Home > Ape Mind, Critical Thinking, Current Affairs, Dystopia, Musings, Philosophy sans Sophistry, Reason, Secular Religions, Skepticism, Technology > On The Rationality of Breivik’s Actions and Public Reactions

On The Rationality of Breivik’s Actions and Public Reactions

This post is about a rational and objective analysis of Breivik’s actions and public reactions to them. I am not considering any of the emotional, legal, cultural, ethical, sexual or other aspects of this event- as there are many others doing that right now. Also, as most of you know – I have no sympathy for CONservative worldviews like his.

Let me begin by stating one very obvious, but often unmentioned, aspect of this event.

Guys who do stuff like this do not care about your version of reason, religion, ethics, morality etc. There is nothing to stop a guy who is competent and willing to die for what he believes in. It is also obvious that he had thought through his actions.

Now let us look at other aspects of that event.

1. What about killing kids? Is that not bad PR? What about ethics, morality etc?

Answer- If you condemn this guy for killing so many kids, what about members of the US army and airforce who have done the same to kids in Afghanistan, Iran or Vietnam? What about their morality, ethics, religiosity?

Unless you believe that a non-white child has less implicit value than a dog, you cannot say that he was especially evil. If anything he was far more honest about the effects of his actions than your average US soldier. There is of course the defense of ‘just following orders’ aka the Nuremberg Defense.

2. What about his worldview? Was killing so many justified for it?

Answer- What about Winston Churchill. Was starving millions in India during WW2 justified? What does that say about his worldview? What about Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot? What about Josef Mengele or Shiro Ishii? Didn’t all these people pretty much get home free inspite of their actions and ideologies? Compared to these people, Breivik’s actions are pinpricks.

Moreover don’t many CONservative cocksuckers worship Churchill inspite of his fuckups and needless genocides? What about Mao’s legacy? Didn’t the USA employ Shiro Ishii after WW2? On a scale of fuckedupness, Breivik scores much lower than many popular leaders from the last century.

3. What about the effects of his actions on his cause?

Two words- Who Cares?

People do all sorts of fucked up things for far more selfish reasons. Doctors prescribe anti-psychotics to hundreds of thousands of kids without considering long-term effects or even therapeutic efficacy- all because of peer pressure or monetary considerations. A very significant part of health care expenditure goes on similar known useless to harmful services and products. But who cares? Does the insurance company who uninsures a cancer survivor care about his/her well-being? What about the government who gives trillions to large financial institutions and cuts benefits to people who cannot find jobs?

People scam, hurt and kill each other over cartels, traditions, “laws” and similar assorted bullshit- and that is considered “normal”. Ask yourself- if those things are “normal” can you really condemn what he did.

While what he did is atrocious we routinely do/accept far worse and justify it.

Comments?

  1. demirogue
    July 25, 2011 at 11:57 am

    Agreed.

    But to think current socialist Marxist ideology is a cure all for the points listed is also absurd. In the area I reside in, 47 of 49 schools flunked their aptitude test. Why? And worse yet, what are these kids going to do down the road when they have no skills to be productive citizens? And they aren’t failing out on the basis of race or sex; it’s literally the byproduct of the ideology of the left. An equal but dumb downed society. Isn’t that akin to killing? Maybe not directly but slowly over time? And in the end, is that also not an atrocity in itself?

  2. July 25, 2011 at 12:09 pm

    I can add also that doing what he did was the only outlet left for a man in his position and circumstances. I don’t see anything else that he could have done and that could have had a real effect. He already wrote a manifesto. If he was to open debates about his opinions, he would have being labelled as a Nazi et alii. Debate there is futile because one dogma is ruling. He could have left Norway. But why should he leave his homeland? And where to? He could have isolated himself. But for how long?

    “There is nothing to stop a guy who is competent and willing to die for what he believes in.”

    The things that he had in his manifesto are statements based on real events not on dogmas. Chosing one’s actions based on realities is much more effective that chosing them based on dogmas.

