Exploiting mass murder, for dummies

It didn’t take long.  A few days after the event – Anders Breivik’s trial opening – comes the headline:

The most shocking thing about Breivik is how many people agree with his his opinions.

Leaving aside that the prolonged and ruthless massacre itself  was on balance, slightly more shocking than a bit of  intellectual consensus, it shows just how quickly media outlets like  New Statesman (yes, I realise hardly anyone buys it) are planning to exploit Breivik’s crime. The admirably public  Norwegian criminal trial is treating Breivik as a bad man, but one who is entitled to due process, and the publicising of his beliefs is part of that.

Oddly enough, when I saw the list of his issues, which appear early on in the notorious video,  I nodded my head too. Let me see:

The rise of cultural marxism in Western Europe. Er yes. For example, who said:

“In the BBC I joined 30 years ago there was, in much of current affairs, in terms of people’s personal politics, which were quite vocal, a massive bias to the left. The organisation did struggle then with impartiality. And journalistically, staff were quite mystified by the early years of Thatcher.”

The answer of course is the outgoing BBC Director General, Mark Thompson, ably supported in this dismal admission by various of their own journalists:

‘What the BBC regards as normal and abnormal, what is moderate or extreme, where the centre of gravity of an issue lies, are conditioned by the common set of assumptions held by the people who work for it. The Guardian is their bible and political correctness their creed.’  He also attacks BBC bosses for their ‘vulnerability to political pressure’ and condemns ‘the callow opinionising of some of its reporters’.

Sounds like cultural marxism to me, along with deconstructing societal norms, such as bizarre time wasting government policies, like banning fox hunting and, dare I mention it again, gay marriage. Whether you agree with this or not, it’s a highly pertinent area of political debate. In fact the point is fairly subtle, as most cultural marxists in public life are enthusiastic capitalists when it comes to money – Ken Livingstone and Peter Mandelson spring to mind.

Islamic colonisation of Europe is so obvious in certain areas it seems pointless to criticise it as a concept. As Ed West writes:only the most dim-witted individual would claim that radical Islam is not a threat to Britain.”  If  Rowan Williams hadn’t recommended the adoption of sharia law in parts of the UK (only not his part, I’m guessing), if the utterly horrific London bombings had not taken place, if  Theo van Gogh had not been brutally killed, if  my medical colleagues hadn’t tried to bomb Glasgow airport and if  many other similar scenarios had not happened, then I guess Breivik’s point would be extreme. The trouble is, they did happen.

Had Breivik not actually carried out his killing spree, his wild rhetoric would still have undermined his argument, although his video is actually pretty well constructed. None of this means that these topics are wrong though, or beyond discussion. Quite the opposite. Which brings us back to the home of cultural marxism, our friends at the New Statesman. These are discussions that they don’t want to have. Hence their attempt to portray Breivik as a lodestar for hundreds of millions of evil non-Muslim rather ordinary Western Europeans. He’s not.

Brendan O’Neill’s leftfield take on the whole business is that Breivik was actually narked by the fact that his particular disaffected minority wasn’t allowed into the privileged first class lounge that is “multiculturalism“.  Just as things often come full circle such that the extreme left and the extreme right are remarkably similar in outlook and behaviour, Breivik has much more in common  with Islamic terrorists than he’d like to admit .

The New Statesman editorial, amusingly if you like your humour black, conflates Breivik’s work with 9/11 using their unique variant on the Vietnam body count tool:

One in four Norwegians knew, or knew of, one or more of the victims. On a per capita basis, Norway lost twice as many people that day as the US did on 9/11.

Ah, thanks, now I get it. He’s obviously much worse than any fundamentalist Islamic killer, on the all important “per capita basis”.  As stated earlier, it hasn’t taken long for the usual suspects – on the left – to exploit this one.

BBC anniversary celebrations!
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s