What Is Anders Breivik?

From Bret Stephens, at Wall Street Journal, "The Oslo Terrorist is Neither Christian Nor Conservative."

On Friday morning Breivik wrote that "today you will become immortal." He seems to have meant it literally. Whatever else might be said of that particular longing, it can hardly be called religious (what then would be the point of an afterlife?), or Christian (murdering children en masse is not a tenet of any Christian faith), or conservative (a political tendency that is fundamentally anti-utopian).

What it is is millennarian: the belief that all manner of redemptive possibilities lie on just the other side of a crucible of unspeakable chaos and suffering. At his arrest, Breivik called his acts "atrocious but necessary." Stalin and other Marxists so despised by Breivik might have said the same thing about party purges or the liquidation of the kulaks.

These are the politics that have largely defined our age and which conservatives have, for the most part, been foremost in opposing. To attempt to tar them with Breivik's name is worse than a slur; it's a concession to a killer with pretensions of intellectual sophistication. And it's a misunderstanding of what he was all about.

Norway, Europe and probably the U.S. will now have anxious debates about xenophobia, populism and the rise of neofascism. These are worthy topics, but they are incidental to understanding what happened on Friday. What we witnessed was the irruption of an impulse—more psychological than political—that defines a broader swath of the ideological spectrum than most people would care to acknowledge. As for Breivik, there ought to be no question as to what he is: evil incarnate.

Stephens' essay emphasizes a key point I raised in my analysis of the manifesto: "Breivik hopelessly romanticizes an earlier time that is simply not coming back. He's crazy in that sense." Still, it bears remembering that indeed Breivik's influences were in conservative writings, and that's not to discount his the millenarian infirmities. The answer to Breivik is somewhere between Stephens' analysis and Ross Douthat's, "A Right-Wing Monster." That crazed criminal resides somewhere between millenarianism and the rhetoric of cultural conservatism.

How The New York Times Spins the Norway Horror

From Ron Radosh, at Pajamas Media (via Glenn Reynolds):

Leave it to today’s New York Times to run a front- page story about the murders perpetrated by the crazed right-wing fanatic, Anders Behring Breivik, that is more accurately described as a not-so veiled editorial. Written by Scott Shane, the article begins by proclaiming that Breivik “was deeply influenced by a small group of American bloggers and writers who have warned for years about the threat from Islam, lacing his 1,500-page manifesto with quotations from them, as well as copying multiple passages from the tract of the Unabomber.”

The implication that he develops is that Breivik’s actions can be attributed to those who for years have been trying to educate the public in the West bout the threat posted to our values and way of life by the forces of radical Islam. In particular, Shane singles out- by virtue of Breivik having cited his writing 64 times in his manifesto- the writings of Robert Spencer at the website Jihad Watch, part of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, as well, he writes, of “other Western writers who shared his view that Muslim immigrants pose a grave danger to Western culture.”

That sentence says it all: those who correctly point out that dangers of sectarian enclaves of unassimilated Muslim immigrants in Europe, of people who do not accept the laws and standards of the nations to which they have immigrated, and who consider themselves proponents of both jihad and sharia law, are not a danger. Instead, the danger comes from those who point out the uncomfortable truths that many dare not face.

Continue reading.

That's a phenomenal, and brutally honest, essay.

A Boost for the Islamists

From Israel Matzav, just read the whole thing.

PREVIOUSLY: "Progressives Attack Pamela Geller and Counter-Jihad"; "'The Left hasn't been this giddy since Rep. Giffords was shot'"; and "Just Awful: Progressives Ecstatic Over Anders Behring Breivik Alleged Ties to Right-Wing Extremism."

Norway Mourns Its Dead as Harsh Rhetoric Spreads

At Wall Street Journal:

OSLO — A Norwegian man confessed to killing nearly 100 people in a pair of attacks on Friday, calling his rampage "atrocious" but "necessary."

The confession by Anders Behring Breivik, made via his lawyer and preceded by a 1,500-page, xenophobic screed he published online before the massacre, has shocked this small Scandinavian country and unnerved governments across Europe, where far-right parties espousing anti-Muslim views, if not violence, have recently been on the rise ...

Norway, a relatively wealthy, sparsely populated country, has little recent history of political extremism, much less terrorism. That it was the site of such an attack, even if by an isolated gunman, has unleashed concern across Europe that the anti-immigrant underswell that has swept much of the Continent in recent years could metastasize suddenly and unexpectedly into violence.

As flags across the city hung at half-staff, hundreds of people flocked in the rain Sunday to Oslo Cathedral, where Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, King Harald of Norway and other leaders attended a memorial service. Outside, many onlookers openly wept and milled about for hours as they contributed to a growing carpet of flowers and candles.

Continue reading.

