Auster vs. Hoste

A few days ago, I wrote a blog entry about this subject, but never got around to posting it. I’ve made a conscious effort this year to avoid feuding with other bloggers who claim to be on the pro-White side of the political spectrum. However, this discussion has grown increasingly acrimonious, and it has entered territory that is of some interest of me.

A brief summary: Lawrence Auster of View from the Right has been quarreling with Richard Hoste of HBD Books and Alternative Right. The feud between these two started months ago over Auster’s objections to Darwinism, HBD, and Roissy. In recent weeks, it has accelerated as Pope Larry has been on the war path against Alt Right over various heresies: “anti-Semitism,” Darwinism, paganism, anti-Zionism, game theory.

Ferdinand Bardamu is supporting Auster. Dennis Mangan backs Hoste and Spencer. In particular, I enjoyed Mangan’s summary:

“Auster’s constant writing about Israel and anti-Semitism, as well as his habit of making one’s views about Israel a litmus test for those whom he considers worthy of being designated a conservative, and additionally his practice of reading out of the conservative camp anyone who fails his litmus test, give one the impression that he cares more about Israel than he does for his native land.”

Talk about hitting the nail on the head.

Recently, Larry has been going overboard with his defense of the Chosen People, even more so than usual. For Auster, Israel is now a “litmus test” of who pro-Whites can work with; those who don’t agree with this party line should be excommunicated to the fringe. He has been attempting to smear Richard Hoste by linking him to Fred Phelps and Timothy McVeigh. The attacks have been extended to all paleocons including Pat Buchanan, Peter Brimelow, and Thomas Fleming. Larry is even saying that White Nationalists want to “complete Hitler’s work” by destroying Israel and exterminating all Jews.

A few comments:

1.) I agree with Richard Hoste’s analysis of terrorism. It is an insignificant issue compared to interracial violent crime. In 2005 and 2006, over 60,000 White women were raped by negroes. How many were murdered, robbed, or simply assaulted? It must number in the hundreds of thousands every year; the millions every decade. The real terrorists are lurking in the shadows in our own cities.

Drunk driving, traffic accidents, alcoholism, and smoking kill far more White people than Islamic terrorists. Obesity and lack of exercise are bigger problems than IEDs. The terrorism problem is also tractable. A few simple changes to our foreign policy would eliminate the grievances that inspired 9/11 and fuel the growth of al-Qaeda. Traditionally, the United States has always had good relations with the Islamic world.

2.) Through the organized American Jewish community, Israel attempts to manipulate American foreign policy. That’s the only grievance I have against Israelis. If they would quit doing this, I wouldn’t have anything to resent about them. I don’t care about the “human rights” of the Palestinians or what goes on in Gaza and Jerusalem. Far from wishing destruction upon Israel, I want the Zionists in our own country to relocate there.

3.) My version of “anti-Semitism” consists in the belief that White Americans would be better off excluding a Jewish community from a White ethnostate than including one. The costs of Jewish influence in our society dramatically outweigh the benefits. Are they a plus or a minus? What kind of risk are we taking on? That’s the way I look at the issue.

I’m willing to grant the Jews a second chance: if they would only quit doing the things that we find so offensive about them, acknowledge and apologize for their past actions, and give us real assurances (not mere promises) that their behavior has permanently changed, well, I would no longer have a problem with them.

An argument can be made that Jews have made positive contributions to the advancement of science and technology. Israel, for example, is often cited as a high tech nation with lots of patents per capita. I don’t disagree, but the benefits of Jewish genius in this area can easily be reaped from abroad. Jews don’t have to be physically present in North America to invent a useful gadget that becomes popular here. Neither do the Japanese who prefer to stick to their own islands.

4.) I recognize that all Jews do not share the destructive mindset of many of their co-ethnics. I’ve always judged people as individuals and as members of groups. Instead of arguing with White Nationalists, these Jews can more profitably spend their time talking sense into their co-ethnics. This would go a long way toward defusing the situation and removing the causes of grievance that inspire anti-Semitism.

5.) Unfortunately, I don’t foresee this enlightened scenario ever happening. I doubt our Jewish elites will surrender their wealth, power, and privileges voluntarily. The clannishness that we see among Jewish racialists like Lawrence Auster – who put Jewish interests above White interests – does not inspire confidence.

Most of these people won’t even consent to the exclusion of the “bad Jews.” We are told that every Jew must be judged as an individual, but when take their advice and recommend the expulsion of Mark Potok and Tim Wise, after judging them as individuals, the same people cry foul. This shows they are only playing a language game in bad faith.

6.) Auster has been repeating all sorts of spurious gossip: Hoste and Spencer were roommates at Yale, Hoste and Peter Brimelow are CMS members, VDARE is losing funding on account of anti-Semitism, etc. This doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in his analysis and reporting.