    “While what he did is atrocious”

    I don’t mind atrocities as long as it helps in killing the Scandinavian dream and other French and European shit.

  3. g
    July 25, 2011 at 1:13 pm

    Youre fudging distinctions – killing kids by accident in war or as collateral is not the same as targeting them. Maybe both are bad but they are not the same. This distinction is usually fudged by liberals with a political agenda, but I am surprised to see a realist like you do it.

    War is not an accident.

    There are two perspective from which an act needs to be judged morally 1) Is it worse or better than the morality of its time? 2) Does it meet a timelessly moral standards?

    Churchill is clearly good from perspective 1, but falls short from perspective 2. Anders Brievik falls short from both perspectives.

    Read about his fuckup at Gallipoli.

    Is killing children morally acceptable if it serves a larger goal? Is killing adult civilians? Why is killing civilians worse than killing soldiers (many of whom dont want to serve)? Why is killing children worse than killing adults?

    The answer is it isnt worse, and it is just sentimentality to think it is. And like most things sentimental, it is harmful. If a war is prolonged because you are reluctant to kill civilians, you end up killing more people in total, and so you let sentimentality create a *penny wise, pound foolish* calculus when it comes to war. Restraint in war might prolong bloodshed and increase carnage.
    —-

    Your ideas are based on the assumption that your side will prevail. I don’t think that is the case.. any longer.

    After the world wars, there was a desire to limit carnage in warfare and return to the more moderate wars of the 18th century. The problem was the wars of the 18th century were more *civilized* because the stakes were not so high – they were wars over which dynasty will rule which territory, etc. A particular dynasty might feel control over territory was worth fighting for, but not with unlimited brutality. When wars are about *cosmic* causes, limited warfare ceases to make sense.

    So if you feel you are fighting for a cosmic cause, sparing children or civilians and making a distinction between them and soldiers makes no moral sense at all. If youre fighting for a more limited cause, such distinctions do make sense.

    So what was the Vietnam war about?

    One persons *freedom fighter* is another persons* evil villain*.

  4. Experienced Father
    August 5, 2011 at 8:53 am

    Advocatus Diaboli,

    Nice straw men there, but you need to try better.

    First, the Cyclone that ravaged the Bengali coast did more than either the Japanese or British to cause the famine. It did more to cause wide spread transportation infrastructure destruction than anything the combatants in British India did.

    And the defeat of the British Raj, and the installation of the “Japanese Co-Prosperity Sphere,” would have killed more Indians than the Famine.

    Just ask the Chinese about that. The “Rape of Nanking” would be high on the list of the voluminous reply.

    As for Shiro Ishii, he is small beer compared to Emperor Hirohito. Yet we, America and particularly Pres. Truman, used the war criminal emperor to save hundreds of thousands if not millions.

    This is just one of the things you have to do in putting down a death cult.

    See page 573 of Tennozan: The Battle of Okinawa and the Atomic Bomb Houghton Mifflin (1992) by George Feifer, referring to expected Allied casualties averted by the nuclear destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which states:

    “The total number must include European and Eurasian prisoners of the Japanese, chiefly from English, Dutch and other colonial and military forces. Okinawa was the most important prelude to the climax because its terrain most closely resembled the mainland’s, but non-Japanese elsewhere in Asia would have suffered even more during the new Tenozan. After the fall of Okinawa, Field Marshal Count Hisaichi Terauchi issued an order directing his prison camp officers to kill all their captives the moment the enemy invaded his southeast Asia theater. That would have been when those 200,000 British landed to retake Singapore, less than three weeks after the Japanese surrender. There was a real chance that Terauchi’s order would have been carried out, in which case up to 400,000 people would have been massacred.”

    The Allies were aware of this order by Terauchi via decryption of Japanese Army codes. Hell, Pres Truman specifically addressed this in his August 9, 1945 Radio Report to the American People on the Potsdam Conference, see:

    http://millercenter.org/scripps/archive/speeches/detail/3821

    I realize the tragic significance of the atomic bomb.