Norway Police Warned of Rising Far-Right Extremism

A report at Wall Street Journal.

Also, at Astute Bloggers, "NORWEGIAN SECURITY AGENCIES BLEW IT: "Breivik came to attention of intelligence services in March."

Added: At Daily Mail, "Anders Breivik 'was on Norwegian secret service watchlist' after buying chemical haul from Polish retailer."

Police Criticized After Norway Attack

At Telegraph UK, "Norway shooting: police response criticised":

The Norwegian police's response to Friday's killing spree has come in for intense criticism after it was disclosed how the operation was beset by a series of delays and blunders.

Transport problems, including a lack of helicopters and a boat that sank, meant it took an hour to apprehend Anders Breivik after he began his attack, police admitted.
There had also been anger among some of the grieving families after suggestions that a security guard at the summer camp had not been at his post and had failed to apprehend the gunman.

However, police officials confirmed he had been at the scene, but had been one of Breivik's first victims.

As the controversy over the police action grew, officials were forced to publish a revised timetable of events in an effort to explain why they response was not quicker.

Continue reading.

'Feeling of Hopelessness' Behind Norway Shooter's Motivations

Read the essay at Saber Point, "Norway Shooter Felt Democracy Offered 'No Hope,' Advocated Armed Struggle."

And of course folks should read the manifesto as well. I don't know how much was plagiarized --- could have been the bulk of it, actually --- but many sections weren't unreasonable at all. These are things most people won't consider (as Breivik's actions were supremely evil), but Stogie nevertheless lets the chips fall where they may:

After Timothy McVeigh blew up the federal building in Oklahoma, his violence was blamed on "right wing rhetoric." However, his violence was really based on leftwing, governmental extremism at both Waco and Ruby Ridge. This is not to justify his evil act, but to provide an accurate description of his motivations.

Now we have Anders Behring Breivik, another individual of McVeigh's ilk. His violence will again be blamed on "right wing rhetoric," but once again his actions are based on leftist political activities and a feeling of hopelessness in bringing change through democratic processes. Breivik's huge crime was largely caused by Gramscian leftist political strategy, which has been highly successful in undermining western culture and institutions over the past 75 years. Now, in response to that crime, we can expect more Gramscian propaganda and a continued feeling of alienation by conservative nationalists, who will be vilified once again for resisting the death of the West, and again painted as mad men bent on violence.

Norway Shooter Plagiarized 'Unabomber'

Actually, most of the manifesto was cut-and-paste with some personal commentary thrown it. Anders Behring Breivik was simply rounding up information to pull together some kind of program of resistance and revolution. It was fascinating reading. I spent a couple of hours looking over that thing. And that was just skimming, stopping to read passages, and then skimming some more. It's a huge paper. In any case see Telegraph UK, "Norway shooting: Anders Behring Breivik plagiarised 'Unabomber'."

The 32 year-old appears to have quoted verbatim large sections from the preaching of Theodore Kaczynski in his 1500 page online rant.

Breivik had “copied and pasted” almost a dozen key passages from the 69 year-old’s 35,000 manifesto, only changing particular words such as “leftist” with “cultural Marxist”.

It remains unclear what his motivations were, but experts said it appeared he had taken “inspiration” from Kaczynski whose two decade parcel-bomb terror campaign killed three people and 29 injured others.

Despite meticulous university thesis-style referencing through the manifesto, Norwegian bloggers discovered that passages quoting Kaczynski were not credited.

RTWT at the link.

PREVIOUSLY: "Anders Behring Breivik's Manifesto."

Anders Behring Breivik's Manifesto

Here's the pdf file: "2083 – A European Declaration of Independence."

I'd say my previous analysis, which I posted prior to reading Breivik's full manifesto, holds up well. See: "Anders Behring Breivik — No Clear Ideological Program." But I can speak with more authority now. Note first that Richard Starr has read parts of the manifesto and has a response, at Weekly Standard, "The Manifesto Behind the Horror in Norway." I'm going to disagree a bit, though, for example:

The author is listed as "Andrew Berwick," which seems to be an anglicized pen name for Anders Breivik. but Mein Kampf may be a better analogy that the Unabomber manifesto. The man is a mass-murdering sociopath, responsible for a horrific bloodbath yesterday. He is an extremist, but he is not incoherent.

