Over here. I'm sure you will find some of the ideas familiar.
Special guest appearance by Denis MacShane:
@carlbildt Are we allowed to name ideology behind Oslo killings? Or do we stay in denial?
...who 21 hours on has not yet managed to name the ideology behind the Oslo killings.
Breivik seems to have been rather prolific, he wrote a blog called
Fjordman and he's published a book called.. Defeating Eurabia.
via Richard Silverstein.
Posted by: Wajahath Dean | July 23, 2011 at 03:50 PM
and 20 hours later we're still waiting for:
"How long before first article in left-lib press saying it's all Norway's fault".
Posted by: skidmarx | July 23, 2011 at 03:51 PM
Compare and contrast:
(from the beeb live feed page):
1559:
Norway's Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere says Norway is united in deep mourning.
"I found people shocked, crying but at the same time there was a lot of caring. And people came together. Those who had found their loved ones alive stayed on for those who had not found their loved ones. Showing that kind of solidarity. It was a moment where the task was to be a human being and to be close to people and we'll do politics later."
Posted by: CMcM | July 23, 2011 at 04:17 PM
Man, it's really "Don't read the comments day."
From a Norwegian comment thread -
Fckin commie socialist sh1t. I'm sure there was a Hiter II in the making from this crowd. The guy should be a celebrated hero for getting rid of these cancers to society. I mean if only we could put l1beral fcks on a small island and have him to go town on our cancers.
Posted by: JamesP | July 23, 2011 at 04:37 PM
Anyone else get a slightly queasy feeling, reading through blog comments you would have completely ignored under other circumstances? No criticism of B&T implied. It's fascinating, but uncomfortable.
Apparently he was a melonfarmer (
not
a Norwegian->English error). Whether this was a cover for large purchases of fertiliser will doubtless emerge.Posted by: bert | July 23, 2011 at 04:47 PM
Anyone else get a slightly queasy feeling, reading through blog comments you would have completely ignored under other circumstances? No criticism of B&T implied. It's fascinating, but uncomfortable.
Apparently he was a melonfarmer (not a Norwegian->English error). Whether this was a cover for large purchases of fertiliser will doubtless emerge.
Posted by: bert | July 23, 2011 at 04:48 PM
Doublepost, sorry.
The comments I'm referring to are the ones translated at Jamie's first link.
Posted by: bert | July 23, 2011 at 04:50 PM
And why in the name of sanity does the BBC think it wise to get a quote from the Henry Jackson Society (16:41)?
Posted by: chris y | July 23, 2011 at 05:19 PM
Malfunctioning link there - try this.
It says:
1641: Robin Simcox, from the Henry Jackson Society, says the attacks mark the "end of naivety" for Norway.
1642: He says he thinks Norway will soon see policies to reflect this.
(On the original, of course, the 1642 part shows above the 1641, rather than as I've produced it.)
It's not clear what Mr Simcox thinks Norway has been naïve about, or what policy changes he expects to see.
Posted by: ejh | July 23, 2011 at 05:27 PM
Malfunctioning link there - try this.
It says:
1641: Robin Simcox, from the Henry Jackson Society, says the attacks mark the "end of naivety" for Norway.
1642: He says he thinks Norway will soon see policies to reflect this.
(On the original, of course, the 1642 part shows above the 1641, rather than as I've produced it.)
It's not clear what Mr Simcox thinks Norway has been naïve about, or what policy changes he expects to see.
Posted by: ejh | July 23, 2011 at 05:27 PM
End of naivety? I seem to vaguely remember that they were invaded by the Nazis.
Posted by: Wajahath Dean | July 23, 2011 at 06:21 PM
Yeah. I seem to vaguely remember a guy called Vidkun Quisling, too.
Posted by: chris y | July 23, 2011 at 06:28 PM
Quite
Posted by: ejh | July 23, 2011 at 06:32 PM
http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/12/fjordman-at-frontpage-magazine.html
Posted by: David | July 23, 2011 at 07:31 PM
I was aware of him at the time, since he showed up in referrals. I want to say that he wrote us and asked for a link, but I'm not sure.
He doesn't seem to've been BNP-style far right, for one thing, he was a freemason, which fascists tend to dislike, but a eurabia transatlantic wingnut of good standing.
Posted by: David | July 23, 2011 at 07:42 PM
Has it been established whether Breivik and Fjordman are the same person? I saw somewhere that B just recommended Fjordman's work.
Posted by: jamie | July 23, 2011 at 08:15 PM
Gates of Vienna, where Fjordman contributes, denies he is Breivik.
Posted by: David | July 23, 2011 at 08:26 PM
The Richard Silverstein article I linked to above says that Breivik contacted a neo-nazi site realisten.se about a year and a half ago and claimed he was Fjordman.
Posted by: Wajahath Dean | July 23, 2011 at 08:47 PM
The location given on the Fjordman blog is Trondelag, which is on the Atlantic coast of Norway, whereas Breivik comes from Oslo (southeast), so I doubt if it's the same person.
