It’s almost as if white Christian conservatives are being pre-demonized for what’s to come, isn’t it? At the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, I wonder if there are any decent books or even online accounts, from those who remember the early years of the Reich and the buildup to all the ugliness, the ghettos and the hell that followed. I wonder if this sounds somehow familiar to them, if they’re still around.
We’re teetering on a repeat of the Great Depression. Severe economic crises led to strongmen leaders, scapegoating and world war, then. All these seeming coincidences might seem to point in that direction now. Tell me I’m overthinking this so I can just dismiss it, it’s a disturbing line of thought.
There is an intellectual disconnect here. Many of his ideas appear completely reasonable, then he kills 90+ children.
Where is the logical or illogical connection?
I’m not buying it.
There’s something rotten in Norway.
[After reading Breivik's diary, which compliments Pam Gellar and Rush Limbaugh]
The writer is a native US speaker. Unless this guy is from the US, the author is no more Norwegian than I am.
"The pages that I have read of Berwick’s Manifesto reflect deep research and rational thought about a serious problem. The Unabomber was misguided, in both thought and action. Berwick’s methods are abominable, but his thoughts are as profound, if not as humorous, as those of Mark Steyn."
I've seen the video based on the Berwick manifesto and I have to agree with almost all of it. I'm starting to read the manifesto and so far, it is dead on. I just think something snapped in this guy, the Norwegian shooter, in order for him to do this. I would have to ask a whole load of questions. Is he under extreme financial pressure? Girlfriend problems? What is his job situation? I can go on and on. I'll also like a full medical examination, I keep thinking of the Austin shooter, Whiteman, back in 1966, they discovered in his autopsy that he had a brain tumor.
The thing is that much of the writing in the manifesto is spot on in its analysis of Islam, the threat posed to Western culture and democratic systems of government by multiculturalism and by Marxism and their sympathizers. There is little evidence in the first 800 or so pages that this is guy who would become so radicalized he would shoot up and blow up innocent people.
He strongly defends and argues in favor of the constitutional rights we enjoy in the United States. He rejects Nazism and other “hateful” ideologies. He shows understandable alarm at the loss of freedoms in the name of tolerance. None of these would be foreign to conservative philosophy. You can tell he researched his subject very well and the argument he presents in favor of protecting Western culture is one I would not fault.
However later in the manifesto he starts getting more heavily into a ultra nationalist argument with
comparisons to Custer and Sitting Bull (he sees himself as a Sitting Bull against the Custer of Islam) and you can see a growing acceptance of armed resistance and action to reach his goals. When he starts his Templar Knights I think it is a safe bet to say he went off the rails big time.
The point being he was right about many things but for whatever reason he failed to grasp that the crimes he committed were the complete antithesis of the philosophy he claimed to believe.
One of the ideals Western culture rests on is the ideal of being a system of laws not of men. His crimes went against that 100%.
"So this guy declared war against muslim immigrants eh? Why do I suspect most of the people he killed were ethnic norwegians?"
They were members of the main Norwegian leftist/multiculturalist party; it was a party youth retreat he targeted. His reasoning was that the muslim invaders would never have got a foothold in the nation, without the connivance of the native leftists -- hence native leftists bore greater guilt. By targeting a youth group, he ensured that many of those leftists would never cast even one vote.
Evil. But perfectly logical.
There's no "freedom of speech" over there. There simply is NOT any lawful venue to protest, if you are a European and you are against multiculturalism, mass immigration, Islamization, and white ethnoreplacement. Dare to breath a word of protest, and you're pegged as a "NeoNazi". You're just not allowed to express that opinion.
John F Kennedy wisely noted: “Those who make peaceful protest impossible make violent protest inevitable."
Of course I don't condone Breivik's violence, but, I hold the governments and the elite classes of Norway and the rest of Europe partially responsible, for making respectable peaceful dissent IMPOSSIBLE on this issue. It was only a matter of time before someone got frustrated enough at being silenced, to start acting out.
a party youth retreat??
what the hell is that?
Sounds like a hitler youth party.
Breivik’s views are a trite caricature of how socialists paint non-believers. He could be carrying out a false flag operation.
Well I see that others have expanded upon my point, i.e. those who promote flooding Norway with Moslems who refuse to assimilate into the traditional culture are gladly painting Breivik as insane because they can paint his observations of the damage done by cultural marxism and the jihad against western culture as insane by association.
If ABB hadn’t come along when he did, the Norwegian left would have had to invent him. And it’s entirely possible, with the left’s and the islamists obsession with “false flags”, that they did.
"Right wing extremism" is an expression which lacks explanatory power, and tends to suppress actual thought.
Certainly the action in question was extreme, that's a given. But what does "right wing" actually mean?
Other than guilt by association for anyone who's not a socialist, that is . . .
I believe that Breivik is not just sane, but that his actions were carefully and expertly planned, well executed, and importantly, achieved Breiviks goals. And in doing so, he has altered the future course of his nation.
Here is some background not widely covered by the media.
1) The Workers’ Youth League (Norway) was founded in 1927 with the merger of the Communist Youth League and Socialist Youth League of Norway. While it officially considers its founding based on the 1903 Norwegian Social-Democratic Youth League, its real impulse came in response to the formation of the Hitler Jugend in Germany, in 1922.
In all of these cases, whether communist or socialist, the purpose of these leagues was to create an ideologically pure generation to replace the current communist or socialist, socialist-fascist political leadership.
Importantly, over the course of almost 100 years, these youth leagues maintained the idealistic, ideological focus of their political movements. This is a winning strategy against conservatism in any form, because conservatives have no inflexible doctrines, and tend to use a static defense of retaining the status quo, whatever it is. Which invariably loses.
2) In modern internationalist-socialism, a primary goal is to eliminate national borders and national, cultural, and ethnic identities, as well as philosophies other than their own. To do this it encourages unrestricted immigration, on condition the immigrants give political loyalty to the left.
Norway has a relatively tiny population of only 4.7m, so they are remarkably easy to infiltrate with immigrants until Norwegians are in the minority.
3) So the end result with be an absolute majority of political power for the left, the destruction of Norway as a unique nation, and the Norwegians as a unique people and culture, what remains being a “generic” administrative socialist district of Europe, lead by an ideologically pure elite of internationalists with no loyalty whatsoever to what had been Norway.
4) However, the left made a major mistake by “putting all its eggs in one basket”, with virtually its entire future generation of socialist leaders on an island with no ready means of escape.
Breivik first used a bomb to distract the socialist government, the arrived at the island to systematically kill everyone on it. Once he had achieved that goal, his mission was over and he surrendered peacefully.
5) What he achieved was to completely handicap not just that political party but their anti-Norway agenda. Almost by default, they will soon lose political power, and the more conservative opposition will derail the most destructive of their schemes, hopefully expelling a large number of these immigrants, requiring integration of the rest, restoring Norway’s national pride and culture, and to dismantle much of the socialist government’s bureaucracy.
As such, after many years, Breivik may be regarded as a national hero, though he will be bitterly vilified and cursed by the left even longer, as a “counterrevolutionary.”
"So, that would make him a "National Socialist."
More or less.
The media and "intellectuals" have pushed the phony meme for a half Century that Fascism is from the right. In fact, it is a leftist philosophy as it's proper name, National Socialism implies. The pre war fight for control of Germany was between Communist groups having nothing to do with the right.