Archive
Categories

From a German Point of View: a Reply to Lawrence Auster

[This article, with an introduction by Baron Bodissey, was also published in Gates of Vienna]

At May 6, Lawrence Auster posted a comment on Germany‘s reaction on Bin Laden‘s death – a comment suddenly highlighting political tensions most of us are normally not aware of. I think it is worthwhile to examine Mr. Auster‘s argument to make clear the nature of these tensions, and what they could mean to the Counterjihad.

Auster‘s starting point is that Chancellor Angela Merkel has been criminally charged for expressing delight over Bin Laden‘s demise. He then quotes a poll according to which „64 percent of Germans do not see the death of Osama bin Laden as something to be celebrated“. To Auster, this indicates the „spiritual death“ brought upon Germany „by the consistent application of liberalism“.

There are some points Auster doesn‘t seem to understand: First of all, the question was not whether Bin Laden‘s death was good or bad, but whether one should celebrate it. In Germany, many terrorists have been killed by security forces during recent decades, and some commited suicide in jail. In no single case did a German government express satisfaction or delight about it, and in no single case there were public celebrations of the kind we are now witnessing in America. Celebrating anyone‘s death, and be it that of an ennemy, is considered undecent in Germany, and therefore, Mrs. Merkel‘s statement was at least an embarassing faux pas, regardless of whether it was illegal or not. It‘s something that is simply not done in this country.

I don‘t blame Mr. Auster for not knowing and not understanding the customs of a foreign country, I just think he should be reluctant to judge what he doesn‘t understand.

Up until now, this has been just a minor disagreement between most Germans on the one hand and most Americans on the other. Given the irrelevance of what we are talking about, it is all the more dismaying that Auster seizes this opportunity to trigger an avalanche of hate and prejudice against Germany, beginning with

And by the way, why are we keeping 50,000 U.S. troops, at a cost of billions a year, in that dead land? For what purpose, other than feeding their economy, which happens to be the largest in Europe?

Well, they are not here to protect Germany from invasions. Indeed, we are invaded, as any European nation is, but the U.S. is the last country who would like to protect us from that – we will pick up this point below. The U.S. have bases in Germany because U.S. forces in the Middle East are supplied from here (and kidnapped persons are distributed from here to secret CIA jails around the globe).

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.

And he adds

I am not being extreme or „anti-German“ when I say that.

which indeed shows that he doesn‘t share German humourlessness.

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.

Many Germans are speaking so, 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 from 1945 on, 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?

Mr. Auster may not understand much about Germany, but he has quite correctly understood that we don‘t share the feelings of triumph on Bin Laden‘s death – not due to appeasement, or liberalism, or decadence, and not only due to a special German concept of decence described above. It may be shocking to some, but even militant counterjihadists like me don‘t share it.

Yes, Bin Laden was our enemy, but on the list of our enemies he was not number one, and even not 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 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 infiltation, 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 its 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?

The obvious answer is that westernization of the Islamic world and islamization of the Western world are two sides of the same coin.

Establishing a global uniform civilization requires the destruction of traditional patterns of values and loyalties. Nations, religions, traditions enable people to express solidarity with each other; they are a the natural enemies of any tyranny. Globalism means to dissolve these ties that hold society together, making men mere perfect consumers and members of the labour force, subject to a global system of supranational institutions responsible to nobody. Such a system of global mobility of capital and labour, i.e. a global market economy, tends to anarchy on the micro level, thereby requiring further empowerment of the supranational level to enforce a peace the individual states are no longer able to preserve.

This is what the political classes of all western countries, including the United States, are working for. The Muslims with their jihad ambition, and the Left with its childish multicultural utopia are just seen as useful auxiliary forces, which is the reason why they are given their head.

This is behind the slogans of spreading „democracy“, and „liberty“, and „good governance“ and so on; and this is behind the phrases of „cultural enrichment“, „tolerance“, „welcome culture“ and so on. It is probable that the responsible believe in what they say. They probably really believe that they work for a system of peace and freedom. Unfortunately, this demands that opponents are not only enemies, but devils, seemingly working for war and tyranny. The utopian concept of „one world“ implies a hyper-morality and entails the de-humanizing of the enemy.

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 Auster‘s attitude is representative), it isn‘t hard to imagine what the reaction would be if Germany seriously fought Islamization. Even conservatives like Auster, I suppose, wouldn‘t stand by our side.

Torturing so-called terrorists in Guantanamo and elsewhere is not an exception from the rule due to irrefutable requirements of national security (by the way: if it was necessary to examine Bin Laden‘s driver, why was it not necessary to examine Bin Laden himself?), and throwing Bin Laden‘s corpse into the sea is the consequence of this de-humanization. At the same time, it is a warning to any opponent of the new world order, f.e. for counterjihadists, that they have no chance of being treated according to civilized democratic standards if their opposition becomes too strong.

What they do today with Bin Laden is what they did yesterday with German generals, and what they will do tomorrow with anyone fighting their utopia. That‘s why I don‘t celebrate Bin Laden‘s death.

No related posts.

46 Kommentare zu „From a German Point of View: a Reply to Lawrence Auster“

    • JV:

      Excellent article.