The ideology is much the same however.
Posted by: Paddy M | July 23, 2011 at 10:12 PM
Realisten.se now says (in Swedish) that ABB contacted an associate of theirs some time ago, claiming he was Fjordman, but that they can't verify it. In his own writings (in Norwegian) he writes of Fjordman as a source of inspiration, not as an alter ego. Probably not the same guy.
Posted by: alle | July 24, 2011 at 03:36 AM
I'm sure you will find some of the ideas familiar.
Familiar indeed. 'Cultural Marxism', the Frankfurt School, feminism and political correctness as the root of the problem, the EU apparat as its enforcer, Muslim immigration and terrorism as its consequence or indeed as its weapon ... now where have we heard these ideas before?
An ideology for justifying violence against racial minorities, the Left and the labour movement has been developing in plain sight, rather than in the underworld of NSDAP re-enactors. And it overlaps mainstream right-wing thinking.
Posted by: Ken MacLeod | July 24, 2011 at 08:18 AM
There are also, I reckon, a lot of people about who hate immigrants and multiculturalism, and whose small businesses have been going pear-shaped.
Posted by: ejh | July 24, 2011 at 09:53 AM
I woke up in the middle of the night with the phrase "the military wing of melanie phillips" in my mouth. I cannot possibly endorse its adoption anywhere, or comment on its appropriateness.
Posted by: belle le triste | July 24, 2011 at 10:40 AM
How direct is the connection between the ideology and the shooting spree, though?
Reading through his stuff makes me think of the 'creative writing' by that guy from Virginia Tech. I can think of all kinds of arguments against the ideas Ken summarises. That they might inspire a mass murder is a long way down the list.
This is serious stuff, though. I can imagine if you've had the EDL march past your house you might have a different view.
Posted by: bert | July 24, 2011 at 12:41 PM
The connection isn't really that tenuous when you have Anne Coulter 'joking' about Oklahoma city-style bombings against the New York Times and Palin putting up maps with gun sights over the names of democrats.
Posted by: Nick L | July 24, 2011 at 02:30 PM
Get a load of the cognitive dissonance why dontcha.
Posted by: Barry Freed | July 24, 2011 at 03:36 PM
Well to be fair, its not real obvious why those beliefs would lead you to shooting the children of members of a centre-left party. There has to be some genuine madness to lead to that conclusion.
Whatever else one might think of him, Timothy McVeigh's actions did at least have internal consistency with his views. Whereas shooting white liberal's children because you oppose all the awful things that the Muzzers might do (such as, presumbaly, shoot innocent children) lacks even that.
Posted by: Cian | July 24, 2011 at 04:21 PM
No, Cian - the key bit of the Philipsoverse is that its the lefties who are the real enemy, since they are deliberately letting in Teh Moos in order to buy votes, further their sinister black helicopter goal, or dilute the White Race. This allows the fash to have less cogdiss, since it's white guys behind it all.
Posted by: Chris Williams | July 24, 2011 at 04:54 PM
There is internal consistency with Breivik in the sense that his ideology hung together on the concept of a betrayal of real Norwegians and Europeans by the left, the "cultural marxists", the multiculturalists, the people using Muslims as their proxies to destroy western civilisation, etc. Given that this ideology is actually fairly widespread among "anti-jihadists" it's quite logical to assume that someone would take direct action against the traitors. It's like the stalhlelm: it's a milieu and it can attract people capable of anything, nothing or something in between.
Incidentally, any sign that the Turner Diaries cropped up in his manifesto?
Posted by: jamie | July 24, 2011 at 04:55 PM
If you believe that a conspiracy of 'cultural Marxists' has betrayed Christian Europe by throwing open the doors to the Saracens then it makes perfect 'sense'. After all, it was them who stabbed us in the back, wasn't it? As some of the Gates of Europe posters acknowledge, the views that lead to Breivik's actions are identical to theirs. Their shock arises from the realisation that in this case they, not bearded brown people, are the barbarians, the extremists, the hate-preachers.
Its interesting to look at The Spectator, Standpoint, the Telegraph and the anti-Muslim web of blogs in this light. Remember what was said about Hizb ut-Tahrir in similar circumstances (and not necessarily unfairly): not a terrorist organisation but possibly a conveyor-belt for terror.
Posted by: Nick L | July 24, 2011 at 05:03 PM
Actually it was probably unfair to include the Telegraph there, they aren't necessarily responsible for their comments boards.
Posted by: Nick L | July 24, 2011 at 05:13 PM
His master plan seems to have been spread his ideology in the long term, and educate receptive European audiences through propaganda of the deed, until anti-Muslim forces are strong and organized enough to seize power. Part of the plot was to employ terrorism to sow confusion and demoralize the enemy, but he explicitly cautions against attacking Muslims in the early stages, since that would be counterproductive. To quote Breivik himself:
Phase 1 (2010-2030)
The ratio of attacks in phase 1 should follow the given guidelines: 90%+ aimed at concentrations of category A and B traitors and less than 10% on the other objectives
Phase 2 (2030-2070)
70% + aimed at concentrations of category A and B traitors and less than 30% on sabotage and other objectives.
