly qualified comments concerning "secular liberal judaism" in National coalition of Jewish organizations demands end of immigration law enforcement, complete with hand-wringing about helping "the anti-semites", and the proposed "solution" being the desire for someone else to make polite requests that "secular liberal judaism" please stop.

Contrast this with The West versus the West, posted by Auster just 90 minutes later. Here's the whole thing:

In yet another step by the Catholic Church to facilitate the spread of Islam in the West, the Vatican newspaper Osservatore Romano has expressed support for the use of sharia finance rules. The story is at The Brussels Journal.

Haven't I said that much of organized Christianity as it now exists is an enemy of Western civilization? Only a revolution, only a total reversal in the current direction of the West, can save us.


The only qualification here is "much". No hemming and hawing. No concerns about what ammunition he might be providing "the anti-Christians". And no pussy-footing about the solution.

Who's more pathetic - the schizophrenic svengali producing these "ideas", or the sycophants lapping them up day after day?

3/13/2009 07:30:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Notice also that Auster's "secular liberal judaism" doesn't cover the lubavitchers third-worlding Postville or the neocons manipulating US foreign policy. How does he explain these jews acting as jews, whose primary identification is with a distinct minority group? He doesn't. They're not part of his "passing scene".

3/13/2009 08:47:00 AM  
Anonymous Desmond Jones said...

Interesting though that Hechtman does 'explain these jews acting as jews', and Larry let's it stand uncontested.

These groups spend two percent of their time opposing discrimination in America and 98 percent of their time defending it in Israel. In a perfect world, they'd oppose both. They'd campaign for open borders here and one-state-solution over there. In your perfect world, they'd probably do something else. That's OK. But I think we agree they deserve to be called out on the double standard.

Look, I attended a Zionist madrassa for 12 years when I was a kid. I know more than I care to about how these people think. To them, Israel is their home. Israel is their only home. The U.S. or Canada is just where they keep their stuff and that only so long as the goyim allow it. They want influence here. They want to tilt North American politics in favor of Israel and the local Jewish community (in that order). But they're not invested here. They keep a packed suitcase next to the door and an open-ended one-way plane ticket in their wallets.


The question of course is why? Why bother to live amongst those who you consider inferior, despicable and dangerous?

Bloom does his best to be fair to the Hasidim as he explores their hermetically sealed world. He notes his relief at the familiar speech rhythms, the questions upon questions. He accepts an invitation for a Shabbat stay with a Hasidic family, revels in the food, and prays with his hosts on command. But finally, Bloom is a liberal, not a fundamentalist: He's repelled by their intolerance, their insularity, their open delight in cheating "the goyim," and their manipulative arguments. He quotes one Hasid as saying proudly: "I am a racist... . Why haven't the Jews been extinguished after scores of attempts throughout history? That we are still here defies logic. There is only one answer. We are better and smarter. That's why!"

It appears "their open delight in cheating "the goyim," is so great and such a visceral ecstasy is gained from their (the goyims) destruction, that they are willing to risk all to revel in it. Is there other evidence in nature of 'delight' gained from such a malicious desire to destroy? In time of war, possibly? Even then the hatred of a sworn enemy fades over time, the schadenfreude felt by the enemy's decline subsides. However, this is not the case for the Postville Lubavitcher.

3/13/2009 03:02:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

I was being sarcastic when I summed up Auster's "solution" like so:

"The majority" must treat his favorite harmful minority as if they were our own petulant children - who we may not in any way sanction or punish, but may only lecture and scold.

Now I see he really does think that way:

Karen writes from England:

It is clear that these Jewish organizations have an agenda against the WASP founding culture and peoples of America and an intent to subvert that culture by encouraging lawlessness. If these organisations continue to undermine immigration law, they should be banned and their leading members deported to Israel (unlike China, Israel cannot refuse to take them). They can then enjoy their open borders one world ideology there and share it with the Palestinians and other Arabs.

LA replies:

When an organized group expresses a persistent, unmitigated hostility to the basic institutions and culture of a country, at the very least the agenda of that group needs to be identified and exposed. This is not now the case. As things are now, these liberal Jewish organizations feel free to say whatever they like. If they were brought under public censure (which, again, has never been done), the entire dynamic would shift, and they would alter their behavior. This can only happen through people standing up for America's majority culture and saying that attacks on our basic institutions will not be tolerated.

Some people think that when I say, "these things will not be tolerated," that's a threat of violence. I don't mean it in that way at all. I mean strong disapproval and indignant condemnation of these Jewish organizations for their anti-American agenda. The Jews (and other minorities) are like adolsscents running amuck, without a parent--the majority culture--to control them. If the parent reappeared on the scene and acted like a parent, the whole situation would change.


I strongly disapprove and indignantly condemn Auster's limp-wristed answer to this persistent, unmitigated hostility. It's "the greatest crime in the history of mankind". "The majority" didn't lose interest and walk away - we're being poisoned, suffocated, and guilt-tripped to death. If you want us to "reappear" Auster, then STFU and get out of our way.

3/14/2009 01:02:00 AM  
Blogger danielj said...

I'm mothaf#$k!ng Auster!

I am the one man majority!

I AM.

3/14/2009 04:04:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

With apologies to Helen Reddy:

I am Auster, hear me roar
In numbers too small to ignore
And I know too much to do shit but pretend
'cause I've said it all ten times
I am down on all their crimes
But no one else is gonna dis my jews, the end

CHORUS
Oh yes I seem wise
But it's wisdom built on shiite
Yes, I say I'm white
And look how much I write
If I have to, I can say anything
I am wrong (wrong)
I am irascible (irascible)
I am Auuuuster

3/14/2009 07:43:00 AM  
Blogger flippityflopitty said...

If Tan is an anti-semite, what does that make Auster - an anti-secular-liberal-semite?

Nothing like qualifiers for shields.

"Some" [FILL IN BLANK HERE] make me friggin' sick. Whoopee! No more racism charges.

3/19/2009 09:52:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home