    Its production and its use were not lightly undertaken by this Government. But we knew that our enemies were on the search for it. We know now how close they were to finding it. And we knew the disaster which would come to this Nation, and to all peace-loving nations, to all civilization, if they had found it first.

    That is why we felt compelled to undertake the long and uncertain and costly labor of discovery and production.

    We won the race of discovery against the Germans.

    Having found the bomb we have used it. We have used it against those who attacked us without warning at Pearl Harbor, against those who have starved and beaten and executed American prisoners of war, against those who have abandoned all pretense of obeying international laws of warfare. We have used it in order to shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Americans.

    We shall continue to use it until we completely destroy Japan’s power to make war. Only a Japanese surrender will stop us.

    Emperor Hirohito was up to his eye balls in war crime guilt with both Shiro Ishii’s Unit 731 (bugs) and Unit 516 (gas) in Manchuria via his control of the funding of both.

    He was also deeply involved in Japanese policy decisions on using gas in China. See:

    Documents on Japanese Poison Gas Warfare in China
    by Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi
    York University, Toronto

    at this link:

    http://chinajapan.org/articles/07.1/07.1wakabayashi3-33.pdf

    It went on to say –

    Finally, microfilmed Japanese Army documents currently scheduled for publication in Japan have been found to contain an order– “Imperial Headquarters Army Directive Number 452–dated 13 May 1939. (For some reason, the original directive cannot be located at the Self-Defense Forces Research Institute in Tokyo where these documents are housed.) According to the Asahi, which reported this finding, Japanese historians generally agree that directives of this type, called tairikushi were normally issued with Emperor Showa’s knowledge and approval. Directive Number 452 explicitly commanded field units to: “employ special material yellow and study its operational value on campaigns in occupied territory.” The code name “special material yellow” designated either iperito or lewisite. 6

    Thus, this Japanese Army directive provides conclusive evidence to substantiate wartime Chinese allegations that Imperial Forces used lethal varieties of gas in addition to non-lethal types such as sneeze- or tear-gas, whose use has already been established. Furthermore, the directive proves that the Imperial high command ordered not just the deployment, but also the actual use, of those poison gases in China.

    In sum, then, postwar Japanese and Chinese findings based on international archival research prove indisputably that Imperial Armed Forces received orders in the emperor’s name to engage in lethal chemical warfare against Chinese military and civilian personnel during the Fifteen-Year War. Thus these findings confirm the contentions raised in File I.B. 152-A.

    I.B. 152-A was a War Department secret report on the Japanese military gas attack on the Chinese Nationalists at Ichang, China in October 1941.

    The Nationalists extensively documented the attack, which killed 600 and wounded 1,000 more, and judging from the report, had American military attaches there during the investigation. They were further supported by local Episcopal Church medical missionary reports of the treatment of wounded Chinese. These were published on Nov 26, 1941 and were picked up by American news wires and republished in the states the week before Pearl Harbor.

    When the war kicked off on Dec 7, 1941. A general order from the Imperial General staff went out not to use chemicals. This was followed like a lot of Japanese General Staff orders…it was ignored when the chain of command broke down.

    Between Dec 1941 and the Summer of 1944 the Japanese used “Chabin” AC blood agent gas grenades twice on western forces. Once on the 7th Hussar Tank Regiment in Burma in 1942 and twice on American troops on Guadalcanal in 1943.

    When the American threat to Saipan, Guam and Tinian was developing, Premier General Tojo wanted to use chemical weapons to defend them. He was opposed by elements of the Japanese military and it didn’t happen.

    The only way that “opposition” could have been effective was with the support of Emperor Hirohito.

    After the fall of those three islands and Tojo’s government, another tairikushi was issued to remove all chemical weapon stocks from the Pacific and Burma theaters.

    This was followed more rigorously, particularly in the Home Islands, but the chain of command issues still existed.

    American air power disrupted logistics prevented chemical weapon removal from the Philippines. So MacArthur’s 6th Army captured Japanese chemical stocks on Leyte.