We will focus on the Muslims AFTER we have seized political and military control. At that point, we will start deportation campaigns.
(By Cat A & B traitors he refers to European enablers of 'Islamization', people aligned with 'Cultural Marxism' etc. Arbeiderpartiet and AUF belong to this category.)
Posted by: alle | July 24, 2011 at 05:28 PM
You can download the manifesto here.
He mentions Mad Mel AND quotes Jeremy Clarkson.
Posted by: Wajahath Dean | July 24, 2011 at 05:35 PM
Re: cognitive dissonance
One would expect a mass murderer to post more extreme comments. This is incredibly strange.
Yes, because any halfway-intelligent would-be mass murderer is going to announce his intentions to all ans sundry on teh Interwebs, isn't he?
Posted by: Paddy M | July 24, 2011 at 06:19 PM
*all and sundry
Posted by: Paddy M | July 24, 2011 at 06:20 PM
It's also indicative of the echo chamber the anti-Muslim right have created for themselves that the people posting on a website that compares immigration to an imperial invasion do not consider themselves 'extreme'.
Posted by: Nick L | July 24, 2011 at 06:55 PM
Well, indeed. And from alle's excerpt, Brievik seems to have envisaged terror campaigns going on side by side with anti-muslim and anti-leftwing agitation. Two means towards the same goal.
Posted by: jamie | July 24, 2011 at 07:13 PM
One part of the echo chamber has decided that the insulation isn't sufficiently robust:
"Note from this blog’s owners: Due to the unusual situation in which it has recently found itself, this blog will be closed to comments until further notice."
Posted by: Paddy M | July 24, 2011 at 07:43 PM
Yup, they're all there: Melanie Philiips, Roger Scruton, Mark Steyn, Anthony Browne, Jeremy Clarkson
Andrew Bostom, Keith Windschuttle...
He's also terribly interested in the Phalange.
Posted by: Chris Brooke | July 24, 2011 at 08:16 PM
And Ted Hughes!
Posted by: Chris Brooke | July 24, 2011 at 08:21 PM
I like Ted Hughes.
Posted by: ejh | July 24, 2011 at 08:36 PM
Is the anti-political correctness meme as prevalent on the right in the UK and Europe generally as it is in the US? (I remember my current events history teacher in High School back in the early 80's - a socialist and all around great guy who'd been run out of several school districts for his politics - wearing a "politically correct" button, but that was well before Roger Ailes and ilk sucked out all the self-deprecating irony of the phrase and made it the new right wing bête noire.)
Posted by: Barry Freed | July 24, 2011 at 08:49 PM
*** Now, if even a trace of the blood of the Men of the North runs in your veins, or if you have lived long enough among them to have acquired some of their spirit, the hair on the back of your neck will rise when you read these words, and you will say, “Yes! This is the hero, the man who will defend us during the troubles that are surely coming.”
Holger Danske has put me in mind of my favourite English poet, Ted Hughes.
Hughes was a Yorkshireman, and the blood of the Danes runs thick in the veins of Yorkshire. Especially in the North Riding — the closer one gets to Whitby, the more natural blond hair in evidence, and the more obvious the Danish place names.
Ted Hughes wrote a number of poems that touched on the Men of the North, and I’ve collected some samples below... ***
Posted by: Chris Brooke | July 24, 2011 at 08:52 PM
Barry: there was a burst of it in the nineties, but it then regrouped and began coming hot and heavy over the past 8-9 years, at the prompting, I think, of US rightwingers.
Incidentally, the "war on Christmas" makes an appearance in Brievik's survey. Yet another import I think.
Posted by: jamie | July 24, 2011 at 08:59 PM
... Daniel Pipes, Christopher Booker, Bruce Bawer (who writes for Standpoint magazine), Scott Burgess, Michael Gove (!!!), Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Dan Hannan...
Posted by: Chris Brooke | July 24, 2011 at 09:03 PM
Christ. Oh, absolutely. (And for which apologies).
Posted by: Barry Freed | July 24, 2011 at 09:06 PM
Naomi Klein complains on Twitter that he quoted her too...
Posted by: ejh | July 24, 2011 at 09:07 PM
Well, yes, but he also says that "I gave up after a few chapters", and he's interested in her as an example of how far "self-criticism has progressed in the political Left a generation after we “defeated” Socialism". The people I'm listing are people he cites uncritically.
Posted by: Chris Brooke | July 24, 2011 at 09:11 PM
I had a brief burst of optimism that HP might take this opportunity to change direction. It was not to be.
Posted by: Chris Williams | July 24, 2011 at 09:13 PM
Tony Blair, incidentally, is one of "the most dangerous European cultural Marxists".
Posted by: Chris Brooke | July 24, 2011 at 09:31 PM