About Hunter Wallace 12380 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. Auster merely says that the book The Liberal Betrayal of Jews influenced his thinking about liberalism. Nowhere does he say that the work provided the initial triggering stimulus for his critique of liberalism, or that it constitutes the intellectual basis of his brand of conservatism. It influenced him. Indeed, he was a vehement critic of liberalism long before the appearance of the work in question.

    (Re-submitted comment due to HTML error)

  2. Indeed.

    Now in light of this Auster should explain why he constantly tells “the majority”, collectively, what we must do and what we can say to stop our “suicidal white guilt”, but never tells even a single individual liberal jew to STFU.

    Actually, he doesn’t need to. It’s the same reason.

    What a bind. Larry recognizes his own people’s liberalism as a threat to themselves, but judges widespread understanding of that truth even more threatening.

    I’d pity him if it weren’t so obvious that he cares much less about the consequences, one way or the other, for the rest of us. That’s why he’s so condescending toward “the majority”, WASPs, Britons, and especially abusive toward the “anti-semites” who have basically realized the same thing he has, but whose concern isn’t primarily for jews.

  3. It influenced him. Indeed, he was a vehement critic of liberalism long before the appearance of the work in question.

    No, it influences him. Indeed, he was a vehement anti-anti-semite long before the appearance of the work in question. And I’d wager that it predates his criticism of liberalism.

    Nobody forces Auster to dish out twice the abuse for “anti-semites” every time he criticizes liberal jews. He’s simply reflecting his priorities.

  4. “The theory (that Auster is motivated by Jewish self-interest) explains his attitude on any number of questions.”

    Not really. I’m not a Jew, and cannot therefore be accused of being motivated by Jewish self-interest, and I agree with Auster wholeheartedly on the issue in question. Moreover, Auster’s defence of Israel is not incompatible with a wider critique of liberalism as injurious to Western civilisation. Indeed, in the book review under discussion, he states that liberalism prevents people from “[opposing] the forces of evil that would destroy the nations of the West” – hardly the sentiment of one who is motivated solely by “Jewish ethnic self-interest”.

  5. I’m gratified to see Auster displaying his priorities so clearly. I’ve been criticizing him for a year to be more open about his pro-jew agenda. Now if he’ll stop libeling and ordering around “the majority” I’ll consider my work done.

  6. It’s not liberalism. Tanstaafl’s neo-liberalism is the better label. Classical liberalism, like J.S. Mill and Darwin espoused is not the source of non-discrimination, not solely of Jews origin, but certainly disproportionately led, financed and organised by official Jewry. Non-discrimination is an ethnic self-interest strategy. Mills position, On Non-Intervention, supports Israel. It’s the hypocrisy that is the issue. Jews advocate discriminatory positions on a survivalist basis for Israel but deny it in the diaspora.

  7. I love Jews because they are at the forefront of liberalism. Jews are the strongest supporters of liberalism and I am forever grateful to them. I am a classical liberal and a neoliberal.

Comments are closed.