      That’s what I meant. Don’t do him a favour by giving him the opportunity to portray himself as someone who speaks for America or is a representative of the Anglo-Saxon world. Lawrence Auster, great American, defender of America against German Osama lovers – he’d like people to see him as something like that. Attack him where it hurts. He isn’t pro-American. He’s just pro-Golem. The second Americans wake up and really take their country back – in any other way than the one he would allow them to – guess what happens to his „patriotism.“

    • JV:

      Excellent article.

      That’s what I meant. Don’t do him a favour by giving him the opportunity to portray himself as someone who speaks for America or is a representative of the Anglo-Saxon world. Lawrence Auster, great American, defender of America against German Osama lovers – he’d like people to see him as something like that. Attack him where it hurts. He isn’t pro-American. He’s just pro-Golem. The second Americans wake up and really take their country back – in any other way than the one he would allow them to – guess what happens to his „patriotism.“

    • JV:

      Excellent article.

      That’s what I meant. Don’t do him a favour by giving him the opportunity to portray himself as someone who speaks for America or is a representative of the Anglo-Saxon world. Lawrence Auster, great American, defender of America against German Osama lovers – he’d like people to see him as something like that. Attack him where it hurts. He isn’t pro-American. He’s just pro-Golem. The second Americans wake up and really take their country back – in any other way than the one he would allow them to – guess what happens to his „patriotism.“

    • JV:

      Excellent article.

      That’s what I meant. Don’t do him a favour by giving him the opportunity to portray himself as someone who speaks for America or is a representative of the Anglo-Saxon world. Lawrence Auster, great American, defender of America against German Osama lovers – he’d like people to see him as something like that. Attack him where it hurts. He isn’t pro-American. He’s just pro-Golem. The second Americans wake up and really take their country back – in any other way than the one he would allow them to – guess what happens to his „patriotism.“

  • The Quadfather:

    As an American,I have always understood that in the bombing of Serbia that we were fighting on the wrong side. We have a faction in our country, the Democrats, that when they come to power, you can expect that. They are traitorous to the real America, to our founding principles. The other faction, the Republicans are better, but far from perfect. The new faction, the Tea party, is our only real hope, and is working to take over the Republican party. It always struck me as odd that while Nazi-ism is villified by our left, Marxism is not. But they are two sides of the same coin, as Stalin admitted himself. But the true reason the American left won’t villify marxism, is that their movement grew out of soviet style marxism. But they are one and the same, and they must be defeated. Oh how the left have howled about the rise of the Tea Party and how they are full of contempt of it. We are aware of the globalists pulling the strings and work against them at every turn.

  • The Quadfather:

    As an American,I have always understood that in the bombing of Serbia that we were fighting on the wrong side. We have a faction in our country, the Democrats, that when they come to power, you can expect that. They are traitorous to the real America, to our founding principles. The other faction, the Republicans are better, but far from perfect. The new faction, the Tea party, is our only real hope, and is working to take over the Republican party. It always struck me as odd that while Nazi-ism is villified by our left, Marxism is not. But they are two sides of the same coin, as Stalin admitted himself. But the true reason the American left won’t villify marxism, is that their movement grew out of soviet style marxism. But they are one and the same, and they must be defeated. Oh how the left have howled about the rise of the Tea Party and how they are full of contempt of it. We are aware of the globalists pulling the strings and work against them at every turn.

  • The Quadfather:

    As an American,I have always understood that in the bombing of Serbia that we were fighting on the wrong side. We have a faction in our country, the Democrats, that when they come to power, you can expect that. They are traitorous to the real America, to our founding principles. The other faction, the Republicans are better, but far from perfect. The new faction, the Tea party, is our only real hope, and is working to take over the Republican party. It always struck me as odd that while Nazi-ism is villified by our left, Marxism is not. But they are two sides of the same coin, as Stalin admitted himself. But the true reason the American left won’t villify marxism, is that their movement grew out of soviet style marxism. But they are one and the same, and they must be defeated. Oh how the left have howled about the rise of the Tea Party and how they are full of contempt of it. We are aware of the globalists pulling the strings and work against them at every turn.

  • The Quadfather:

    As an American,I have always understood that in the bombing of Serbia that we were fighting on the wrong side. We have a faction in our country, the Democrats, that when they come to power, you can expect that. They are traitorous to the real America, to our founding principles. The other faction, the Republicans are better, but far from perfect. The new faction, the Tea party, is our only real hope, and is working to take over the Republican party. It always struck me as odd that while Nazi-ism is villified by our left, Marxism is not. But they are two sides of the same coin, as Stalin admitted himself. But the true reason the American left won’t villify marxism, is that their movement grew out of soviet style marxism. But they are one and the same, and they must be defeated. Oh how the left have howled about the rise of the Tea Party and how they are full of contempt of it. We are aware of the globalists pulling the strings and work against them at every turn.

  • Nevertheless, it is characteristic that he [Auster] is able to articulate his anti-German resentment without any proof. Obviously, he believes the public he is addressing is sharing his views and prejudices, and I am afraid he is right.

