The Anti-Knight
July 25, 2011
THE PHOTOGRAPHS now in wide circulation of the Norwegian mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik show a man of immense grandiosity. Posing in uniforms or with weapons, looking straight at the camera and smiling with self-satisfaction, Breivik displays heroic pretensions that are in stark contrast to his actual life. According to this profile, Breivik spent much of his time playing video games, a world of risk-free, contained aggression. He does not appear to have done anything more heroic on the political scene than commenting at blogs. He did not run for office or even set up his own website. His crimes were against the defenseless: unarmed young people in bathing suits and office workers sitting at their desks.
Assuming he did act alone, here was a man with an overblown fantasy life revolving around the virtual world of video games and Internet websites. He now has the renown that matches the glorious self-image he cultivated there. That is one of the most disturbing aspects of his horrific crimes. He wanted to be famous and he is.
— Comments —
Alissa writes:
You wrote:
His crimes were against the defenseless: unarmed young people in bathing suits and office workers sitting at their desks.
While I agree with your post not all young people in Europe are defenseless. There are European leftist youth groups similar to “Antifa” scattered throughout Europe. The group “Antifa” derived its name from “Anti-fascist” where youths persecute and terrorize conservatives for “hate speech” and “thought crimes” on European soil. This Norwegian bomber committed an atrocity but the young people are not completely innocent either. A couple of them are bred to be future European liberal leaders and are fanatical followers. In our eyes this is odd but I’ve dialogued with a traditional conservative from Scandinavia once. He mentioned how in a few situations these youth are dangerous, not harmless cute kids. They’re typically thugs and vandals (and may even strike the same blow as black flash mobs in the USA on rare occasions). Of course the Scandinavian media is irredeemably pro-liberal and therefore these events are either brushed under the carpet and hidden or the victims (conservatives) are portrayed as a bunch of ” fascistic, regressive, extreme-right, neo-Nazi, fundamentalist Christians” that deserved the blow. Of course this factor doesn’t make what Breivik did correct and he committed an atrocity without a doubt.
Laura writes:
Whether any of those killed were obnoxious in their political activism or held views that would bring about the demise of Europe is irrelevant to any appraisal of what Breivik did
While I don’t agree with everything he says in this piece, Mencius Moldbug makes one good point about the activists at Utoya: Breivik should have recruited them, not killed them.
Alissa writes:
I don’t believe it’s irrelevant. A minimal factor, yes. Irrelevant, no.
Breivik should have recruited them, not killed them.
The ironic thing is that Breivik believed in this as well. It’s written somewhere in his manifesto. He said how it’s best to dialogue and try to bring activists over to his side (as in recruiting them). It just doesn’t add up that he could do the opposite to what he advocated. Was he framed or is he experiencing a mental illness?
Laura writes:
The leftism of the victims is irrelevant to a moral evaluation of what Breivik actually did.
It is not mental illness. He acted with calculation and a sense of purpose. A person who laughs when stalking unarmed people is demonic. It reminds me of Eric Harris, one of the Columbine killers, who was not mentally ill either.
Alissa writes:
He acted with calculation and a sense of purpose.
Truly. He created a 1500 page manifesto named “2083: A Declaration Of European Independence” and is trying to resurrect some form of European Knight resistance.
A person who laughs when stalking unarmed people is demonic.
Indeed.