    During the fight for Luzon, Filipino Guerrilla’s reported to 6th Army in January – February 1945 that the Japanese garrison in Davao Mindanao had planted mustard gas land mines and tested the blood agent AC in hand grenade on dogs.

    The 1st Cavalry Division (Div.) then got gassed several times with vomiting agent gas candles and 75mm shells by Japanese naval suicide troops during the battle of Manila in Feb 1945.

    Based on the Manila attacks, General H.M. Smith (USMC) was planning to use poison gas from fired from mortar and rocket armed gunboats (US Navy warships did not have gas shells) to gas Iwo Jima per stated US retaliation policy when FDR directly countermanded those plans. This is part of the reason Smith was so bitter after WW2.

    Given non-surrender of the Japanese, the mass mass murders of Allied POW and occupied civilian populations would have started on Sept 9, 1945, when the British Amphibious Invasion of Malaya (Operation Zipper) kicked off. If not sooner, if the Soviets tried to invade Hokkaido in August 1945.

    MacArthur’s planned but little written on plans for the invasion of Java would have happened shortly after wards, if only due to the paralysis Adm King and Adm Nimitz were going to kick off fighting the implementation of Operation Olympic, the invasion of Japan, followed by Typhoon Louise hitting Okinawa.

    By Oct/Nov 1945, the British would have been in the dead city of Singapore and the American Eight Army would have over run the bodies of the white Dutch murdered by the Japanese in Batavia (modern Jakarta) on Java.

    The pictures of the bodies would have been daily fair for American newspapers. Along with stories of all the interned American civilians and POWs in Japanese hands being murdered by the Japanese in China and elsewhere.

    The murderous, volcanic, out pouring of pure hate from the American public would have removed all political restraints on American actions. Save those of inter-Allied logistics that got in the way of killing the Japanese everywhere, as soon as possible.

    The name for that “Soon as possible” was poison gas. See:

    http://strategypage.com/htmw/htchem/articles/20020514.aspx

    May 14, 2002

    When A Democracy Chose Genocide -June 18, 1945 –

    The United States government decided on June 18, 1945, to commit genocide on Japan with poison gas if its government did not surrender after the nuclear attacks approved in the same June 18 meeting. This was discovered by military historians Norman Polmar and Thomas Allen while researching a book on the end of the war in the Pacific. Their discovery came too late for inclusion in the book, so they published it instead in the Autumn 1997 issue of Military History Quarterly.

    Polmar & Allen ran across references to this meeting in their research and put in a Freedom of Information Act request for related documents. Eventually they received, too late for use in their book, a copy of a document labeled “A Study of the Possible Use of Toxic Gas in Operation Olympic.” The word “retaliatory” was PENCILED in between the words “possible” and “use”.

    Apparently there were only five of these documents circulated during World War Two. The document was requested by the Chemical Corps for historical study in 1947. In an attempt to “redact” history, another document was issued to change all the copies to emphasize retaliatory use rather than the reality of the US planning to use it offensively in support of the invasion of Japan.

    The plan called for US heavy bombers to drop 56,583 tons of poison gas on Japanese cities in the 15 days before the invasion of Kyushu, then another 23,935 tons every 30 days thereafter. Tactical air support would drop more on troop concentrations.

    The targets of the strategic bombing campaign were Japanese civilians in cities. Chemical Corps casualty estimates for this attack plan were five million dead with another five million injured. This was our backup to nuking Japan into surrender. If the A-bombs didn’t work, we were going to gas the Japanese people from the air like bugs, and keep doing so until Japanese resistance ended or all the Japanese were dead.

    Using Emperor Hirohito to get the “suicide-murder before honor” death cultists in the over seas Japanese Army to surrender, and saving his institution to reform Japan to a post-Death cult society, saved millions at the cost of justice for our dead and hiding lessor war criminals like Shiro Ishii.

    It was one of the few time in history that a death cult society was destroyed without killing most of the cultists, AKA genocide.

  1. July 25, 2011 at 8:16 pm
  2. July 31, 2011 at 4:19 pm

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

%d bloggers like this: