Prompted by the links discussed in Saving the West, One Blogger at a Time, Auster writes My November 2007 response to Tanstaafl about the First Law and the Jews.
He begins by rephrasing his “First Law of Majority-Minority Relations in Liberal Society” for the Nth time:
The First Law refers to a liberal majority’s concealment of the negative truths about minorities who are visibly dysfunctional, alien, or threatening: the more dysfunctional or dangerous they are, the more their negative qualities are denied and are blamed on the majority.
He goes on to deny that jews are dysfunctional. One of his commenters gets him to dissemble about their alien nature. He doesn’t address “threatening” or “dangerous”. His own reaction to the idea that his law applies to jews provides a vivid example of the law in action. He admits he was thinking of blacks and muslims and didn’t consider jews when he formulated this version for John Savage (his emphasis):
As I look over your collection, it’s clear to me that there is but one Law, and it’s simply this: that the more difficult or dangerous a minority or non-Western group actually is, the more favorably it is treated. This increasingly undeserved favorable treatment of an increasingly troublesome or misbehaving minority or non-Western group can take numerous forms, including celebrating the group, giving the group greater rights and privileges, covering up the group’s crimes and dysfunctions, attacking the group’s critics as racists, and blaming the group’s bad behavior on white racism.
The new, shorter version is missing the reference to “racism”. How convenient. Most of the rest of Auster’s comments are an attack on Chechar and myself for “anti-semitism”, that extra special form of “racism” most noted for its use in covering up the crimes, misbehavior, and dysfunctions of an extra special “minority”.
Auster could have called his law “The Law That Covers Everbody Except Jews”. Too late, it’s The First Law of Jewish Influence now.
Find the “auster-referenced” title associated with the photograph insulting to disabled persons.
I think a public apology is warranted.
I apologize to the retard for associating him with Auster.
Some further thoughts on what Auster wrote.
As I noted in my next post, he first tried to paint jews as “insiders”, to justify excluding them from his law. When James N called him on that he conceded:
I did not mean that Jews perceive themselves as insiders. I meant (1) that the white gentile majority perceives the Jews as insiders
This is as telling as his opinion of the differences between White and jewish “liberalism”, quoted in The First Law of Jewish Influence:
Jewish liberals see white Christians as guilty. The Jews feel OK about themselves, they think the white gentile majority is the problem.
Auster is clearly aware that Whites are misinformed about jewish views and intentions. He mocks Chechar’s and my own rapid change in opinion, trying to direct attention away from the cause, which is the realization that we’ve been mistaken and misled. As Chechar put it, quoting Svigor, “Yeah, kinda like how quickly you change your opinion of your best friend when you find out he’s been banging your wife for ten years; rapid descent into hatred.”
Also of note: in this relatively brief post Auster blurted out three fruitloopable presumptions:
I am a liar and a hypocrite and an agent of the Zionist takeover of America
. . .
Tanstaafl (followed now by Cesar) saw my reasoned and serious response [thoroughly dissected and exposed as both unreasonable and unserious] to his question as a dishonest cover up on behalf of the Jews
. . .
I am a fifth columnist carrying out a Jewish agenda to destroy the white race
It’s not his conscience. He has none. It’s pure arrogance. He rubs his agenda in our faces while calling anyone who notices a “vicious anti-semite”.
Tan mate, check out this classic Auster meltdown. The man isn’t retarded he’s a full blown mental case.
Unhinged? He was never hinged. You couldn’t even say he’s lost the plot since he keeps on saying he never read the plot he’s blowing his gasket over in the first place.
Pat Hannagan
I notice Auster uses the same “nutcase” epithet Seiyo and others have been slinging around at Chechar’s and GoV.
He also writes:
Having defended himself and his commenters from the charge that they had called me an “untrustworthy Marrano,” Mangan then proceeds to say:
Lawrence Auster has made it clear that he values Israel at least as much as he does his own country…
Whoa! Isn’t that a Marrano-like profile he’s attributing to me? That is, just as a Marrano pretends to be a Christian, but is really a Jew, I pretend to be a loyal American, but in reality I am equally loyal–or even more loyal–to Israel than to America?
By the end of the outburst “Marrano-like profile he’s attributing to me” magically mutates into “Mangan’s remark that I am a Marrano”. Whoa! Yet another fruitloopable presumption!
All the bluster is to distract from the reality that, yes, he places the interests of israel over America, and jews over Whites. You must do so as well or he condemns you. If you notice and discuss this he condemns you too. How typically jewish. I think it was Joe Sobran who noted that in order to survive in journalism you must be acutely aware of jewish power but must never speak of it. Auster has little power, but he’s a legend in his own mind.