    Manfred, as per Tanstaafl’s post, Auster is first and foremost a Jew and that is where his first and foremost allegiances apply. Likewise his commentariat are mostly Jewish. Auster is not Anglo-Saxon, though he did convert to High Church Anglicanism, with his former ethnic and religious allegiance fully in tact and dominant. Read him with that understanding and you will begin to understand the premises of his points of view. For example, he is pro-Wilders even though Wilders represents most of those things a conservative and traditionalist, that Auster describes himself as, would actively oppose. The reason Auster does so is because Wilders is pro-Israel and vehemntly opposed to Islam. Those are the only criteria of Wilders that Auster agrees with, and they are fundamental to any agreement with Auster.

    Auster is not representative of America from what I know of Americans but rather he is representative of Judeo-Aemrica. The sort of America that interferes with all nations as you have described with particular reference to Judeo-American interference with France.

    Gates of Vienna is similar, though they are not Jews but anglophiles with a pro-Israeli/Zionist bent. Politically they are what are termed neo-conservatives: socially left wing, economically free market absolutists with a staunch Israel/Zion obsequiousness.

    Germany is opposed whenever they do not fully submit to Israel firstism, which in this instance is to not joyously celebrate the death of Osama bin Laden. Germany’s instructions are all our instructions from Judeo-America: invade the world, invite the world. Nationalism for no none, nationalism for Israel.

    I hope this helps.

    • What you and the other American commenters write is encouraging, though I suppose it wouldn’t be really diffcult to make a devil of Germany if the media wanted to. Anti-German stereotypes were mobilized even during World War I, when Americans had no reason to hate Germany. It would be the more easy today.

      By the way: I am a supporter of Israel, too, for the same reasons why I would support any Western nation if it was threatened, and I am a supporter of Wilders, despite his liberal approach to some matters. In Germany, where parties critical of Islam and Immigration get just 1 or 2 percent of the votes, we envy the Dutch for Wilders, although some points of his agenda are rather short-sighted. I don’t know whether it is tactics that Wilders focuses on Islam rather than immigration, but if it is, it is smart.

    • What you and the other American commenters write is encouraging, though I suppose it wouldn’t be really diffcult to make a devil of Germany if the media wanted to. Anti-German stereotypes were mobilized even during World War I, when Americans had no reason to hate Germany. It would be the more easy today.

      By the way: I am a supporter of Israel, too, for the same reasons why I would support any Western nation if it was threatened, and I am a supporter of Wilders, despite his liberal approach to some matters. In Germany, where parties critical of Islam and Immigration get just 1 or 2 percent of the votes, we envy the Dutch for Wilders, although some points of his agenda are rather short-sighted. I don’t know whether it is tactics that Wilders focuses on Islam rather than immigration, but if it is, it is smart.

    • What you and the other American commenters write is encouraging, though I suppose it wouldn’t be really diffcult to make a devil of Germany if the media wanted to. Anti-German stereotypes were mobilized even during World War I, when Americans had no reason to hate Germany. It would be the more easy today.

      By the way: I am a supporter of Israel, too, for the same reasons why I would support any Western nation if it was threatened, and I am a supporter of Wilders, despite his liberal approach to some matters. In Germany, where parties critical of Islam and Immigration get just 1 or 2 percent of the votes, we envy the Dutch for Wilders, although some points of his agenda are rather short-sighted. I don’t know whether it is tactics that Wilders focuses on Islam rather than immigration, but if it is, it is smart.

    • What you and the other American commenters write is encouraging, though I suppose it wouldn’t be really diffcult to make a devil of Germany if the media wanted to. Anti-German stereotypes were mobilized even during World War I, when Americans had no reason to hate Germany. It would be the more easy today.

      By the way: I am a supporter of Israel, too, for the same reasons why I would support any Western nation if it was threatened, and I am a supporter of Wilders, despite his liberal approach to some matters. In Germany, where parties critical of Islam and Immigration get just 1 or 2 percent of the votes, we envy the Dutch for Wilders, although some points of his agenda are rather short-sighted. I don’t know whether it is tactics that Wilders focuses on Islam rather than immigration, but if it is, it is smart.

  • Nevertheless, it is characteristic that he [Auster] is able to articulate his anti-German resentment without any proof. Obviously, he believes the public he is addressing is sharing his views and prejudices, and I am afraid he is right.

    Manfred, as per Tanstaafl’s post, Auster is first and foremost a Jew and that is where his first and foremost allegiances apply. Likewise his commentariat are mostly Jewish. Auster is not Anglo-Saxon, though he did convert to High Church Anglicanism, with his former ethnic and religious allegiance fully in tact and dominant. Read him with that understanding and you will begin to understand the premises of his points of view. For example, he is pro-Wilders even though Wilders represents most of those things a conservative and traditionalist, that Auster describes himself as, would actively oppose. The reason Auster does so is because Wilders is pro-Israel and vehemntly opposed to Islam. Those are the only criteria of Wilders that Auster agrees with, and they are fundamental to any agreement with Auster.

    Auster is not representative of America from what I know of Americans but rather he is representative of Judeo-Aemrica. The sort of America that interferes with all nations as you have described with particular reference to Judeo-American interference with France.

    Gates of Vienna is similar, though they are not Jews but anglophiles with a pro-Israeli/Zionist bent. Politically they are what are termed neo-conservatives: socially left wing, economically free market absolutists with a staunch Israel/Zion obsequiousness.

