Anders Behring Brevik's online following and the way forward.

[Furunculus]

I mean the fascist, extreme right.

There is a dilution of the term, of the political current, coming from two directions. One, succesful hardright parties have developed a 'fascism with a human face'. A kind of fascism-lite. Spearheaded by clean-cut poster boys. Or girls. Not the basement=dwelling troglodytes with nazi-tattoos of old, but smart, clean, rhetorically gifted career politicians. Sometimes, one does wonder where form follows content, where fascism turns into social-fascism, the way socialism and reactionarism have been tamed into social-democracy and Christian-democracy.
Two, European mainstream is becoming de-sensitivied towards hardright issues. Things are now said openly, even by non-hardright parties, which were considered 'incitement to hatred' fifteen years ago.

fair enough, but i believe the populist right is a far more significant force, now and in the future, for european politics.

re ther european mainstream is becoming de-sensitivied towards [[hard]]right issues - this to me is all part of the normal tangent away from socialism that has been happening for nearly a generation now, and will continue to occur for another generation, until there is no real difference between what people claim to be social-liberalism and social-democracy.

[Fragony]

Thoroughly excellent post Hax, I am very much agreed, and seem to remember trying to advance a similar argument vis-a-vis the BNP in british politics.

Never back a wild animal into a corner, there seems to be a lesson in there somewhere for the healthy governance of a representative democracy.

I dare saying that if Norway had a Geert Wilders who's rethoric goes too far even for me, this probably wouldn't have happened. The idiotic head of the labour party here seems to persist in the old way though, it wasn't enough for him that Wilders distantiated himself, the implication is obvious. Glad to say that most show the same dignity Norway has (which can't be praised enough), save a few collumnists nobody takes seriously

[Louis VI the Fat]

As much as I hate to say it, I may actually kind of agree with Fragony. Look at what's happened here. It makes me want to cry, to be honest. These acts of violence are inexcusable and I hope that the perpetrator realises to full extent how horrific his actions were.

However, what society have we wrought in which the only way people can express their opinions through the means of violence? Even if this was indeed the act of a lone wolf, a single person that in his crazy mind decided the best way to help society is by the cold execution of several dozens of young people who came together to find a way to improve their country in their own way, doesn't it tell us something about the way how we have collectively alienated certain people from society, by automatically refusing to consider their opinions, even if they may be of a controversial nature.

I fear that several subjects have become indiscussable in our democratic societies after World War II. These subjects include eugenics, population control, state-sanctioned discrimination and problems with immigration. I do not think the fall of the Berlin wall had anything to do with it. We have suffered from a collective guilt complex after the horrors of World War II, and for a good reason, because many of our states (in)directly supported the nazis, of which many people here are aware and I don't have to explain. It's good that we have decided that such horrible events should never take place again, but at what cost?

Perhaps if the extreme right wing had not been alienated, but rather had been fought at on their own terms, such a situation could've been avoided. Perhaps. And even then, is it really worth the risk? I'm not sure.

An excellent post, which unfortunately overlooks two things:

Those PC taboos are taboos of old. They are already ancient, of a previous era. There is no silence. There is no silencing of hardright proponents. Far from it. Immigration, the failure of the multicultural society are not taboos, they completely dominate European debate. So much so, that one could rather speak of an obsession. Every frontpage of every European newspaper, every internet forum, is all about Muslims, immigration, resurgent nationalist reflexes.

Secondly, Norway's hardright isn't marginalised at all. As everywhere else, it has been winning elections, is now Norway's second largest party, has governed Norway by propping up a rightwing coalition.


It is in this atmosphere of broken taboos, of the hardright's meteoric rise to power, that this terror attack took place. Not in an atmosphere of repression. Although the perception of the terrorist itslef might have been one of repression, and his frustrations based on his thinking Europe is not turning hardright.

[Furunculus]

Secondly, Norway's hardright isn't marginalised at all. As everywhere else, it has been winning elections, is now Norway's second largest party, has governed Norway by propping up a rightwing coalition.

I take it by "hardright" we are using your definition as previously given; "fascist, extreme right."

So the progress party, which according to wiki has the following platform:

"Founded by Anders Lange in 1973 largely as an anti-tax movement, the party highly values individual rights and supports the downsizing of bureaucracy and increased market economy,[8] although it also supports an increased use of the uniquely Norwegian Oil Fund to invest in infrastructure.[9] The party in addition seeks a more restrictive immigration policy and tougher integration and law and order measures."

