Blog has moved, searching new blog...

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Who's To Blame for Anti-White Governance

Last week a Hamburg judge filed a criminal complaint against German Chancellor Angela Merkel for "endorsing a crime" after she stated she was "glad" that Osama bin Laden was killed by US forces. Self-described jewish fifth columnist Lawrence Auster responded to this report by blaming Germans for all of Europe's ills:
Just think, if the anti-Hitler plotters in 1944 had succeeded in killing him, and if some German leader had expressed his joy, this German judge, if translated back to 1944, would seek to punish him. I guess Germany hasn't changed so much after all, hmm? Pure liberalism, which the Germans in their humorless fanatical thoroughness aspire to as the opposite of Nazi totalitarianism, is another form of totalitarianism. And in the same way, as I have often remarked, the German-championed transnational opposite of the Nazi nationalism which sought to destroy the nations of Europe, is also destroying the nations of Europe. One way or another, whether in their Nazi form or in their hyper-liberal form, the Germans pose a determined threat to the nations and peoples of the West. To paraphrase Churchill's famous remark about the Germans, they need to be kept at our feet, or else they will go for our throat.

I am not being extreme or "anti-German" when I say that. The Germans agree with me. They see themselves as a threat to others. That's why they say that the EU is necessary, to keep them, the ever-threatening Germans, in check. The problem is that the German-led EU which in the German mind is aimed at suppressing the German nation, must suppress all other European nations as well. This is why, just as German nationalism could not be allowed to rule Europe, German anti-nationalism also cannot be allowed to rule Europe. Germany must not rule, period.
Then in Debate on Germany Auster expressed regret that his sweeping condemnation of "the Germans" was not more comprehensive:
My strongly worded entry last week about German hyper-liberalism has set off something of a debate in the blogosphere. At Gates of Vienna, a German writer, Manfred Kleine-Hartlage, replies to me. I haven't yet read his article. But for the moment I want to repeat once again the qualifications I made last week. My statements about Germany were not intended as a comprehensive criticism of Germany and Germans, and if I gave that impression I regret it. My argument related to one, narrowly framed, core issue: that just as the German hyper-nationalism of the past sought to crush the nations of Europe, German hyper-liberalism, which arose as an all-consuming reaction against German hyper-nationalism, also poses a danger to the nations of the West, and therefore it is not desirable for Germany, in its present, hyper-liberal state, to dominate Europe.
Auster's "narrowly framed" problem isn't just with nationalist or anti-nationalist Germans but with "the Germans" in general. He identifies Germans as a biological group having personality traits such as "humorless fanatical thoroughness" and "hyper-liberalism". He sees them posing a danger not only to Europe but "the nations of the West". Thus they must be "kept at our [sic] feet".

In The Real Problem is “Global Governance” Manfred Kleine-Hartlage responds to Auster's outrageous slander, specifically calling attention to Auster's claim that "the Germans" agree with him:
Many Germans say this, because they were told to speak and think such things. They were taught to consider thousand years of German history just as a pre-history of Hitler. They were taught to regard their history as merely a history of crimes. They were taught that they are a danger to others. They were taught that patriotism and “nationalism” are the same thing, and that the latter is the root of all evils in the world. They were taught to hate themselves.

It started with the re-education after 1945, and this re-education is still going on. To poison an entire nation with self-hatred turned out to be a working concept, and this concept, once successfully applied, was generalized to the Western world as a whole, and as the concept of “white guilt” is now undermining our civilization. This is nothing you should blame the Germans for. They were just the guinea pigs.

The million-dollar-question is: Why is this done, and who does so?
Excellent question.

Having dealt with Auster, Kleine-Hartlage follows up by going where Auster never does. He points to the connection between the never-ending Global War on Terror and the never-ending drive for genocidal levels of immigration into all White countries - our hostile international elite:
Yes, Bin Laden was our enemy, but on the list of our enemies he was not number one, and not even number ten. Islam is marching forward in Europe not by terrorism, but by immigration and ethnic struggle, with strong support from the international political elites. It makes no sense to assert a difference between American and European elites, because they all belong to a transatlantic network centered in, but not confined to, America. Within this network, strategies are made compatible with each other, so that there is no such thing as a strictly national policy. There are disagreements on minor questions, but the general direction is towards establishing a global uniform civilization. The EU is part of this process, and an analyst blaming just Germany for that, as Mr. Auster does,
The problem is that the German-led EU which in the German mind is aimed at suppressing the German nation, must suppress all other European nations as well. This is why, just as German nationalism could not be allowed to rule Europe, German anti-nationalism also cannot be allowed to rule Europe. Germany must not rule, period.
proves that his hatred of a particular country is stronger than his analytical capabilities.

Why is the leading power in the “war on terror” at the same time urging France to open herself to Islamic infiltration and secretly fostering this infiltration, as we know by Wikileaks (and there is no reason to assume that the same strategy is not applied to other European countries)? Why is the European power most passionately joining this war — Great Britain — at the same time and with the same passion engaging in self-Islamization? Why are the Anglo-Saxon powers, while at war with more than one Islamic country, urging Europe to enlarge the European Union more and more, predictably with the result that Turkey and North Africa will join the club, thereby opening Europe to a flood of Muslim immigrants?
So instead of "the Germans" Kleine-Hartlage blames "the Anglo-Saxon powers" - the US and Britain. From his afterword:
Mr. Auster’s polemics have shown the gap between Anglo-Saxon and German conservatism. To bridge the gap a little bit, I have started a new blog, German Views, in order to make important articles from the conservative German blogosphere available in English.
The essay is reposted at his new blog, From a German Point of View: a Reply to Lawrence Auster, minus the afterword, but Kleine-Hartlage reiterates his point in a comment:
The problem – and the reason why I started this blog – is the dominance of the Anglo-Saxon narrative on Germany.
Kleine-Hartlage seems unaware that Lawrence Auster is no Anglo-Saxon, that his grandparents were all jewish immigrants to the US. Auster refers to Britain as "the Dead Island", just as he refers to Germany as "that dead land". His affections are for Israel. It may also surprise Kleine-Hartlage to know that the US Ambassador to France, Charles H. Rivkin, whose Wikileaked embassy report he linked, also has Russian jewish roots.

If we wish to talk honestly about who dominates not only the narrative on Germany but who dominates political, social, cultural and historical narratives in general, who is relentlessly encouraging Germans, Anglo-Saxons, and Whites in general to hate ourselves and feel guilty, then we must not neglect to mention the jewish elephant in the room. It is possible to honestly debate how significant jewish influence is. It is not honest to neglect to address that influence entirely.

I presume Kleine-Hartlage knows better than I do how German speech regarding jews is proscribed by law. Perhaps this is why he pins the blame on Anglo-Saxons.

Kleine-Hartlage might be interested to know that Auster's recent ranting about the threat of German "hyper-liberalism" and German "anti-nationalism" is consistent with his usual schtick. He blames "the majority" (Whites) for "liberalism" (anti-Whiteness). He explicitly excuses "the jews".

Just a few years ago Auster was discussing anti-nationalist sentiment in the US. Jews’ idiotic anti-nationalism:
Asked by the General Social Survey if immigration improves America, 52 percent of Protestants, 61 percent of Catholics, and 90 percent of Jews said yes. Matthew Yglesias, a Jew who works for The American Prospect, explains why Jews support immigration so much more than other groups, and Steve Sailer offers effective replies.

One of Yglesias’s points is: “Second, as a historical matter, nationalism has been Bad For The Jews.”

Yglesias is certainly correct that this is the Jewish view of the matter. But how truly idiotic and despicable a view it is. Jews have always lauded America for defeating Hitler. Would America have been able to defeat Hitler if it hadn’t existed as a nation and been a strong nation? Would it have been better for the Jews if Britain had had a weak sense of nationality and compromised with Hitler, instead of, as was the actual case under Churchill, a strong sense of nationality and stood up to him? Would Ann Frank’s family have had to hide in an attic for two years and then been arrested and sent to concentration camps where they died horrible deaths, if the Netherlands, instead of being a weak nation that was easily overrun by the Germans, had been a strong nation that was able to prevent the Germans from conquering the Netherlands and capturing all its Jews?

Also, most Jews are thankful for the fact that America, the strongest nation on earth, stands almost alone against the world-wide movement to destroy Israel. Will a weak and divided America be able to perform that function?
Don't worry, Auster eventually excuses "the jews". Note also that he doesn't argue that jewish anti-nationalism is despicable because it's bad for Whites (American, Briton, or Dutch). He thinks it's despicable because it's bad for "the jews".

The usual judeo-liberal anti-nationalist hate/guilt narrative is that Whites must subordinate our interests to the interests of "minorities", because if we worry about what's best for us then we're guilty of hate. Auster regularly calls attention to this narrative, at least as it pertains to blacks or muslims, but he wishes to preserve the special privileges of "minority" status for "the jews". If we worry about what's best for Whites, and that conflicts with what Auster thinks is best for "the jews", then according to him we're guilty of hate.

I'll conclude here by quoting two jews who, though separated geographically and linguistically, sound remarkably alike. In fact if Lawrence Auster were transported back to 1944 it's not unreasonable to imagine him expressing his thoughts in very similar terms.

Ilya Ehrenburg:
The Germans are not human beings. From now on the word German means to use the most terrible oath. From now on the word German strikes us to the quick. We shall not speak any more. We shall not get excited. We shall kill. If you have not killed at least one German a day, you have wasted that day ... If you cannot kill your German with a bullet, kill him with your bayonet. If there is calm on your part of the front, or if you are waiting for the fighting, kill a German in the meantime. If you leave a German alive, the German will hang a Russian and rape a Russian woman. If you kill one German, kill another -- there is nothing more amusing for us than a heap of German corpses. Do not count days, do not count kilometers. Count only the number of Germans killed by you. Kill the German -- that is your grandmother's request. Kill the German -- that is your child's prayer. Kill the German -- that is your motherland's loud request. Do not miss. Do not let through. Kill.
Theodore Kaufman (in his book, Germany Must Perish!):
Today's war is not a war against Adolf Hitler.

Nor is it a war against the Nazis.

It is a war of peoples against peoples; of civilized peoples envisioning Light, against uncivilized barbarians who cherish Darkness.

Of the peoples of those nations who would surge forward hopefully into a new and better phase of life, pitted against the peoples of a nation who would travel backward enthusiastically into the dark ages. It is a struggle between the German nation and humanity.

Hitler is no more to be blamed for this German war than was the Kaiser for the last one. Nor Bismarck before the Kaiser. These men did not originate or wage Germany's wars against the world. They were merely the mirrors reflecting centuries-old inbred lust of the German nation for conquest and mass murder.

This war is being waged by the German People. It is they who are responsible. It is they who must be made to pay for the war. otherwise, there will always be a German war against the world. And with such a sword forever hanging overhead the civilized nations of the world, no matter how great their hopes, how strenuous their efforts, will never succeed in creating that firm and solid foundation of permanent peace which they must first establish if ever they intend to start the building of a better world.

For not only must their be no more German wars in fact; there must not even remain the slightest possibility of one ever again occurring. A final halt to German aggression, not a temporary cessation, must be the goal of the present struggle.

This does not mean an armed mastery over Germany, or a peace with political or territorial adjustments, or a hope based on a defeated and repentant nation. Such settlements are not sufficiently conclusive guarantees of no more German aggressions.

This time Germany has forced a TOTAL WAR upon the world.

As a result, she must be prepared to pay a TOTAL PENALTY.

And there is one, and only one, such Total Penalty: Germany must perish forever!

In fact -- not in fancy!
Germans are an execrable people! They think and dream of nothing but chicanery. Their great joy consists in fault-finding, shrieking and threats.
Though these men try to conflate their narrow concerns for jews with the interests of others, let us not pretend that what we see and hear are Whites spouting self-hatred.

Labels: , , ,



Blogger Tanstaafl said...

There are previous related comments on this subject at "A Guide to "Racist" Guilt-Tripping".

5/11/2011 07:40:00 PM  
Anonymous Pat Hannagan said...

Excellent post! I'd forgotten those other words of Auster's about "the Germans".

Auster is no Anglo-Saxon but he did convert to High Church Anglicanism. Sometimes I wonder if High Church Anglicans are actually Anglo-Saxon converts to Judaism, so the match and "conversion" is one made in their heaven.

English hatred towards Germany and "the Germans" is still profound even today. Oddly enough, it's never reciprocated by the Germans that I know. Rather they exhibit an abiding respect and simultaneous mystification at the depths of English hatred towards them. So I can understand where Kleine-Hartlage is coming from with regard the Anglo-Saxon powers.

I just hope that our Anglo-Saxon brothers do wake from their Juden-Reich subservience and finally see how they are being manipulated before we go embarking one third and last time on another White civil war. This time to dismantle Germany forever and sow her land with salt like the Romans on Carthage.

Kleine-Hartlage's post in general, and specifically with your quotes, is an excellent summary of what is happening throughout the West. And you have joined the dots for him. It's not the Anglo-Saxons, it's the Jews.

5/11/2011 08:41:00 PM  
Blogger Chechar said...

@ “To paraphrase Churchill's famous remark about the Germans, they need to be kept at our feet, or else they will go for our throat.”

Of course this is projection: its the Jews who need to be kept at our feet, or else they will go, as are presentlu going, for our throat.

5/11/2011 08:59:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great post. Re: churchill:

5/11/2011 09:14:00 PM  
Blogger dudhduddhd said...

Thus they must be "kept at our [sic] feet".

Right on dog. Right on!

You're one clever mofo.

5/11/2011 09:22:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excellent post.

Auster is merely one variant of the entire spectrum of Jewish conservative activity (which is virtually all conservatism these days). The plan is:

1) Pretend to care about the interests of White conservatives to get them to follow you
2) Then channel their efforts into activities that are either useless or that benefit Jews/Israel and do nothing for White people.

The same basic pattern is how Jews manipulate White liberals as well.

Many people realize that something is wrong with their respective "side", but they usually can't figure out what it is.

