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.
That the immigrants are also deeply ideological and in strong opposition to leftism is of small consequence to the left, because it sees them as inherently weak and corruptible, their ideologies far weaker than conservative nationalism.
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.”
yefragetuwrabrumuy, Free Republic 83 Comments
[5/2/2012 3:15:29 AM]
Fundie Index: 106
Submitted By: Rabbit of Caerbannog
1 2 3 4
@Raised by Horses
The utterly tragic thing is that you're right. The platforms Hitler and Franco used to gain power would be denounced as Socialism by the modern American right. They would balk in horror at the concept of getting the money under control using the Government instead of Private Sector pixie dust. They would be outraged over the use of, say, Hitler's government policies that protected German markets at the expense of free trade. The People's Car and the Autobahn would be ridiculed as a complete, job-killing waste of taxpayer money by Modern Right.
5/2/2012 7:42:19 AM
after many years, Breivik may be regarded as a national hero
The rogue general who tried to start a war between the US and USSR in the James Bond movie, "Octopussy", had a similar delusion.
5/2/2012 7:51:55 AM
Why don't you just say Hitler was awesome and call it a day, you Complete Monster
5/2/2012 8:03:31 AM
No, what he achieved was to completely discredit his aims and ideals and everything associated with them, and to set back his cause, perhaps forever.
5/2/2012 8:33:45 AM
So - despite all your rationalisational tl;dr - yehfragtherightwingenemy, what you're saying is that you support, nay, condone the atrocity committed by Breivik?
And all this - along with their claims about a certain Austrian not being a Christian, and that he was pro-abortion (when the evidence to the contrary exists) - just to ensure they won't be compared with said Austrian. A big PROTIP, Free Repubic & all your ilk: Hitler* was a right-winger. [/Reverse Godwin]
National Socialism =/= Social Democracy. Deal with it.
*- He was also a Christian (and any Teabagger/Neocunt out there doesn't have the right to say otherwise; the evidence to prove he was exists), and he banned abortion in his Third Reich; long prison terms for the women who underwent said abortions, and the doctors who performed said abortions were executed.
Them's the facts (backed up by evidence), and they're not up for discussion. Ah, but then, to quote the God Emperor of the Teabaggger/Neocunt, Ronnie Raygun: 'Facts are stupid things'.
'Americans hate complexity'
-Stephen Fry, "Stephen Fry in America"
5/2/2012 8:42:40 AM
Doesn't this belong in CTSTDT?
5/2/2012 8:48:11 AM
Rabbit of Caerbannog
"No, what he achieved was to completely discredit his aims and ideals and everything associated with them, and to set back his cause, perhaps forever."
And I couldn't be happier about THAT part.
5/2/2012 8:51:14 AM
Everyone else has already mentioned it, so I will ignore the fact that the OP is defending a child-murderer and will focus on some other parts of this rant:
1) While Hitler was a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party in 1922, at that point he and the party were virtually unknown because hyperinflation had not yet hit. Therefore, it it highly doubtful that Hitler could have created the Hitler Youth before he had even the slightest chance of power!
2) In Europe, there is a clear difference between communism and socialism. Communism is the authoritarian philosophy of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and thus not very popular, especially since it had half the continent under its thrall until my generation was born. Socialism, on the other hand, is the term Europeans (and Canadians, and Australians for that matter, and pretty much everyone on the planet except Americans) use to describe such practices as reducing poverty and increasing the national standard of living. Only a total sociopath can be opposed to that. It has nothing to do with communism for one simple reason: In 1968, Alexander Dubchek, who was not an authoritarian despite being the leader of Czechoslovakia, tried to placate the Soviets by instituting leftist economic policies, but allowing his people the same political freedoms as people in the West enjoyed. If the USSR were truly socialist they would have had no opposition to this. However, they did. The Soviet Union invaded Czechoslovakia, deposed Dubchek, and made its satellite state authoritarian until the Velvet Revolution twenty years later, thus proving that communists hate freedom as much as fascists do. That was rather long, but I thought it needed to be brought up in order to show the difference between socialism and communism.
3) The OP has yet to explain why allowing immigration is a bad thing. I doubt that the OP is opposed to people from other Western European nations moving to Norway if they so desired.
4) Norway is a Scandinavian country. Thus, it is more socialist than we in the United States could ever be. The mere notion in Norway of adopting such uniquely American practices of no universal health care, letting the poor die, and being a rationality-denying fundamentalist Christian is utterly anathema to the population, thus proving once more that the US is far far inferior to its European cousins.
5) What Breivik has done has backfired spectacularly, as he has just shown the right wing's true colors. Any political group which resorts to terrorism, no matter the reason, has proved that it has no legitimate arguments and thus has forever lost the debate. The far right has even less support now than it did before the tragedy, much like how Islamic extremism has much less support now than it had before 9/11. Anybody who tried to defend Osama bin Laden would be rightfully abhorred, and the same applies to the defenders of any other terrorist. Also, remember that Norway is the country which hates fascism so much that it reinstated the death penalty just so that the population could legally kill the fascist whom the Nazis put in control of their country during the occupation.