Is now to be branded fascist and extreme?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_Party_(Norway)

i feel like i must reiterate my previous call:

can we make a distinction between the extremists and non-conformists of the right please?

ukip have been winning seats, but they are populist-right.
the bnp is arguably hard-right and they have been losing seats.

those finnish fellows, as well as Geerts bunch are likewise populist, and thus fail to conform with political orthodoxy, but they are not extreme in a manner that would justify the label hard-right.

[Fragony]

'It is in this atmosphere of broken taboos, of the hardright's meteoric rise to power, that this terror attack took place. Not in an atmosphere of repression'

It only looks like that, in reality what you call the hard-right is still teethless, it will take at least 20 years to get the babyboomer generation from the (unelected) key positions. Harsh words in parlement mean nothing

[HoreTore]

Ya.

Glad for this thread because I couldn't in the other out of respect for the victims, but the multicultural left creates it's own monsters. If people from 100% white neighbourhoods who put their children on 100% white schools keep going for your eyes when you aren't 100% sure that everything is 100% ok, no doubt allowed, people are to break at some point. There is no reason for mass-immigration but votes for labour and that warm feeling it gives them. If other people have to live your dreams you will inevitably wake up in a nightmare

Saw the pics of the day before, 100% white summercamp

STOP SPREADING YOUR GODDAMNED LIES.

I'm not asking you to change your political stance, frags. I'm not asking you to vote labour or praise immigration. I have no problems with you continuing your right-wing gibberish and general lies. I have already dealt with your claim/outright lie that we lefties live in white neighborhoods, and I am not surprised to see you disregard it and continue as if you didn't know it to be a lie.

However.

I ask one thing of you. That you stop spreading the lies about the victims of this attack, the lies that directly lead to their branding as traitors and subsequent execution. In the light of things, I consider this a rather modest request.

Utøya was far from '100%' white, and had you been interested in something besides spewing your filth, you would've found out easily.

http://www.dagbladet.no/terror/ofrene/

The above link contains the confirmed names of the dead and missing. 38 so far. There is little reason to suspect that his killings was anything but random, and that he killed mostly everyone he was able to. So, it can be assumed that the makeup of the dead largely reflects the makeup of the camp.

7 of them are in some way not ethnic norwegian. 7 out of 38 is roughly 18%, or about one in five, which corresponds nicely with my impression from the time I was there in 2008. As the percentage of immigrants in the country as a whole is around 8-9%, this means that the immigrant representation was about double. Consider the extremely low percentage of immigrants who vote, the represenation of immigrants was actually sky-high.

As an additional bonus, here is Brevik's street: http://www.1881.no/?Query=Hoffsveien+skøyen&qt=8

While I obviously haven't looked through all 1500 residents, I have browsed a little, and it looks quite white to me.


And this marks the end of this particular discussion for me. I have said all I want to say, and will say no more. Don't take this as an attempt to keep you quiet, frags, I really don't care if you continue dicussing it. Just know that there will be no more involvement from me.

The youths at Utøya were young and idealistic, whose goal for being there was to do their part in making the world a slightly better place for everyone.

Lies after lies made them out as evil monsters intent on destroying the rest of the population through scheming and treachery. This eventually cost 68 of them their lives.


Have some respect for yourself, Frags, don't believe in such horrible lies.

[Fragony]

Read what you want to read

[Adrian II]

Saw the pics of the day before, 100% white summercamp

Not true at all. Besides, what a cheap excuse for an argument. Some people have no shame.

AII

[Strike For The South]

Read what you want to read

\

But there are pictures

"Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please."

[Fragony]

Not true at all. Besides, what a cheap excuse for an argument. Some people have no shame.

AII

You know better then taking it litteraly, but feel free to do so. Ask yourself this, you know the research done on lone wolfs, social system deficiency, doesn't that count anymore when the system is yours?

[Strike For The South]

A man does get 300,000 NOK by being a lone wolf, my money is someone is funding this old chap

[Adrian II]

A man does get 300,000 NOK by being a lone wolf, my money is someone is funding this old chap

My money is on Alan Lake. We discussed that in the other thread. Lake is a businesman/millionaire and sponsor of the EDL and a very militant sort of fellow who may have supported Breivik in various ways.