5/11/2011 09:26:00 PM  
Blogger Chechar said...

@ 1) Pretend to care about the interests of White conservatives to get them to follow you 2) Then channel their efforts into activities that are either useless or that benefit Jews/Israel and do nothing for White people.

The same basic pattern is how Jews manipulate White liberals as well. Many people realize that something is wrong with their respective "side", but they usually can't figure out what it is.

There is something that I must say at this point.

Remember the post at Gates of Vienna by “Westerner” about nuking Mecca, the one that Tanstaafl commented here that it was the “most illiberal post” at GoV?

Well. If Auster is not Westerner, he published that piece first in his own site before GoV: and he seemed to be concerned that I excerpted it instead of posting it in full.

Whoever Westerner really is the trick is obvious: let’s use our useful gentile idiots for a final solution to the Muslim problem so that Israel is spared in the forthcoming conflict.

5/11/2011 10:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One of the funniest reactions of Auster, when a few of his own fans/commenters pointed out the obvious fact that the Germans don't have any say in this matter, being a defeated, occupied and "pariah" nation, was to accuse them of being... "victimological". For a person of Jewish background, it sounds comical beyond words. I mean, the Masters of Victimology themselves, a people whose entire historical-mythological narrative is based on the state of perpetual victims, playing the anti-victimological card? Just how dishonest can one be?

5/12/2011 01:18:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

A reader replies to Kleine-Hartlage:

The reader writes:

"Kleine-Hartlage's assertion that Lawrence Auster wouldn't stand by the side of Germans if they were to seriously oppose Islamization shows that he has not been paying attention."

Auster responds:

"Thank you for this solid analysis. It's just amazing to me how intellectually lost most Europeans are. They form some concept, and then they build up everything around that concept without regard to whether it accurately describes reality or not."

. . .

"He evidently hasn't read me at all.

Here's my definition of a European intellectual: a person who builds his entire world view on fatally wrong-headed and never-examined prejudices.

. . .

"I have not been able yet to read Kleine-Hartlage carefully and reply to him. I will do so."

So based on a second-hand account (which mistakes a supposition for an assertion) Auster feels justified to vent his negative opinions about Europeans in general, and European intellectual specifically. And lo and behold it sounds just like what a "liberal" would say about White "prejudice".

This is classic Auster. His sweeping self-righteous critique applies best of all to himself.

5/12/2011 09:51:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

More on the pattern of jewish manipulation mentioned by Anonymous 5/11/2011 09:26:00 PM at Murdoch, Phillips, and Auster on What's Best for "The Jews".

5/12/2011 09:51:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

What Kleine-Hartlage wrote vis-a-vis Auster and Islamization:

"Labelling opposing countries “rogue states” means not to abide with established legal standards with respect to these countries. As my own country has twice been declared a rogue state in the last century, I know what I am talking about, and seeing how easily even a mere opinion poll provokes pure anti-German ethnic hatred among Americans (I think Mr. Auster’s attitude is representative), it isn’t hard to imagine what the reaction would be if Germany seriously fought against Islamization. Even conservatives like Mr. Auster, I suppose, wouldn’t stand by our side."

Auster is all for Whites seriously fighting Islamization. He sees Islamization as bad for "the jews". As he made clear in his comments on jewish anti-nationalism, he wants Whites to be strong in order to better defend "the jews". What Auster cannot abide is Whites being strong in any way that results in us seriously fighting judaization. KH can rest assured that if he or anyone else ever even simply speaks against judaization (much less seriously fight it) then Auster will condemn them in stronger terms than he condemns anything else, including Islamization.

5/12/2011 09:51:00 AM  
Blogger FeminizedWesternMale said...

Auster "To paraphrase Churchill's famous remark about the Germans, they need to be kept at our feet, or else they will go for our throat."

Actually, the less well known quote from a younger Churchill, before power sublimated his knowledge of Jews and he became a Zionist: “The Jew is always either at your throat, or at your feet.”

How perfectly appropriate that Churchill would switch the roles to quench his thirst. And Auster... well, I leave that heavy lifting to Tan, who has a laser site on his rodent-like moves.


5/12/2011 10:24:00 AM  
Anonymous Matra said...

John Demjanjuk is being described as 'littlest of little fish' in today's Guardian and sentenced to a German jail at the age of 91 after 20 years of almost constant imprisonment, trial, and harassment. If Auster is looking for a chance to go after the Germans this is his opportunity. If the USA is Javert for going after Polanski surely the same thing could be said about the Germans and international Jewish organisations today. So far no comment from Auster.

5/12/2011 11:55:00 AM  
Anonymous Pat Hannagan said...

Welcome back.

5/13/2011 03:00:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Blogger Buzz: Blogger is back

Blogger has been trying to recover from a f'upgrade for more than a day now.