    Germany is opposed whenever they do not fully submit to Israel firstism, which in this instance is to not joyously celebrate the death of Osama bin Laden. Germany’s instructions are all our instructions from Judeo-America: invade the world, invite the world. Nationalism for no none, nationalism for Israel.

    I hope this helps.

  • Nevertheless, it is characteristic that he [Auster] is able to articulate his anti-German resentment without any proof. Obviously, he believes the public he is addressing is sharing his views and prejudices, and I am afraid he is right.

    Manfred, as per Tanstaafl’s post, Auster is first and foremost a Jew and that is where his first and foremost allegiances apply. Likewise his commentariat are mostly Jewish. Auster is not Anglo-Saxon, though he did convert to High Church Anglicanism, with his former ethnic and religious allegiance fully in tact and dominant. Read him with that understanding and you will begin to understand the premises of his points of view. For example, he is pro-Wilders even though Wilders represents most of those things a conservative and traditionalist, that Auster describes himself as, would actively oppose. The reason Auster does so is because Wilders is pro-Israel and vehemntly opposed to Islam. Those are the only criteria of Wilders that Auster agrees with, and they are fundamental to any agreement with Auster.

    Auster is not representative of America from what I know of Americans but rather he is representative of Judeo-Aemrica. The sort of America that interferes with all nations as you have described with particular reference to Judeo-American interference with France.

    Gates of Vienna is similar, though they are not Jews but anglophiles with a pro-Israeli/Zionist bent. Politically they are what are termed neo-conservatives: socially left wing, economically free market absolutists with a staunch Israel/Zion obsequiousness.

    Germany is opposed whenever they do not fully submit to Israel firstism, which in this instance is to not joyously celebrate the death of Osama bin Laden. Germany’s instructions are all our instructions from Judeo-America: invade the world, invite the world. Nationalism for no none, nationalism for Israel.

    I hope this helps.

  • Nevertheless, it is characteristic that he [Auster] is able to articulate his anti-German resentment without any proof. Obviously, he believes the public he is addressing is sharing his views and prejudices, and I am afraid he is right.

    Manfred, as per Tanstaafl’s post, Auster is first and foremost a Jew and that is where his first and foremost allegiances apply. Likewise his commentariat are mostly Jewish. Auster is not Anglo-Saxon, though he did convert to High Church Anglicanism, with his former ethnic and religious allegiance fully in tact and dominant. Read him with that understanding and you will begin to understand the premises of his points of view. For example, he is pro-Wilders even though Wilders represents most of those things a conservative and traditionalist, that Auster describes himself as, would actively oppose. The reason Auster does so is because Wilders is pro-Israel and vehemntly opposed to Islam. Those are the only criteria of Wilders that Auster agrees with, and they are fundamental to any agreement with Auster.

    Auster is not representative of America from what I know of Americans but rather he is representative of Judeo-Aemrica. The sort of America that interferes with all nations as you have described with particular reference to Judeo-American interference with France.

    Gates of Vienna is similar, though they are not Jews but anglophiles with a pro-Israeli/Zionist bent. Politically they are what are termed neo-conservatives: socially left wing, economically free market absolutists with a staunch Israel/Zion obsequiousness.

    Germany is opposed whenever they do not fully submit to Israel firstism, which in this instance is to not joyously celebrate the death of Osama bin Laden. Germany’s instructions are all our instructions from Judeo-America: invade the world, invite the world. Nationalism for no none, nationalism for Israel.

    I hope this helps.

  • DW:

    It will be interesting to see if this anti-German hate rhetoric is just the start of a broader campaign against the Germans? I heard Fox News’s Glenn Beck stirring anti-German conspiracies about a month ago on his show.

    There are elements within „Anglo-America“ who greatly fear an independent Germany. These people would much prefer a Germany that just goes along with the globalist program. In fact, the biggest competition for the Anglo-American globalists are the Germans. They (Anglo-American globalist elite) don’t care much for the Russians either but direct their heaviest hate towards the Germans. Mr. Auster works within the narrative-creating apparatus of the Anglo-American elite. His job is to spread memes, shape arguments, provide assumptions, and maintain a narrative that benefits this Anglo-American elite.

    Of course he does believe what he’s saying. He does have an inner hate for Germans for reasons beyond self-interest. So don’t think he’s just in it for the money or status. They use him for this job particularly because he IS „GOOD“ at German hating! His job in this case is to use the rhetoric of dehumanization and domination against a people that his bosses fear.

    And it’s such a waste of time! America should be moving closer to Germany at this point in history. Germany is experiencing many of the same issues that America faces (energy, immigration, birth rates). What if instead of middle east energy wars we (The US) and the Germans allocated resources together and worked to develop new forms of energy? Or labor saving technologies? Why not explore space together? Send more exchange students? We (Americans) can learn about modern manufacturing from the Germans.

    • DW, do you have a link on that comment w/regards to Glenn Beck?

      • DW:

        I heard him say it on his show. He tied some problems occurring in the world to Germany in an insinuating manner. He spoke with innuendos and warned the audience to „remember Germany,“ meaning that something bad in the future will be tied to Germany.

