Crazy and stupid white liberals who believe that Laura Wood is really Lawrence Auster

I just came upon a blog discussion from September 2011 in which most of the participants believe that Laura Wood does not exist, that she is my creation, that I am the real author of The Thinking Housewife. One commenter, citing Laura’s and my similarities and agreements and mutual quoting of each other, writes:

We are all kinda likeminded people here. Anyone out there agree with everything I write? Every single word? I can’t think of a single person who I agree with all the time. Either they are similarly named soulmates, or they are the same freaking person.

Another commenter writes:

Yeah that does seem like an obvious similarity.

So Occam’s razor, why does Lawrence feel the need to blog as a female persona? Trying to reach a wider/diverse audience? Maybe he has some sort of latent cross dressing desires and gets his jollies pretending to be a middle aged mom?

And another:

I think part of it is that he wants a more credible voice for his misogynistic crap. He is a never married man, so who the f*** cares what he thinks about women? As Laura Woods, he can spew all that garbage about how women deserve rape.

Leave aside the point that these people fail to realize that Laura Wood, notwithstanding that she shares my worldview and agrees with me on most issues, obviously has a different personality, background, and writing style from me.

Leave all that aside. Instead, think of what these people must believe in order to believe that I am Laura Wood. They believe that I have the ability to invent an entire female human being, with her background, her personal history, her family, her experiences, her personality, her home, her gardening and cooking experiences, her interest in art. They believe that I could invent all that, and also have the time and energy to write and manage an entire blog in addition to my own. They think that I have the ability to interact with female commenters the way Laura does. In short, they believe that Lawrence Auster—this grouchy never-married misogynist bigot they despise—is a superhuman genius with an incredible sympathetic understanding of women!

This is like the “truthers” who believe that President Bush was a superhuman genius who coordinated with al Qaeda to fly planes into the World Trade Center at the exact time that a vast network of bombs, planted by Bush’s agents, blew the buildings up, so that people would think that the towers had been brought down by the planes instead of the bombs planted by Bush, and this plot, which had to involve hundreds of people, was so disciplined and well organized that no one ever leaked the truth. It’s like the people who believe that Bush was a Machiavellian genius who, when he embarked on the insane project of democratizing Muslim countries, really knew that it would not succeed, his real purpose being to discredit the idea of Muslim democratization.

There are all kinds of white idiots, on the right as well as the left, who are unable to think and who will believe any absurd and impossible conspiracy theory if it satisfies some emotional need of theirs.

- end of initial entry -

Karl D. writes:

Add to that the fact that you are living with cancer and undergoing chemotherapy treatments. You really must be some kind of superman.

LA replies:

Not only that, but when I post a note saying that my limited energy is used up in blogging and I haven’t been able to post comments or send thank you notes, as soon as I post that, instead of resting, I put on my Laura Wood hat and start blogging furiously at The Thinking Housewife. Not only that, but look at all those exchanges between Laura and me: all faked. Imagine the effort that would take. Not only that, but consider all the female readers who write to me (in my Laura Wood incarnation) gratefully telling me how much they appreciate my blog because I understand the problem of non-feminist women.

Or consider this. The other day, after penning my six point summary of the ways in which liberals have unleashed moral chaos on society, I added in a comment: “My understanding of the nightmarish regime imposed on boys in this country comes largely from conversations with Laura Wood, who has a profound understanding of this issue.” Now according to the “Laura is Larry” crowd, Laura could not have helped me understand this issue, because Laura doesn’t exist. According to them, my comprehension of this issue came from myself, but I falsely attributed this comprehension to another person who doesn’t exist and thanked this non-existent person for instructing me.

Again, think of the work and effort that would be involved, not to mention the staggering level of deviousness, in constructing this totally unnecessary fiction. The required deviousness would almost be on the same level as that required by the anti-Semites’ constant charge against me, that I am an anti-white Jewish fifth columnist whose real purpose is not to protect the white West from Third Worldization, but to destroy the white West for the sake of the Jews. Think of the years of lonely struggle involved in conceiving and writing The Path to National Suicide: An Essay on Immigration and Multiculturalism. According to the anti-Semites, that entire work is the exact opposite of what it seems to be; it is a elaborate trick, designed to fool whites into thinking that I, the evil anti-white Jew, am on their side, so that I can then destroy them from within.

