|
|
Bio-centric YuppiedomLawrence Auster’s scathing and accurate criticism of the Sailerite/GNXP worldview: “Bio-centric Yuppiedom”. Posted by Phil Peterson on Sunday, October 23, 2005 at 04:00 PM in Political analysis Comments:2
Posted by Truth Be Told on October 23, 2005, 07:17 PM | # Sounds like he got you, Stevie. Did your check from the ADL clear your account yet? 3
Posted by Geoff Beck on October 23, 2005, 09:31 PM | # Sailer knows where his bread is buttered; he wants to write for AmConMag, UPI, and etc… Taking a chance on WN’ism is a bridge too far. Well, “a man’s got to know his limitations.” 4
Posted by Desmond Jones on October 24, 2005, 02:17 AM | # Of course, Auster’s case falls apart when it comes to Judaism, at which point he runs for cover amongst the Sailerites. Despite 6000 years of separateness, ‘the people who shall dwell alone’, will assimilate and embrace the age-old traditions of European man, according to Auster. For the Jews, as KMAc has pointed out, it is all about biological reductionism. It’s the biological preservation of a Jewish race/religion. If ‘biological reductionism is associated with secularism’ how does he explain diaspora Orthodox Judaism. Auster’s notion fails because he must embrace Jewry and Jewry is an anathema to Christian tradition. How does Auster plan to assimilate the Jews without embracing the Sailer notion that ‘people marry whom they will’? Accepting Auster’s dismissal of Sailer is to accept a dismissal of KMac. 5
Posted by John S Bolton on October 25, 2005, 04:06 AM | # The ad hominem criticisms don’t score against Auster or Sailer, but it seems Auster’s objections against some such citizenism could be answered. Sailer’s description of citizenship as being like shareholding does sound depleted of higher values. At the same time there is a contradiction in terms involved in our being asked to value, as citizens, the devaluation of our citizenship, as by mass immigration. In those terms, the contradiction offends against ideal reason. Sailer doesn’t say why the state must prefer the citizen; he even calls it favor, as if justice would have us increase the aggression on our fellow nationals, to take care of foreign hostiles! My objection to both Sailer and Auster on these points, is that they do not keep clear that they are dealing with the ethics of aggression. It is not a matter of values other than those strictly regarding aggression, if it is political. The absolute loyalty must be to the principle that foreign aggressors are in a special class. It is treason for officals to divert public resources to foreign hostiles here. Receiving net public subsidy this way, is perfect demonstration of the hostile status of such foreigners here. 6
Posted by John S Bolton on October 25, 2005, 04:25 AM | # The question of love for a foreigner should appear now in an altogether different aspect. The relevant point is whether bringing the foreigner here results in an increase in the aggression on your fellow nationals, especially the net taxpayer. If it does, your nation may use any degree of counteraggression to crush that relationship. It may do so dispassionately, or with high passion. There can be no duty to grant citizenship to hostiles. Love does not conquer all. Next entry: Condi for President? Previous entry: BNP banned again |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. Robert Reis commented in entry 'Free speech and open discussion issues' on 02/09/12, 04:07 AM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/09/12, 12:27 AM. (go) (view) anon commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 11:18 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 10:51 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 10:28 PM. (go) (view) Silver commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 09:48 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 09:48 PM. (go) (view) Mary commented in entry 'Anti-white ideology is like anti-biotic overuse' on 02/08/12, 09:24 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 09:04 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 08:15 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 08:09 PM. (go) (view) Guessedworker commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 07:52 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 07:48 PM. (go) (view) jamesUK commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 07:36 PM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 07:10 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 06:49 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:45 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 06:27 PM. (go) (view) marloe commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 06:21 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:17 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 06:08 PM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:07 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:03 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 05:53 PM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 05:51 PM. (go) (view) dc commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 05:13 PM. (go) (view) Lurker commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 04:55 PM. (go) (view) MP commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 04:43 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 04:31 PM. (go) (view) Selous Scout commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 04:07 PM. (go) (view) Wild Bill commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 04:02 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 03:47 PM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 03:24 PM. (go) (view) dosto commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 02:40 PM. (go) (view) Thorn commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 02:36 PM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Controlled Opposition Crime General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Whites in Africa |
Posted by Svigor on October 23, 2005, 05:10 PM | #
He calls it “romantic,” yet romance and soulless biological reductionism make an odd match indeed
Lol, Auster’s been drop-kicking Sailer lately. “Romance” is fine when it serves Sailer’s needs (individualistic) but not when it works against them (collectivistic).
Like Ray, Sailer is opposed to WNism only because he wants to be.