The last few days worth of comments here are still missing, including yours Pat. Let's hope they get restored soon.

5/13/2011 03:15:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

I see Auster still has not found the time to read or respond directly to KH.

5/13/2011 03:21:00 PM  
Anonymous Mary said...

Another great post Tan....brilliant.


5/13/2011 05:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Svigor said...

At the risk of getting the Alemanians and their fellow-travelers all in a twist, I have to point out that years ago I came to the conclusion that the post-war Germans tinkered with a few variables without changing their personality much. They're still fascists, 'cept now they're PC fascists. Not raggin' on them - I prefer them to the vast majority of humanity, but a spade's a spade.

'Course that doesn't change the fact that Auster doesn't get to say anything about them AFAIC, any more than Germans get to say anything about Jews as far as Ashkenazis are concerned.

5/13/2011 07:21:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

years ago I came to the conclusion that the post-war Germans tinkered with a few variables without changing their personality much. They're still fascists, 'cept now they're PC fascists.

Then, according to this logic, Americans, Brits, and all Europeans became "PC fascists", since the PCism became the dominant ideology all over the West.

Which would be false, of course. It's not about ethnic psychology/personality, German or non-German, which supposedly determines us to think in this way - but as KH's pointed out in his response to Auster, we were told to think and believe such things. We were educated and trained to hate ourselves.

5/13/2011 11:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's not the Germans that are the PC Fascists.

"Once the Lemire case reached the Federal Court of Canada, a series of parties intervened on both sides of the issue. To support Section 13 and its censorship powers were three self-appointed Jewish groups, including the Canadian Jewish Congress, the B’nai Brith, Simon Wiesenthal Centre and the “African-Canadian Legal Clinic” represented by the former head of the CJC. Supporting freedom of speech, four organizations were granted intervener status, including the BC Civil Liberties Association, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the Canadian Free Speech League and the Canadian Association of Free Expression."

5/13/2011 11:47:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Thank you for that example from Canada. The drive to outlaw certain political expression as "hate" was everywhere intended to benefit jews, who have eagerly participated in that drive.

Counter-jihadists should keep it clearly in mind that only later did muslims exploit what had been done in the name of promoting the interests of "minorities", "the jews" being the prototypical "minority".

5/14/2011 05:13:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

The latest word from Blogger:

"Update (5/13 7:46PM PST): Nearly all posts since Wednesday are restored, now bringing back comments from last couple days. We expect the comments to be back this weekend or sooner."

5/14/2011 05:17:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Judging after the number of his latest posts, it seems Larry Auster is safe and sound again. Yet, no answer to KH's response. Hmmm... Why would that be?

5/14/2011 10:21:00 AM  
Anonymous Cameron said...


I believe you'll find a case which is currently before the courts in Australia very interesting.

This article will fill you in on it:

(Pat and myself would like to post on it but, for legal reasons, our hands are tied))

5/14/2011 10:23:00 AM  
Anonymous Svigor said...

Then, according to this logic, Americans, Brits, and all Europeans became "PC fascists", since the PCism became the dominant ideology all over the West.

No, the Americans, Brits, and Europeans are PC x, y, z, where you fill in the actual characters of the countries in question for the variables. I don't think you really got my point.

It's not about ethnic psychology/personality, German or non-German

You've never noticed the German propensity for laws? Lots and lots of laws? And micromanaging? Lots and lots of micromanaging?

If anything, it's the PC part that is in doubt, not the fascism part; they've managed to keep their immigration law much more sensible than we have, for example.

5/14/2011 10:37:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Thanks Cameron, I was not aware of the Bolt case.

It's clear evidence that for non-Whites the only acceptable form of anti-"racism" is anti-White. Bolt's crime, as hammered home by a team of jewish prosecutors, is to think that he can freely to opine on racial matters, even if he uses all the usual judeo-liberal terminology.

The prosecution jews also made clear that the rationale and justification for their persecution of Bolt is rooted in and revolves around the suffering of "the jews".

5/14/2011 12:19:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Stephen Whittle, who wrote under the pseudonym Luke O'Farrell until he was convicted of "inciting race hate" in Britain, produced an extraordinary series of essays. I could have sworn he wrote one contrasting the relatively small number of internal security personnel in wartime Germany versus the much larger numbers employed by the communists in postwar East Germany. (The point being that the control-freak attributes Svigor alludes to as fascism, as used in common postwar parlance, are more accurately ascribed to judeo-bolshevism.) I can't find that essay. But here are a few that caught my eye after reading the Bolt article, with our repressed Australian allies in mind:

Enough Already: Gullible Goyim and Golden Shoahs
David and Goliath: How Jews Defend Freedom of Speech
Weeding Out Whitey: Mass Immigration as Biological Warfare

5/14/2011 01:01:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Auster thinks he's being clever with Clashes between Jews and Nazis Leave Six Million Dead - "That's the way the Holocaust would have been reported, if today's liberal/neocon Washington Post had been reporting it." This is typical of Auster's punditry. He measures everything by a jewish metric.