AII

[Strike For The South]

My money is on Alan Lake. We discussed that in the other thread. Lake is a businesman/millionaire and sponsor of the EDL and a very militant sort of fellow who may have supported Breivik in various ways.

AII

Watching his "Four freedoms worldwide"

[Fragony]

A man does get 300,000 NOK by being a lone wolf, my money is someone is funding this old chap

Not buying the 'lone wolf' either

[Strike For The South]

Not buying the 'lone wolf' either

Ask yourself this, you know the research done on lone wolfs, social system deficiency, doesn't that count anymore when the system is yours?

That seems like a pretty direct question

MOAR KITTENS

[Shibumi]

This guys an idiot.

That guy might think the same of you. One of you might be right.

From my perspective, he very clearly put a lot, a lot of thought into this. Sure, crazy delusional thoughts, but still 1600 pages of it. As I have read it, the guy is clearly intelligent, but he also have serious traumas / psychological problems.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Norwegian gunman has given hate-filled racists a bad name, insist EDL
As links between gunman Anders Breivik and the EDL emerged the far-right group responded by saying that its members are able to draw a line between ‘intolerance and hatred’ and ‘gun-toting killing spree’.
A spokesperson for the EDL, Joseph Butler, said, “In situations like this its easy to have a knee-jerk reaction and start to question the actions of all decent, hard-working racists.”
“But it’s important to understand that we are a non-violent organisation. We are committed to making the lives of people who aren’t like us a living hell by exclusively peaceful means.”

“Yes we share a common ideology with Mr. Breivik but in this situation our mantra is – love the racism, hate the racist.”

Rival racists the BNP appealed to those who had become disillusioned with the EDL to join their party.
Chairman Rudolph Lee said, “Don’t be fooled by the weasely words of the EDL, it is the BNP that provides a true home for hate-filled moderates in Britain today.”
http://newsthump.com/2011/07/25/norw...me-insist-edl/

If there is one tragic result of all this, it must be that this gunner gives all decent, hard-working fascist hatemongerers a bad name.

~~o~~o~~<<oOo>>~~o~~o~~

British society is the only thing ruining what is an otherwise perfectly pleasant place to come and take the blame for a country’s social and economic struggles, according to immigrants polled by pressure group, Liberty.

The poll was commissioned in the wake of Prime Minister David Cameron’s claim that immigrants systematically refuse to congregate at the cluttered bosom of Mother Britannia with their steadfast refusal to learn enough English to realise just how much their neighbours hate them.

A thousand immigrants, supposedly contributing to the erosion of British pastimes such as fish and chips by the seaside and urinating in the street, were asked what was the worst thing about living in Britain with all answering ‘British society’.
Immigrant Rajesh Sharma explained, “You know, we get that when we are given our three bed room semi-detached house and weekly citizen eclipsing allowances, it’s not really ‘free’.”
“Life among the British society is the debt that we pay.”

“We must be prepared for the most horrendous abuse from the nation when everything goes tits up on the job front, and shoulder the blame that would otherwise be directed at the government.”
“They come knocking at our doors instead saying oh ‘you take our jobs, you take our jobs,’ waving sticks and wanting to kill us.”
“But that’s not true. We don’t take your jobs, we just take the benefits paid for by taxes taken from you. That’s very different.”
http://newsthump.com/2011/04/14/mass...st-immigrants/

[Furunculus]

Don't worry folks, the EU is on the case:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...776985,00.html

European Commissioner for Home Affairs Cecilia Malmström - "I have many times expressed my concern over xenophobic parties who build their unfortunately quite successful rhetoric on negative opinions on Islam and other so-called threats against society," she wrote. "This creates a very negative environment, and sadly there are too few leaders today who stand up for diversity and for the importance of having open, democratic and tolerant societies where everybody is welcome."

Define the "everyone" who is to be welcome:
a) Everyone who lives in the society?
b) Everyone who lives in the society, as well as those who come to live in that society from outside?
c) Everyone, as in quite literally; anyone and everyone who should have a desire to live in that society?

Perhaps if there was a clearer understanding and acceptance as to what is an appropriate level of immigration then people might not let fear of the third option (c) colour their judgement over the very principle and merits of immigration itself.