Thomas Bertonneau writes:

So you’re Laura Wood. In that case, we met a few weeks ago in Baltimore. May I compliment you on your elegant sense of ladies’ dress, your gentleladay’s bearing, and your aura of cultivated femininity. You’ll have to tell me where you bought that purse!

Terry Morris writes:

So when I send you a donation next week, should I send it to your address in New York, or to “Laura’s” address in Pennsylvania; should I make it out to “Laura” or to Lawrence? ;-)

Laura Wood (who tells me that a few people have written to her accusing her of being Lawrence Auster) writes:

You fail to mention the chief irony in this, which is that I write mostly about the importance of sex differences. So if you were me, i.e., if you were a a man posing as a woman who writes about the importance of sex differences, you would be a flaming hypocrite.

Laura continues:

The real heart of this is that they simply can’t absorb the fact that a woman is as anti-feminist as I am. They want to explain that away and discredit my anti-feminism.

LA writes:

Laura has posted a picture of herself to establish that she actually exists and is a woman:


Ed H. writes:

Conspiracy theorists occupy a unique and under-studied segment of the mental health spectrum. I suppose generally they fall under the category of paranoia which in the realm of politics can be very dangerous to underestimate. In paranoia the fear and suspicion grows most intense precisely when you try to reason with it. The classic case is Stalin who killed his most competent people precisely because they were the most rational. For example he once asked his generals if there was any reason to fear the Americans. “Oh, no, the Americans would never dare attack us, they know how strong we are!” said one. Stalin’s eyes narrowed and marked the man down for immediate liquidation. In the paranoid’s mind anything that suggest relaxing the state of constant suspicion has to be eliminated. Thousands were purged as a result of being sane and connected to reality and wanting the best for Russia, They went to their deaths by the thousands writing even more rational letters to Stalin explaining that they were no threat, which only sealed their fate. The correct response, of course, was: “Yes Comrade Stalin, if we let down our guard for one second the American capitalists will destroy us!” That is what the paranoid must hear.

You should be aware of this dimension when wondering why conspiracy theorists make no sense, and why your common sense objections (I am not, nor could I be, Laura Wood) are met with, not enlightenment, but even more elaborate and more far fetched layers of fabrication. On the level of power politics there is a very dangerous element here. As the liberal ideology implodes, reason itself will become a threat that must be destroyed. As VFR reader Jacob M. wrote recently: “The more liberals gain complete control the more liberal society will fail, and the more it fails the more those in charge will go looking for the few remaining conservatives to blame.” This process never self-corrects, but will spiral in ever more crazy circles especially amongst the true believers.

LA replies:

It just occurred to me: Just as the various gnostic utopias could not exist in the real world, the various gnostic conspiracy theories could not take place in the real world. Both the gnostics’ good, and their evil, are entirely imaginary.

Paul K. writes:

I LOVE this. Just think, if instead of Laura Wood her name was Laura Wencester, your names would be perfect anagrams. Then the plot would really thicken!

Michael S. writes:

So Thomas Bertonneau thinks he met Laura Wood recently. Silly man! Doesn’t he know there are plenty of actresses looking for work? Clearly the person he met was an impersonator.

Robert B. writes:

Ed H. is wrong in his musings as to why Stalin killed millions of people. He is also wrong as to why Stalin killed his generals in mass—at least prior to WWII. Stalin ordered the trials and conviction of 4,500 people per month nation-wide as a means of instilling fear in the general populace to prevent mass uprisings due to the failures of Soviet industrialism and collectivized farming. Not out of paranoia. When Stalin gave the order he was told that there were not enough dissidents for even one month, let alone an ongoing crusade. Stalin’s reply was that they simply be found regardless of their loyalty to the Communist regime and be tried for any reason they felt like. This is no different than what Ivan the Terrible did.