If Auster really wanted to say something illiberal and iconoclastic (not to mention traditional conservative, and in putative defense of Christians) he could point out that the contemporary judeo-liberal narrative has reduced WWII to "Clashes Between Europeans Leave Six Million Jews Dead" (with the corollary that only "racist" "anti-semites" care how many Europeans died). But then this is an anti-White/anti-Christian narrative Auster likes and embraces, finding it convenient to invoke even when say talking about the Copts in Egypt in 2011.

5/14/2011 01:34:00 PM  
Anonymous veshtk said...

Auster's latest: 61 percent of the Koran and the Hadiths is about us. The instincts of the jew is wonderful to behold, like discovery planet. Let you and him to fight!

5/15/2011 08:02:00 PM  
Anonymous Pat Hannagan said...

Tan said 13/05/2011 I see Auster still has not found the time to read or respond directly to KH.

Status Update: Auster still hasn't found time to "closely read" nor respond to KH. However Auster has been blogging a storm on SK (Strauss-Kahn). Nine posts so far and rising.

Plus two "jokes" on the subject:

I know I shouldn't joke about such a serious matter, but maybe Strauss-Kahn was seeking sexual release prior to his meeting with Chancellor Merkel so that he wouldn't be distracted by Merkel's extraordinary charms and could concentrate on the business at hand. Inserted picture here of Merkel with décolletage. Sorry to throw that at you like that. (See VFR's original reactions to the photo here.)

Perhaps Auster, like Muslims and Orthodox Jews, believes and dissembles "...that women should be appreciated for who they are and what they do, not for what they look like, and the Jewish laws of modesty are an expression of respect for women, not the opposite". (Source)

Second joke for big laffs:

Stephen T. writes:

In my hasty scroll-and-scan, I initially assumed the photo you posted (of Tristane Banon) was of the hotel maid! I immediately thought: Jobs Americans won't do? Who says?? Wow, maybe these border controls I've been advocating are having some effect, after all ...

LA replies:

Hah hah.

Laughter is always welcome.

Yes, laughter is always welcome at Austers when it comes to Goy, even should the subject be rape.

But still no time to reply to KH's considered and respectful reply to Auster's outrageous slurs and hatred of "the Germans". Do we detect a pattern here?

5/16/2011 09:16:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

In Was Strauss-Kahn framed? Auster writes:

"the idea that DSK, as the French call him (probably in order to avoid the annoyance of writing or speaking his pretentiously hyphenated name), would, without any build-up or preliminaries, charge naked out of his bathroom and begin sexually attacking a lowly black immigrant hotel maid, is so strange it's hard to believe"

I agree. I also find it so strange it's hard to believe that people would robotically hate jews, for no good reason whatsoever. But Auster has no problem believing that.

Auster seems oddly at peace with the idea that DSK has been set up or is the victim of a Brawley/Mangum style hoax. I think it's because he's very conscious that his "Javert nation" overreaction to Polanski's arrest discredited him. So this time he's overcompensating, suppressing his usual tendency to rail against black-on-"white" malfeasance so as not to appear to be defending his tribemate.

Naturally Auster hasn't taken time to read and respond to Kleine-Hartlage's point about "immigration and ethnic struggle, with strong support from the international political elites". What could he say? In his worldview it is an amorphous, incorporeal boogeyman called "liberalism" which pops out of the bathroom to ruin civilization for no good reason whatsoever. If anybody's actually responsible for this it's the victim, "the majority" (the French, the Germans, Whites in general). He avoids talking about the judaized intellectual, political, financial, and cultural ruling class. He treats DSK's membership in that class so superficially because in his view it's hardly significant.

He also sees no need to examine DSK's jewish identity or Israel-first sentiments. What would be the point? Those are weaknesses from a pro-French view, and Auster shares those weaknesses.

5/16/2011 10:47:00 PM  
Anonymous Armor said...

I wish DSK had waited until he was president to rape a maid in a New York hotel. It would have been fun to have the French president in Sing Sing.

It really could have happened. Only three months ago, Sarkozy himself flew to New-York in his jet to spend a private week-end there.

5/16/2011 10:57:00 PM  
Blogger Winston Jack said...


I found the article from Luke O' Farrell that you were referring to here:

His index is still cached.

The excerpt you referred to with regards to the Stasi vs. the Gestapo can be found about 3/4 of the way down. They come from a book called The File by Timothy Garton Ash. Although that author was a committed "anti-racist", Farrell did have this much to say about him:

"And Ash, for all his liberal stupidity, hasn’t shaken off that innate white respect for truth. He’s a committed anti-racist and no doubt believes firmly in “If we admit race exists, then we end up in Auschwitz”, but that didn’t stop him revealing these highly significant facts."