        Fox News as a channel is very anti-Europe and some of their programming is intended to program white middle class people on the American Right to perceive Europe as an enemy (Godless progressives). They try very hard to deny a common Western heritage between Europe and America.

        American right-wingers are instead supposed to feel solidarity with the Israelis. Newt Gingrich is another European basher who „reminds“ Americans how different „we“ are from the progressive-socialist, decedent, Godless Europeans.

      • DW:

        I heard him say it on his show. He tied some problems occurring in the world to Germany in an insinuating manner. He spoke with innuendos and warned the audience to „remember Germany,“ meaning that something bad in the future will be tied to Germany.

        Fox News as a channel is very anti-Europe and some of their programming is intended to program white middle class people on the American Right to perceive Europe as an enemy (Godless progressives). They try very hard to deny a common Western heritage between Europe and America.

        American right-wingers are instead supposed to feel solidarity with the Israelis. Newt Gingrich is another European basher who „reminds“ Americans how different „we“ are from the progressive-socialist, decedent, Godless Europeans.

      • DW:

        I heard him say it on his show. He tied some problems occurring in the world to Germany in an insinuating manner. He spoke with innuendos and warned the audience to „remember Germany,“ meaning that something bad in the future will be tied to Germany.

        Fox News as a channel is very anti-Europe and some of their programming is intended to program white middle class people on the American Right to perceive Europe as an enemy (Godless progressives). They try very hard to deny a common Western heritage between Europe and America.

        American right-wingers are instead supposed to feel solidarity with the Israelis. Newt Gingrich is another European basher who „reminds“ Americans how different „we“ are from the progressive-socialist, decedent, Godless Europeans.

      • DW:

        I heard him say it on his show. He tied some problems occurring in the world to Germany in an insinuating manner. He spoke with innuendos and warned the audience to „remember Germany,“ meaning that something bad in the future will be tied to Germany.

        Fox News as a channel is very anti-Europe and some of their programming is intended to program white middle class people on the American Right to perceive Europe as an enemy (Godless progressives). They try very hard to deny a common Western heritage between Europe and America.

        American right-wingers are instead supposed to feel solidarity with the Israelis. Newt Gingrich is another European basher who „reminds“ Americans how different „we“ are from the progressive-socialist, decedent, Godless Europeans.

    • DW, do you have a link on that comment w/regards to Glenn Beck?

    • DW, do you have a link on that comment w/regards to Glenn Beck?

    • DW, do you have a link on that comment w/regards to Glenn Beck?

    • The Quadfather:

      We have explored space together. The American space program is the german rocket program of world war II. We just extended it and pacified it. But we couldn’t have done it so quick without all the german scientists that came over here to help.

    • The Quadfather:

      We have explored space together. The American space program is the german rocket program of world war II. We just extended it and pacified it. But we couldn’t have done it so quick without all the german scientists that came over here to help.

    • The Quadfather:

      We have explored space together. The American space program is the german rocket program of world war II. We just extended it and pacified it. But we couldn’t have done it so quick without all the german scientists that came over here to help.

    • The Quadfather:

      We have explored space together. The American space program is the german rocket program of world war II. We just extended it and pacified it. But we couldn’t have done it so quick without all the german scientists that came over here to help.

  • DW:

    It will be interesting to see if this anti-German hate rhetoric is just the start of a broader campaign against the Germans? I heard Fox News’s Glenn Beck stirring anti-German conspiracies about a month ago on his show.

    There are elements within „Anglo-America“ who greatly fear an independent Germany. These people would much prefer a Germany that just goes along with the globalist program. In fact, the biggest competition for the Anglo-American globalists are the Germans. They (Anglo-American globalist elite) don’t care much for the Russians either but direct their heaviest hate towards the Germans. Mr. Auster works within the narrative-creating apparatus of the Anglo-American elite. His job is to spread memes, shape arguments, provide assumptions, and maintain a narrative that benefits this Anglo-American elite.

    Of course he does believe what he’s saying. He does have an inner hate for Germans for reasons beyond self-interest. So don’t think he’s just in it for the money or status. They use him for this job particularly because he IS „GOOD“ at German hating! His job in this case is to use the rhetoric of dehumanization and domination against a people that his bosses fear.

    And it’s such a waste of time! America should be moving closer to Germany at this point in history. Germany is experiencing many of the same issues that America faces (energy, immigration, birth rates). What if instead of middle east energy wars we (The US) and the Germans allocated resources together and worked to develop new forms of energy? Or labor saving technologies? Why not explore space together? Send more exchange students? We (Americans) can learn about modern manufacturing from the Germans.

  • DW:

    It will be interesting to see if this anti-German hate rhetoric is just the start of a broader campaign against the Germans? I heard Fox News’s Glenn Beck stirring anti-German conspiracies about a month ago on his show.

    There are elements within „Anglo-America“ who greatly fear an independent Germany. These people would much prefer a Germany that just goes along with the globalist program. In fact, the biggest competition for the Anglo-American globalists are the Germans. They (Anglo-American globalist elite) don’t care much for the Russians either but direct their heaviest hate towards the Germans. Mr. Auster works within the narrative-creating apparatus of the Anglo-American elite. His job is to spread memes, shape arguments, provide assumptions, and maintain a narrative that benefits this Anglo-American elite.

