Lawrence Auster—secret enemy of America and the West

In a blog entry in which Dennis Mangan defends arch anti-Semite Kevin MacDonald, Chechar (a.k.a. Cesar Tort) comments:

The “big Jew brains” in the counter-jihad, anti-immigration, supposedly pro-West bloggers that would be most interested in refuting KMD are Larry Auster, and Takuan Seiyo who is Jewish on his father side (but it’s apparent that in a conflict of interest he sides [with] Jewish interests).

Thus Chechar, who just a few months ago considered me la crème de la crème and called for a “non-anti-Semitic white nationalism,” and who then suddenly turned around and adopted an anti-Semitic perspective, now describes me as “supposedly pro-West.” What is the source of this accusation? It is the fact that I unreservedly condemn serious anti-Semites. In the minds of the anti-Semitic right, if you condemn anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism, you’re an enemy of the West.

In taking this tack, Chechar is following Mangan’s recent theme. In response to my attack on the anti-Semites and anti-Israelites of the right, Mangan wrote:

Can there be any doubt whatsoever where Auster’s loyalties lie? Yes, I know that questioning loyalties is, by decree of Auster himself, anti-Semitic, but in this case he makes his loyalties crystal clear: Israel is to be favored over the U.S.

He really ought to just get it over with and make aliyah.

Does the fact that Mangan is now saying about me what the most virulent anti-Semites have been saying for years—that I am a Jewish fifth columnist advancing Jewish interests against America and the West—mean that Mangan himself is anti-Semitic? Of course not! Mangan is not an anti-Semite. He is only a host, ally, defender, facilitator, and fellow-traveler of anti-Semites.

Now watch how Mangan splits hairs to deny that his description of me is the same as the anti-Semites’.

- end of initial entry -

Steve R. writes:

As you reported, Geert Wilders proclaimed that support for Israel was his litmus test—that he would only cooperate with those who supported Israel. In view of his unequivocal support for that nation full of Jews it seems only right that a similar title should read:

Geert Wilders—secret enemy of Holland and the West

LA replies:

I myself have challenged Mangan on this point, saying: If my support for Israel’s existence and my rejection of right-wing anti-Israelites means that I am more loyal to Israel than America, then why doesn’t Mangan say that Wilders’ support for Israel’s existence and his rejection of anti-Israelites mean that he is more loyal to Israel than the Netherlands? Mangan ignored the question for a long time, but then ultimately replied. He said that Wilders is a tool of the Jews, because notwithstanding his extravagant support for Israel, liberal Jews don’t like him. As though the correctness of a position was based on whether liberal Jews approve of you for taking it! But heck, being a tool of the Jews is less bad than being more loyal to Israel than to one’s own country, or being a Jewish fifth columnist. That’s the advantage Mangan gives Wilders as a gentile.

Here is what Dennis Mangan thinks of the man who is currently the most important political leader in the West:

In my opinion Geert Wilders is a tool. With a reputation as “a flamboyant philosemite” and after having visited Israel some 40 times (sic), he is treated as a pariah by both Jews and by respectable public opinion in Europe, one reason for the latter being the former. Wilders supports gay marriage and all the other usual liberal suicide memes, but he’s made an unprincipled exception for Muslims, which has been enough to garner the support of some supposed conservatives.

As I’ve said before, paleocons or HBD’ers or whatever we call Mangan are reductively tribalist in their thinking, see everything in terms of tit for tat, of who scratches your back, and who doesn’t scratch your back. As a result they are incapable of grasping principle, because they judge a position based only on whether it’s their friends / fellow tribalists or their enemies who are for/against that position. This also leaves them incapable of grasping the idea of a larger good that may not be embraced by most people at this moment, but ultimately can win out. Wilders by making support for Israel’s existence the litmus test for whom he will cooperate with, is doing the right thing in the big picture and in the long run, morally and for the West, even if most Jews now oppose him as a “right-winger.” But it’s also the case that many Jews do support Wilders, and those who do, are at the cutting edge of a better politics that is coming. All this is beyond the shriveled vision of the HBD- and paleocon tribalists.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at July 13, 2010 05:15 PM | Send