Love your writing, keep up the good work.

5/18/2011 01:41:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Thanks Winston. Whittle's contribution is sorely missed.

BTW, here's a recent critique of Ash: Timothy Garton Ash: We need more pro-multicultural propaganda | The Occidental Observer.

5/18/2011 06:50:00 AM  
Anonymous Pat Hannagan said...

Steve Sailer has been on a roll here and here amongst other excellent posts. You can see the theme he has warmed to.

Suddenly our man in New York dredges up out of nowhere an old unresolved bone of his to gnaw over but his erstwhile flunkies just keep smacking him down, though a few old klingons remain glued.

Funny thing is though, Auster complains that Sailer had no response to my critique. Then, the other day, in a reply to a commenter, I repeated my criticisms of Sailer's theory. A reader at Sailer's site has asked Sailer to reply. Sailer remains silent.

I wish one of Auster's readers would remind him that he has promised to reply to Kleine-Hartlage's critique of Auster. Surely the genius of Manhattan has recovered enough by now, several bazillion posts later on his skepticism about the IMF's lead Jew, to have completed his "close reading" and address the monumental insanity and outright hatred that Auster expressed towards "the Germans"?

Addendum: classic Auster style rebuttal here. The post in its entirety:

Obama doesn't need to worry about the Jews

The statement that Jews are abandoning Obama over his demand that Israel return to its 1949 borders is horsefeathers. Liberal Jews care more about the Democratic Party than they do about Israel, and neoconservative Jews care more about "democracy" than they do about Israel.

- end of initial entry -

Don't you just wish you had the clarity of thought and sheer brilliance of logic to come up with a dispelling argument like that?

5/25/2011 06:50:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Auster goes on to spell out his thinking:

"Ok, they've abandoned Judaism. But have they also abandoned loyalty to and concern about the Jewish people? It seems to me that that's the issue here."

He speaks from authority, using himself as the ideal - a jew who has abandoned judaism without abandoning loyalty to and concern about "the jews".

Auster's loyalty and concerns border on hysteria and delusion. As a general rule "the jews" seem just as loyal to and concerned about "the jews" as he is, most just express it in ways that differ from his. What a fruitloop.

5/25/2011 01:04:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

From Is Sailer able to defend his status-competition theory of white suicide?

"Mark P. writes:

Liberalism is a game of class-warfare among upper-class white people. Raising your status is not just an attempt to rise to a higher order. It is also an attempt to distinguish yourself from a lower order. A person who espouses liberal values is someone who shows that he is not affected by liberal policies. In contrast, a white person who does complain about liberal policies signals that he is a loser who faces loss from immigrants or blacks or taxes or poverty or any of these things. In other words, in the status-conscious world, being an anti-liberal signals that you are the wrong kind of person. [LA replies: You have utterly failed to respond to the argument I've made over and over in this entry and other entries on the same subject, which is that what you say about liberals and liberal society is true of all societies. In any society one can think of, espousing the dominant beliefs of the society will tend to enhance one's status. So to say that liberals embrace liberalism for the purpose of status competition tells us nothing distinctive about liberals.]

5/25/2011 02:13:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...


One distinctive thing about what Auster misidentifies as "liberalism" is what he had to say to his tribemate Paul Gottfried about it:

"What distinguishes Jewish liberalism from Protestant liberalism is the following.

Jewish liberals see white Christians as guilty. The Jews feel ok about themselves, they think the white gentile majority is the problem.

By contrast, white Protestant liberals feel guilty about themselves. This leaves them without a confident group selfhood. They believe only in equality, only in their own guilt for somehow standing in the way of equality. It is this lack of collective and even individual selfhood, this inner nothingness, this willingness to be destroyed, that makes the white Protestants the true liberals. The Jews, whose collective and individual psyche is not guilty under liberalism (since in the liberal world view Jews are victims and the champions of victims), have psychological power and self-confidence and thus are not true liberals.

A true liberal is a person who is willing to accept his group's extinction. Protestants are willing to accept their group's extinction. Jews are not. Therefore Protestants are closer to the true liberal essence than the Jews are.

As usual Auster excuses "the jews". Yet the most dominant belief in the status-conscious "liberal" world is that "the jews", in every way shape and form, are to be regarded as the most sacred of all cows. You can be a gay, black, immigrant, muslim single mother in a wheelchair with AIDS, and you thereby stand head and shoulders above everyone else according to "liberal" status standards. But if you have one thing to say out loud that "the jews" don't like then overnight you're persona non grata. In the past year this has been very clearly demonstrated by Rick Sanchez, Helen Thomas, John Galliano, and Lars von Trier - non-jewish "liberal" icons all, until they said something that vexed "the jews". Thus it's more properly called judeo-liberalism.