Stalin purged the officer corps due to an elaborate counter espionage scheme perpetrated by the Germans to get Stalin to cut his military’s head off because the Germans had trained the Soviet officer corps during the inter war years as part of their trade agreement. The Germans did not want to go up against a professional officer corps that knew how German officers thought and were trained to fight wars. After the war, Stalin killed generals who posed a possible threat to his power if they were too popular with their troops. He did so because that popularity with the troops presented a possible threat to his regime. No different than the Roman emperors who killed any general who possessed such popularity with the legionaries.

So, the lesson Ed H. is reaching for is not that paranoid liberals will seek to kill those who disagree with them; it is that those who rise to power will use that power to destroy those amongst them who represent a threat to the maintenance of their power. Hillary and Bill Clinton being accused of racism by their fellow liberals who sought to protect Obama and his rise in their polls is a case in point.

Lastly, what the conspiracy nuts on the left point to is their actual lack of critical thinking skills and low level mental illness which in turn supports the utopian and easily discredited policies of the left.

Paul T. writes:

This is a hoot! Perhaps (taking a leaf from Spartacus), we should ALL declare that we are Laura Wood?

I’m laughing my head off.

Evan H. writes:

What evidence do we have that any of your commenters exist outside your imagination? This is why I subscribe to the “Big Lie” theory of VFR. In fact, now that I think about it, I wouldn’t be surprised to discover you had invented that entire “Free Jinger” site out of whole cloth, simply to throw us off the trail.

P.S. Since tone is so hard to convey over email, I must regrettably include this disclaimer assuring you and your readers that the above was satire :)

Kristor writes:

So when I had coffee with Laura at the train station in Philadelphia, that was you? And then when I saw you in New York City at the end of that train ride, that was you, too?

Man, you are good.

That message from “Thomas Bertonneau” was totally transparent, though. He’s obviously nothing more than another of your noms de plume, which you adopt when you want to assume a scholarly air. And “Moldbug” calling you a liberal? What an obvious subterfuge. Yet you’ve kept it up for so long!

Yours “truly,”
“Kristor Lawson”

Laura Wood writes:

Evan H. wrote:

What evidence do we have that any of your commenters exist outside your imagination?

I have actually been accused of making up all my commenters, of sitting at my computer all day inventing correspondents and writing to myself from various points of view. Can you imagine? I’d have to be a literary artist of the highest order.

December 23

Terry Morris writes:

It would not surprise me to learn that most of the people who believe Laura to be your own invention (and all that goes with that) are taking some kind of anti-psychotic drugs. (Obviously we would never learn that, but I’m just saying.) [LA replies: I think Terry meant to say anti-depressants, not anti-psychotics, and his (I assume unintentinal) attack on anti-psychotics mistake was part of what set off Patrick H.’s reply here.]

Years ago I had an employee who came to work “out of it” one morning. While we were out on a job working he began to talk gibberish about being “a general in my own army,” and weird things like that. I quickly whisked him away from the job and took him back home. That was his last day at work because he immediately went on a drink and drug binge that lasted the better part of a month and ultimately landed him in jail for several months on “resisting arrest” and related charges. My hope in taking him home was that he would sleep it off, but it didn’t work out that way.

But anyway, given the discussions at VFR and at TTH concerning psychotropic drugs in the aftermath of the Newtown school massacre, it occured to me, once I stopped laughing about the stupidity of it, that these idiots as you rightly call them are probably being rendered stupid (and paranoid, and idiotic) at least in part by use of anti-psychotic prescription drugs.

You can tell, I guess, that I have a very healthy fear of the power of such drugs to alter the perceptions of those (otherwise normal, reasonable people in many cases) who ingest them, rendering them stupid, paranoid, idiotic and psychotic. And these people are all around us all the time; they endanger us in many ways not necessarily physical. [LA replies: Again, it’s obvious that Terry really meant anti-depressants rather than anti-psychotics, because people who are otherwise reasonable and normal are not given anti-psychotics.]

LA replies:

That’s very interesting. Consider the extreme anti-social, hostile, and irrational behavior that is common on Web forums. How much of that is connected with severe psychological problems, or with psycho-active drugs which are intended to palliate those problems but in many cases exacerbate them? The population in question—largely male adolescents and young men—is the same as with the mass killers.

LA writes:

A commenter replies to Terry Morris here.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 22, 2012 01:04 PM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):