    Of course he does believe what he’s saying. He does have an inner hate for Germans for reasons beyond self-interest. So don’t think he’s just in it for the money or status. They use him for this job particularly because he IS „GOOD“ at German hating! His job in this case is to use the rhetoric of dehumanization and domination against a people that his bosses fear.

    And it’s such a waste of time! America should be moving closer to Germany at this point in history. Germany is experiencing many of the same issues that America faces (energy, immigration, birth rates). What if instead of middle east energy wars we (The US) and the Germans allocated resources together and worked to develop new forms of energy? Or labor saving technologies? Why not explore space together? Send more exchange students? We (Americans) can learn about modern manufacturing from the Germans.

  • DW:

    It will be interesting to see if this anti-German hate rhetoric is just the start of a broader campaign against the Germans? I heard Fox News’s Glenn Beck stirring anti-German conspiracies about a month ago on his show.

    There are elements within „Anglo-America“ who greatly fear an independent Germany. These people would much prefer a Germany that just goes along with the globalist program. In fact, the biggest competition for the Anglo-American globalists are the Germans. They (Anglo-American globalist elite) don’t care much for the Russians either but direct their heaviest hate towards the Germans. Mr. Auster works within the narrative-creating apparatus of the Anglo-American elite. His job is to spread memes, shape arguments, provide assumptions, and maintain a narrative that benefits this Anglo-American elite.

    Of course he does believe what he’s saying. He does have an inner hate for Germans for reasons beyond self-interest. So don’t think he’s just in it for the money or status. They use him for this job particularly because he IS „GOOD“ at German hating! His job in this case is to use the rhetoric of dehumanization and domination against a people that his bosses fear.

    And it’s such a waste of time! America should be moving closer to Germany at this point in history. Germany is experiencing many of the same issues that America faces (energy, immigration, birth rates). What if instead of middle east energy wars we (The US) and the Germans allocated resources together and worked to develop new forms of energy? Or labor saving technologies? Why not explore space together? Send more exchange students? We (Americans) can learn about modern manufacturing from the Germans.

  • i had a few thoughts on auster’s comments. published them here.

    great idea for a blog, „german views“ in english! look forward to reading more. (^_^)

  • i had a few thoughts on auster’s comments. published them here.

    great idea for a blog, „german views“ in english! look forward to reading more. (^_^)

  • i had a few thoughts on auster’s comments. published them here.

    great idea for a blog, „german views“ in english! look forward to reading more. (^_^)

  • i had a few thoughts on auster’s comments. published them here.

    great idea for a blog, „german views“ in english! look forward to reading more. (^_^)

  • RS:

    Dislike of Auster is… Well, as far as I can recall, Auster does get after people sometimes for alleged blanket prejudice against Jewry – inter alia. Whatever. Auster is one of about three Ashkenazim in the entire world of Anglophone dissidents who state that Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street in the past, and still is. I’m baffled as to why people give him no credit for this extremely distinctive fact, even if he is a temperamental fellow. Hell, so am I in some degree.

    The fact that Auster says the NS guilt cult should be dropped is no doubt directly related to the fact that he definitely sees substantial truth in ‚200 Years Together‘, and the like, and understands what was weighing on the German electorate in ’33. He probably also understands lots of other stuff like the severe French and American irresponsibility regarding gold. Believe me when I say, virtually nobody in America, at any level of education short of a PhD on modern Germany, knows any of this context beyond a few token criticisms of Versailles. Do you think his readers – apparently a mix of Jews, and Gentiles who are much more Protestant-trad than ethno-preservationist – would give him any grief if he were to blast away at ‚200 Years‘ with his heaviest artillery? A book which is not available in English, by the way – what an enigma, lol. On the contrary, he would be three times as popular as he is. He says what he says – repeatedly – because it’s true. I absolutely assure you, relative to Americans, and I’m pretty sure relative to Brits as well, he’s at the 99.9th percentile for understanding extra-German causes of ‚German‘ mistakes which I would consider to be as much caused by the rest of the West – yes, including Russian and German Jews, not least – as they were caused by Germany in general. (In their defense, their bolshevist activism was caused partly by earlier Gentile-Jewish conflict of a severe nature.) The top NS get a lot more blame from me than Germany in general, almost the sole error of which was the ’33 vote. One should not be a childlike idealist: at that point the ability to moderate or get rid of the top NS by peaceful means began to decline rapidly – one could ask the bones of Edgar Julius Jung about that. I wouldn’t certainly wouldn’t attack Muscovites for not running amok to stop the Red Terror or Holodomor; that would be silly. Sadly, that’s the way it is.

    To me, Auster is a hero of honesty. The man has integrity. We all have our moods – especially him. He’s been as unfair about Sailer at times as he was lately about Germany – of course that had to do with Israel, and I respect the man’s affinity for Israel though I scarcely back such comments. Anyway, I read the man holistically. It’s not really one’s fault if one happens to be uninformed about his total body of opinions, and yet at the same time, one won’t understand him without knowing him more holistically. Without his traits, he wouldn’t be him. He likes being trenchant and boldly honest about what’s in his mind, and his trenchancy does more for good than for ill. He’s a man of very uninhibited expression, but he spreads around his fiery, and no doubt sometimes mistaken, stubbornness with conspicuous integrity. So, of course criticize his stuff – always. I’ll probably do so myself at some point, but I’ll be sure to give him respect. For maximum effectiveness, he should probably tone himself down a little – but if he doesn’t, I’ll continue to respect him anyway.