It's the jew-first aspect (and by extension the worship of "minorities" in general) that's most distinctive about what Auster misidentifies as "liberalism". He even goes so far as to misidentify jew-/minority-first "conservatism" as "right liberalism", rather than judeo-conservatism. He carries on about The First Law of Majority-Minority Relations in Liberal Society, from which "the jews", being holiest of holies in Auster's jew-first mind, are exempt.

Auster lives in a glass house and throws stones. He has never clearly stated much less defended his theory of White "suicide". He simply asserts it as such, implicitly excusing the genocidal motives of "the jews". I think Auster is trying to goad Sailer into making a clear statement on the jewish aspect of the status competition so he'll have one more excuse to denounce Sailer as a jew-hater.

What else would we expect from a man who wears his loyalty to and concern about "the jews" on his sleeve?

5/25/2011 02:14:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

"Planking," the Darwin Award, and Darwinism:

"How can Darwinian evolution, consisting of random genetic mutations which are naturally selected because of their power to help their possessors survive and produce offspring, have produced an entire race that is committing suicide? The wholesale adoption of Darwin Award-winning behavior by the white race would seem to suggest that the Darwinian theory of evolution is not true."

Or it's genocide. The "new non-adaptive behavior" Auster speaks of is jew-firstism, imposed from above by increasing jewish influence in media, politics, finance, law, and academia for the benefit of "the jews", who in Auster's own estimation are not suicidal.

5/25/2011 03:08:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

From a comment at TOO (which seems to be excerpts taken from News From The West) regarding General George Patton's views in the wake of WWII.

In his personal memoirs and letters he makes his principles pretty clear (all quoted from the Patton Papers):

“Evidently the virus started by Morgenthau and Baruch of a Semitic revenge against all Germans is still working. Harrison (a U.S. State Department official) and his associates indicate that they feel German civilians should be removed from houses for the purpose of housing Displaced Persons. There are two errors in this assumption. First, when we remove an individual German we punish an individual German, while the punishment is not intended for the individual but for the race… Furthermore, it is against my Anglo-Saxon conscience to remove a person from a house, which is a punishment, without due process of law.”

“I am frankly opposed to this war criminal stuff. It is not cricket and is Semitic. I am also opposed to sending POW’s to work as slaves in foreign lands (i.e. the Soviet Gulags), where many will be starved to death.”

“I have been at Frankfurt for a civil government conference. If what we are doing (to the Germans) is ‘Liberty, then give me death.’ I can’t see how Americans can sink so low. It is Semitic, and I am sure of it.”

“Today we received a letter… in which we were told to give the Jews special accommodations. If for Jews, why not Catholics, Mormons, etc?… We are also turning over to the French several hundred thousand prisoners of war to be used as slave labor in France. It is amusing to recall that we fought the Revolution in defense of the rights of man and the Civil War to abolish slavery and have now gone back on both principles.”

“Berlin gave me the blues. We have destroyed what could have been a good race, and we are about to replace them with Mongolian savages. And all Europe will be communist. It’s said that for the first week after they took it (Berlin), all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped. I could have taken it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed.”

“What we are doing is to destroy the only semi-modern state in Europe, so that Russia can swallow the whole.”

“There is a very apparent Semitic influence in the press. They are trying to do two things: first, implement communism, and second, see that all businessmen of German ancestry and non-Jewish antecedents are thrown out of their jobs. They have utterly lost the Anglo-Saxon conception of justice and feel that a man can be kicked out because somebody else says he is a Nazi. They were evidently quite shocked when I told them I would kick nobody out without the successful proof of guilt before a court of law.”

6/09/2011 11:57:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Re-education: The Third War Against Germany at German Views provides a translation of the essay "The Re-education of the Germans as a Part of Psychological Warfare", by Hans-Joachim von Leesen.

A comment by Thomas Völker:

"What the allies understood was, that the purpose of the Frankfurt School was to destroy the cultural backing of the German society, because they (the allies) tried to change that cultural backing (which I accept to be a legitimate geopolitical goal, although I don’t like it). So they put them (Frankfurt school members) back in charge. What they missed to understand was the reason for this purpose and the implications of the studies done by the Frankfurt School for the rest of the world.

What you have to understand is, that the “reeducation” happend ALL OVER the western world. It was done EVERYWHERE the same way: with books, media, via schools…if you have a answer for the question, how the children in the us are being indoctrinated, then you have an answer to the question, how it was done in Germany. The speciality of Germany is the “holocaust”, but in all other countries there are such “events of guilt” which are used to argument the need of altering the society: in the rest of Europe colonialism, in the US f.e. slavery.

6/09/2011 01:02:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home