7.) Admittedly, there are some “anti-Semites” who are so out there that even we laugh about them. When I log on here and see discussions going on about whether or not Christopher Columbus was a Jew, I can’t help but laugh. The difference is my reaction is humorous and productive. I think to myself: these are still my people, they acknowledge a Jewish problem, and persuasion works better than demonizing them.

In the past, I used to read VFR much more than I do now. Auster’s obsession with Darwinism and anti-Semitism killed my interest. His ambition to police the racialist blogosphere is reminiscent of the neocons. It gives credibility to those who claim Jews will use their position as opinion makers to impose a narrow interpretation of their ethnic interests on White Gentiles. I don’t foresee this becoming a problem though given the level of awareness of the Jewish Question in the pro-White community.

Larry Auster doesn’t seem to be able to get along with anyone: Peter Brimelow, Jared Taylor, Taki, Thomas Fleming, Richard Spencer, Pat Buchanan, Roissy, Steve Sailer, Richard Hoste, Tanstaafl, Dennis Mangan, Chechar, Conservative Swede, Robert Spencer, Hesperado, Ian Jobling, Paul Craig Roberts, Gates of Vienna, David Horowitz … I can’t think of anyone that Auster hasn’t feuded with over the last year or so. This says a lot about his personality.

I think we can write off a career in politics.

Update: Richard Spencer responds to Larry.

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


  1. Jack Ryan,

    9/11 is played out. People are frankly sick and tired of it. White Americans intuitively have the sense that 9/11 happened 10 years ago, it was used to play up their emotions and garner their support for foreign adventurism, and now after a decade, all they have to show for it is fatigue, demoralization, economic disaster, endless debts, drastic domestic changes, especially demographically, etc. They have the sense that for the past 10 years, they’ve been had, that all this was a distraction to the more important domestic problems and issues.

    In Europe, focusing on Muslims makes sense because they comprise most of the immigrants there. But in the US, the issue of Muslims and terrorism always gets redirected towards the international sphere and towards aggrandizing the federal government. And how many White American even encounter Muslims regularly? The immigrant problem they face and encounter every day is largely mestizo. They’ve got to dealt with on those terms, as mestizos. You’ve got to present mestizos as a problem as mestizos, not as potential Muslim terrorists. Few Whites are going to take seriously the idea that the dull, relatively placid mestizos mowing their lawns are a problem because instead of breaking for a siesta they might strap bombs on their chests and blow up a shopping mall. They’ve got to be shown that the mestizos themselves as mestizos are the problem.

  2. Like everything in politics, the Overton Window should be kept in mind.

    The extreme sites and venues, the most Far Right sites and venues, should debate 9/11 and entertain Truther ideas, both for the sake of truth and for getting people to question the dominant social authorities.

    Politically, if sites like Occidental Dissent choose to avoid the 9/11 issue, this allows them to appear more moderate and “normal” relative to the more extreme sites that openly engage the issue.

    So sites like Occidental Dissent can come across as more moderate for the cautious and conformist types who may be put off by questioning 9/11, while at the same time there are open outlets available for people to question 9/11 and be led towards a WN viewpoint.

    You can ridicule 9/11 “trutherism,” but I’ve known liberals and patriotard Republican types who have arrived at WN or semi-WN viewpoints by questioning 9/11. When you start to question something like 9/11, you begin to question all of your political assumptions, loyalties, and allegiances.

    Practically speaking, I don’t think spending time and energy to try to “prove” anything about 9/11 is useful. But there’s no question that more people questioning and being skeptical about 9/11 can be a good thing for our movement. It destroys the political legitimacy of our ruling overclass, especially of the Republican wing of this overclass. The Left has long lost any legitimacy in the eyes of most Whites, so something that erodes the legitimacy of the Republican wing is a good thing for WN.

  3. Hey Bernard,
    Could the Conspiracy Theorists (CTs) maybe leave recent American history alone and instead try to convince the Greeks that the Muslim Turk sack of Constantinople “Never Happened”, that it was a false flag operation or try to spread the theory that the Muslim Turkin invasion, occupation of Greece and the Balkans was a “good thing” or if there were any problems they were all caused by secret Zionist/Masonic/Catholic “insiders”.
    Another area you could go for is to argue that the 700 year Arab Muslim Moor occupation of Spain never happened – that would be a good one; just imagine the political change possible when large numbers of Whites start to believe that some secret group of insiders, extra-terrestrials could pull off a 700 year false flag operation!
    For “The Rest of US” – we’ll just go a different route:

    1) Healthy

    2) Sane

    3) Working to lead our White people, not alienate them.

    And when I get on an airplane, I check out the passengers for dark, hairy, nasty looking Arabs, Muslims, profile for terrorists. I do that, because I know that Swedes and the Amish, have never hi-jacked an airplane. Arabs/Muslims do it again, and again, and again.

    When I get on a subway car (New York or Paris – it doesn’t matter) I check out the car for potential low life, Black Nig criminals. Yep, I confess:

    I’m RACIST. That’s because I understand the real world, I don’t walk in a state of confusion, convinced some secret group of “INSIDERS” is controlling everything and nothing is as it seems.

    Most things in the world aren’t hard to understand, especially when you know racial realities.

    So folks, isn’t it better to be healthy, sane, aware of racial realities, work to connect with regular Whites, look to lead them in positive pro White directions, instead of going off the deep end to embrace a loner, loser, drop -out society of paranoid, conspiracy theory obsessions?

  4. First of all, are you suggesting that I’m a conspiracy theorist? I haven’t offered any theories at all. I’m just a White Man with questions that wants to know the truth. I don’t know who or what the fuck you are, aside from the fact that you come across as a typical dissimulator and dissembler with the usual tactics of red herrings, strawman and ad hominem arguments.

    Secondly, I specifically said that we shouldn’t waste time and energy trying to “prove” anything about 9/11. It’s not practical. And I made clear that not all WNs and WN sites should engage or question 9/11. The more extreme ones should. This makes political sense per the Overton Window. If you’ve got the extreme WN sites engaging 9/11, the WN sites that avoid the issue entirely or otherwise tow the official line on 9/11 will appear moderate and “normal” by contrast.

  5. Jack Ryan makes a critical point about the history of WN and crankery. Many of the people who post here have only been interested in WN for a very short period of time and aren’t really familiar with the history of the movement. One of the big things holding the “far right” in America back over the decades has been a tendency to withdraw into bizarre conspiracy theorizing rather than engaging with politics and culture.

    Bernhard, you make a valid point about how the Muslim issue is not as important here as it is in Europe and can be used to support the neocon agenda. But that is no excuse for 9/11 Truth BS. It’s important to keep this blog free of nonsense if we want to influence the right kinds of people: those who are still young, well educated and with potential to gain positions of power in politics, business, academia and media. If we want to influence cranky old people instead, then by all means, talk about that crap.

  6. ATBOTL,

    If you’re going to address me, read my comments first.

    I said several times already in this thread that I don’t think all WNs and WN sites should engage or question 9/11, and that I think it’s a waste of time and energy.

  7. It depends on whether OD is going after the minority or the majority. The enlightened vs. the elite.

    If this website is going to be populist, it certainly should not turn into a conspiracy site. So I wouldn’t suggest that OD have some heavy focus on 911 or the Mossad.

    As for people who actually believe the Ragheads Did 911 theory, I treat them the same way as I do Tea Partiers and Christian Zionists. I smile and nod politely. All I ask is that you be pro-white.

    On the other hand, if OD was going after a select market of young, college educated Whites with independent thoughts that don’t buy into the current anti-White regime, covering stories like this may actually work:

    Just think how OD could have hijacked the South Park PR department on this particular angle, and drawn some hits.

    It depends on the strategy.

  8. I’ve never written about 9/11, Obama’s birth certificate, the Mossad, Freemasons, Bilderbergers, etc. I don’t think any of the other writers have either. We want to appeal to two groups: White Nationalists and the implicit Whites who hate the federal government and are flirting with our ideas.

  9. I think it important to point out to self-conscious enemies of our race (and the wider readership) who attempt to appeal to the mechanistic status mongering so intimately connected, yet so tragically now disconnected, from our pursuit of reproductive fitness, in assigning the unpersonhood of kookdom to Whites who feel the need to discuss conspiracy theories that said self-conscious enemies of our race are doing just that – attempting to assign the unpersonhood of kookdom to pro-White conspiracy theorists. After all, that is what the enemies of our race who have commented in this thread are doing, isn’t it?

    Although, the pro-White conspiracy theorists should recognize that the total harm done to our race per their proposed conspiracies are in fact minor compared with the harm done to our race per machinations which cannot be reasonably disputed (e.g., the Jewish role in opening up America’s borders as related by MacDonald).

  10. Although, the pro-White conspiracy theorists should recognize that the total harm done to our race per their proposed conspiracies are in fact minor compared with the harm done to our race per machinations which cannot be reasonably disputed (e.g., the Jewish role in opening up America’s borders as related by MacDonald).

    Can’t argue with this at all. I consider these “machinations” you refer to as conspiracies. They involved Jews associating together to further particular ends and interests, whether consciously or subconsciously. They’re so well documented and corroborated by the facts by people like MacDonald that they shouldn’t even be called conspiracy “theories.” They should be called conspiracy facts at this point. And like you say, these were and are much more harmful than the other issues and events engaged by the pro-White conspiracy theorists.

Comments are closed.