  • RS:

    Dislike of Auster is… Well, as far as I can recall, Auster does get after people sometimes for alleged blanket prejudice against Jewry – inter alia. Whatever. Auster is one of about three Ashkenazim in the entire world of Anglophone dissidents who state that Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street in the past, and still is. I’m baffled as to why people give him no credit for this extremely distinctive fact, even if he is a temperamental fellow. Hell, so am I in some degree.

    The fact that Auster says the NS guilt cult should be dropped is no doubt directly related to the fact that he definitely sees substantial truth in ‚200 Years Together‘, and the like, and understands what was weighing on the German electorate in ’33. He probably also understands lots of other stuff like the severe French and American irresponsibility regarding gold. Believe me when I say, virtually nobody in America, at any level of education short of a PhD on modern Germany, knows any of this context beyond a few token criticisms of Versailles. Do you think his readers – apparently a mix of Jews, and Gentiles who are much more Protestant-trad than ethno-preservationist – would give him any grief if he were to blast away at ‚200 Years‘ with his heaviest artillery? A book which is not available in English, by the way – what an enigma, lol. On the contrary, he would be three times as popular as he is. He says what he says – repeatedly – because it’s true. I absolutely assure you, relative to Americans, and I’m pretty sure relative to Brits as well, he’s at the 99.9th percentile for understanding extra-German causes of ‚German‘ mistakes which I would consider to be as much caused by the rest of the West – yes, including Russian and German Jews, not least – as they were caused by Germany in general. (In their defense, their bolshevist activism was caused partly by earlier Gentile-Jewish conflict of a severe nature.) The top NS get a lot more blame from me than Germany in general, almost the sole error of which was the ’33 vote. One should not be a childlike idealist: at that point the ability to moderate or get rid of the top NS by peaceful means began to decline rapidly – one could ask the bones of Edgar Julius Jung about that. I wouldn’t certainly wouldn’t attack Muscovites for not running amok to stop the Red Terror or Holodomor; that would be silly. Sadly, that’s the way it is.

    To me, Auster is a hero of honesty. The man has integrity. We all have our moods – especially him. He’s been as unfair about Sailer at times as he was lately about Germany – of course that had to do with Israel, and I respect the man’s affinity for Israel though I scarcely back such comments. Anyway, I read the man holistically. It’s not really one’s fault if one happens to be uninformed about his total body of opinions, and yet at the same time, one won’t understand him without knowing him more holistically. Without his traits, he wouldn’t be him. He likes being trenchant and boldly honest about what’s in his mind, and his trenchancy does more for good than for ill. He’s a man of very uninhibited expression, but he spreads around his fiery, and no doubt sometimes mistaken, stubbornness with conspicuous integrity. So, of course criticize his stuff – always. I’ll probably do so myself at some point, but I’ll be sure to give him respect. For maximum effectiveness, he should probably tone himself down a little – but if he doesn’t, I’ll continue to respect him anyway.

  • RS:

    Dislike of Auster is… Well, as far as I can recall, Auster does get after people sometimes for alleged blanket prejudice against Jewry – inter alia. Whatever. Auster is one of about three Ashkenazim in the entire world of Anglophone dissidents who state that Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street in the past, and still is. I’m baffled as to why people give him no credit for this extremely distinctive fact, even if he is a temperamental fellow. Hell, so am I in some degree.

    The fact that Auster says the NS guilt cult should be dropped is no doubt directly related to the fact that he definitely sees substantial truth in ‚200 Years Together‘, and the like, and understands what was weighing on the German electorate in ’33. He probably also understands lots of other stuff like the severe French and American irresponsibility regarding gold. Believe me when I say, virtually nobody in America, at any level of education short of a PhD on modern Germany, knows any of this context beyond a few token criticisms of Versailles. Do you think his readers – apparently a mix of Jews, and Gentiles who are much more Protestant-trad than ethno-preservationist – would give him any grief if he were to blast away at ‚200 Years‘ with his heaviest artillery? A book which is not available in English, by the way – what an enigma, lol. On the contrary, he would be three times as popular as he is. He says what he says – repeatedly – because it’s true. I absolutely assure you, relative to Americans, and I’m pretty sure relative to Brits as well, he’s at the 99.9th percentile for understanding extra-German causes of ‚German‘ mistakes which I would consider to be as much caused by the rest of the West – yes, including Russian and German Jews, not least – as they were caused by Germany in general. (In their defense, their bolshevist activism was caused partly by earlier Gentile-Jewish conflict of a severe nature.) The top NS get a lot more blame from me than Germany in general, almost the sole error of which was the ’33 vote. One should not be a childlike idealist: at that point the ability to moderate or get rid of the top NS by peaceful means began to decline rapidly – one could ask the bones of Edgar Julius Jung about that. I wouldn’t certainly wouldn’t attack Muscovites for not running amok to stop the Red Terror or Holodomor; that would be silly. Sadly, that’s the way it is.

