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.“

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.”

“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.

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.

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?

“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.]“