6) The OP is a Complete Monster for defending Breivik.
5/2/2012 9:08:33 AM
I claim a trifecta! That is racism, conspiracy, and (implicit) islamophobia sine these are the immigrants he hates!
And Breivik was a scared pussy once the armed police arrived - he was successful because he was killing unarmed children - no hero he!
And my hat off to you brave Rabbit, for continuing to patrol the outer fringes of nastiness
5/2/2012 9:39:52 AM
You stupid fuckers always pick the psychopaths as heroes, so this does not surprise me much. Most of you retarded Freepers would have goosestepped in time with der Fuhrer in 1932.
Godwin be damned.
5/2/2012 9:46:21 AM
That fucker killed 77 people and the maximum penalty he can get is 23 years in jail. Police should have shot him dead right on the scene.
5/2/2012 10:02:06 AM
I wish an unpleasant future for you and your little jackbooted friends. Please, die like the coward you are.
5/2/2012 10:12:40 AM
Words fail me, but I'll do the best I can: You. Despicable. Cunt.
I hope the next delusional nazi spree killer kils your kids while at school.We'll see how well your exalted opinions hold then...
5/2/2012 10:19:12 AM
Jesus would be proud of you.
5/2/2012 10:42:14 AM
No, it only means that his case will be reevaluated after the maximum of 23 years to see if he is fit to rejoin society.
Considering this is Breivik we are talking about, I highly doubt he will be a free man again for the rest of his life.
5/2/2012 11:19:15 AM
One for Cunts Say the Darndest Things
5/2/2012 11:38:00 AM
Later in the thread:
Not at all, but the ends should never be ignored when examining the means.
I read an analysis of what Breivik did, but rewritten to put it in terms that make more sense to Americans, supposedly taking place in America.
It begins with a non-violent Muslim youth league, that over many years becomes increasingly powerful as a political movement in the US, to the point that now and then the Muslim political party has a majority in congress and even the presidency.
Their ends are to get rid of the US constitution, and replace it with Sharia law. All the while assuring non-Muslim Americans that they mean them no harm. But soon, all government largess goes to those who support Islam, and there is unrestricted immigration encouraged from every Muslim nation in the world. Hundreds of millions of Muslims coming to America.
Eventually they wish to even discard the name “America” and replace it with a Sultanate. And they train all their children in a giant, public funded madrassa, with the idea that eventually they will become the future leaders of the Sultanate. No one can become a leader in their political party unless they have graduated from this madrassa and follow precisely the agenda of the Muslim party.
Yet one non-Muslim American sees where this is going, and does not like it. He likes living in a constitutional nation. He likes his fellow Americans, but does not like endless immigration of Muslims to America.
And he knows that if he wipes out this giant madrassa, the cause of the Islamization of America will be set back perhaps a hundred years or more. It will be highly likely that the spigot of immigration will be turned off, and many of the immigrants already here will be made to leave.
He is an American version of Breivik. Is he a villain or a hero for wanting to save his nation the way it is?
This is a fair approximation of the situation in Norway. So again the question is, do the ends justify the means?
5/2/2012 11:54:50 AM
Wow, besides being totally sick, this guy doesn't have a fucking clue about politics. Equating Norwegian social-democrats with communists is totally absurd. And everything else he said is just plain silly. “Putting all its eggs in one basket”? Oh please.
Well, you're right about one thing. After this, I wouldn't be surprised if Norway brings back the death penalty
What an American way of seeing things. No, as with other civilized countries, it will only confirm their view that violence and death aren't the answer. They're primitive and barbaric, worthy of apes, not of humans.
5/2/2012 11:57:02 AM
I hope the next delusional nazi spree killer kils your kids while at school.We'll see how well your exalted opinions hold then...
That's not a very nice thing to hope for, besides I'm fairly certain his children are completely innocent of his views.
5/2/2012 12:35:13 PM
I particularly like the Hitler Jugend -- in Norway, yet -- in 1922. In 1922 the Nazi Party in Germany could fit into a back room in a beer hall.
This person's ignorance is impregnable.
5/2/2012 1:39:42 PM
The part about Hitlerjugend being formed already in 1922 surprised me too... but then I looked it up and it's actually true. Well, whaddaya know :|
5/2/2012 1:45:03 PM
I believe that fuck you.
5/2/2012 2:07:37 PM
ugh, sickening... and especially everything about it. not one sentence do i find pallatable (even with honey)
FR truly does not deserve its name, cos it preaches neither freedom, nor republican ideals
5/2/2012 2:09:41 PM
Yet again, you have shown that you support terrorism. Don't think we've forgotten about this: http://fstdt.net/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=79776&Page=1#1262495
5/2/2012 2:36:59 PM
Sorry, double post.
5/2/2012 2:39:48 PM
1 2 3 4