    To me, Auster is a hero of honesty. The man has integrity. We all have our moods – especially him. He’s been as unfair about Sailer at times as he was lately about Germany – of course that had to do with Israel, and I respect the man’s affinity for Israel though I scarcely back such comments. Anyway, I read the man holistically. It’s not really one’s fault if one happens to be uninformed about his total body of opinions, and yet at the same time, one won’t understand him without knowing him more holistically. Without his traits, he wouldn’t be him. He likes being trenchant and boldly honest about what’s in his mind, and his trenchancy does more for good than for ill. He’s a man of very uninhibited expression, but he spreads around his fiery, and no doubt sometimes mistaken, stubbornness with conspicuous integrity. So, of course criticize his stuff – always. I’ll probably do so myself at some point, but I’ll be sure to give him respect. For maximum effectiveness, he should probably tone himself down a little – but if he doesn’t, I’ll continue to respect him anyway.

  • RS:

    Dislike of Auster is… Well, as far as I can recall, Auster does get after people sometimes for alleged blanket prejudice against Jewry – inter alia. Whatever. Auster is one of about three Ashkenazim in the entire world of Anglophone dissidents who state that Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street in the past, and still is. I’m baffled as to why people give him no credit for this extremely distinctive fact, even if he is a temperamental fellow. Hell, so am I in some degree.

    The fact that Auster says the NS guilt cult should be dropped is no doubt directly related to the fact that he definitely sees substantial truth in ‚200 Years Together‘, and the like, and understands what was weighing on the German electorate in ’33. He probably also understands lots of other stuff like the severe French and American irresponsibility regarding gold. Believe me when I say, virtually nobody in America, at any level of education short of a PhD on modern Germany, knows any of this context beyond a few token criticisms of Versailles. Do you think his readers – apparently a mix of Jews, and Gentiles who are much more Protestant-trad than ethno-preservationist – would give him any grief if he were to blast away at ‚200 Years‘ with his heaviest artillery? A book which is not available in English, by the way – what an enigma, lol. On the contrary, he would be three times as popular as he is. He says what he says – repeatedly – because it’s true. I absolutely assure you, relative to Americans, and I’m pretty sure relative to Brits as well, he’s at the 99.9th percentile for understanding extra-German causes of ‚German‘ mistakes which I would consider to be as much caused by the rest of the West – yes, including Russian and German Jews, not least – as they were caused by Germany in general. (In their defense, their bolshevist activism was caused partly by earlier Gentile-Jewish conflict of a severe nature.) The top NS get a lot more blame from me than Germany in general, almost the sole error of which was the ’33 vote. One should not be a childlike idealist: at that point the ability to moderate or get rid of the top NS by peaceful means began to decline rapidly – one could ask the bones of Edgar Julius Jung about that. I wouldn’t certainly wouldn’t attack Muscovites for not running amok to stop the Red Terror or Holodomor; that would be silly. Sadly, that’s the way it is.

    To me, Auster is a hero of honesty. The man has integrity. We all have our moods – especially him. He’s been as unfair about Sailer at times as he was lately about Germany – of course that had to do with Israel, and I respect the man’s affinity for Israel though I scarcely back such comments. Anyway, I read the man holistically. It’s not really one’s fault if one happens to be uninformed about his total body of opinions, and yet at the same time, one won’t understand him without knowing him more holistically. Without his traits, he wouldn’t be him. He likes being trenchant and boldly honest about what’s in his mind, and his trenchancy does more for good than for ill. He’s a man of very uninhibited expression, but he spreads around his fiery, and no doubt sometimes mistaken, stubbornness with conspicuous integrity. So, of course criticize his stuff – always. I’ll probably do so myself at some point, but I’ll be sure to give him respect. For maximum effectiveness, he should probably tone himself down a little – but if he doesn’t, I’ll continue to respect him anyway.

  • Rosalie:

    „Auster is one of about three Ashkenazim in the entire world of Anglophone dissidents who state that Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street in the past, and still is.“

    Can you give an example (one single example) where Auster said that in the past the Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street?

  • Rosalie:

    „Auster is one of about three Ashkenazim in the entire world of Anglophone dissidents who state that Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street in the past, and still is.“

    Can you give an example (one single example) where Auster said that in the past the Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street?

  • Rosalie:

    „Auster is one of about three Ashkenazim in the entire world of Anglophone dissidents who state that Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street in the past, and still is.“

    Can you give an example (one single example) where Auster said that in the past the Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street?

  • Rosalie:

    „Auster is one of about three Ashkenazim in the entire world of Anglophone dissidents who state that Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street in the past, and still is.“

    Can you give an example (one single example) where Auster said that in the past the Jewish-Gentile conflict was a two-way street?

  • Well, apparently Auster does not intend to actually ever answer Manfred’s article. Of course, DSK’s sex affairs are a much easier topic…

  • Well, apparently Auster does not intend to actually ever answer Manfred’s article. Of course, DSK’s sex affairs are a much easier topic…

  • Well, apparently Auster does not intend to actually ever answer Manfred’s article. Of course, DSK’s sex affairs are a much easier topic…

  • Well, apparently Auster does not intend to actually ever answer Manfred’s article. Of course, DSK’s sex affairs are a much easier topic…