Actually, Breivik states a passionate loathing of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi program of the Third Reich, much of which was outlined in Hitler's early writings. (See the specific quotations appended below.) Also, while Breivik is obviously sociopathic, I disagree about his coherence. The guy's a criminal mastermind whose "program," as written, wouldn't fit a single major established party. He's explicitly "ethno-nationalist" but rejects the racial supremacy theories of Europe's historical hard-right parties. And Breivik hopelessly romanticizes an earlier time that is simply not coming back. He's crazy in that sense. A loner, rejecting intimacy and relationships that might jeopardize his "cause." He is conservative, but again the idea that he's "far right" is ridiculous in the European context. Nazis hated Jews. He loves them as preserving the crusading anti-Islamic history of the Medieval West. Most of all, the manifesto lays out a program of terrorism using all manners of paramilitary resistance, including deployment of weapons of mass destruction (and yes, nuclear and radiological weapons). We'll have to see upon further investigation, but if he's not acting alone then folks should be worried about what's ahead. But so far no larger movement has claimed alliance with or responsibility for the horrendous and evil carnage befallen Norway. We can both learn and remain vigilant, and of course pray for the families of those killed.

And it must be said, but obviously Breivik's crimes deserve complete condemnation, and no modern conservative should be sympathetic to what has happened. It's pure evil and Breivik's violence has no place in modern democratic societies. I won't hold my breath waiting for progressives to produce one mainstream conservative who backs it, although they're surely attempting so.

And the MSM's sticking to their ideological witch hunt, for example, at New York Times, "Norway Attacks Put Spotlight on Rise of Right-Wing Sentiment in Europe."

Anyway, here's some a few passages in chronological order:

Consolidating our forces in phase 1, 2 and 3

We must work hard in the coming decades to create and develop Anti-Jihad or other forms of Cultural conservative movements. Our objectives will be to recruit the youths of our society (15-30) whom will be the bulk of the physical defence of our cultural conservative ideology.

The cultural conservatives vs. the racial conservatives

Whoever manages to attract the youths of a society will have the best possibility to secure power and implement the changes of the given political ideology.

If racist organisations succeed where we have failed, then we know what will happen. Unfortunately for us, the intelligence agencies of Europe are currently doing everything they can to prevent the creation of any type of militia, that being CC’s or RC’s. The media on the other hand will go to great lengths to put us, the cultural conservatives (anti-Jihad movements etc.) in the same category as the racial conservatives. To them it’s black and white; According to them, everyone who is not considered “politically correct” must by default be racists or Nazis…

*****

Organisational work in Phase 1 (2009-2030)

We must spend the next 20 years wisely and continue our work on creating a pan European conservative consolidation, a new conservative political ideology (a political ideal) which has the potential to appeal to a MINIMUM of 20-35% of Western Europeans, including the bulk of our youth. The creation of cultural conservative student organisations in Universities all over Europe must be a priority.

In order to do this we have to agree on a consensus for creating a modern, “un-tainted”, cultural conservative, patriotic youth movement which will prevent our youths from joining NS or WN movements. This movement should be somewhat like the equivalent of Russias Nashi movement (Putins youth movement - 120,000 members aged between 17 and 25). They are anti fascist/anti Nazi, but still patriotic conservatives.

*****

The word "race", “white”, “ethnic” or "nationalist" for that matter should never be used in modern debates with adversaries or individuals who may have been subject to severe indoctrination. These words are so stained by history and post-war media coverage that you are basically just undermining yourself and the message you seek to communicate by actively using them. It’s wise to limit the use of all words that has stigma attached as well as or the cultural Marxist/multiculturalist mainstream media will attempt to label you as a bigot. If you use the word "race" you are basically contributing to committing character assassination of yourself or will contribute to self-defeat of the organisational goals you are representing. You need to understand the following; the modern European man/women has been indoctrinated or conditioned in a way that he is likely to run for the hill or active subliminous mental defensive blocks if you use rhetoric containing these words in your attempt to reach out to him or her. Ill try to explain this more throuroughly [sic] as this applies to me as well. In a world where the absolute arch sin is to be a Nazi, words who are associated with Nazis must be avoided at all costs, regardless of the justification for associating them with given ideology.

*****

3.4 Why armed resistance against the cultural Marxist/multiculturalist regimes of Western Europe is the only rational approach

It is counterproductive, even lethal to waste another five decades on meaningless dialogue while we are continuously losing our demographical advantage. We have never and will never be allowed to ever exercise any influence. The cultural marxist/multiculturalist elites nationally and in Brussels have for the last five decades created a resilient system whose objective is to ridicule, persecute, harass and silence us. They will continue to systematically marginalise us until the day when we are no longer a threat to them. The following arguments will further underline why any democratical or peaceful cultural conservative victory of significance is impossible ...

It is expected that native Europeans shall humbly watch and applaud their own annihilation and extinction. The fact that we are persecuted and harassed in our own countries does not violate our human rights because we are white Christians and therefore evil by default.

It is a pretty terrifying prospect that the prevailing ideology that dominates Western Europe long term will result in the extermination of people like me and you.

Nevertheless, it is the only plausible theoretical explanation of the current development. As such, multiculturalism is an inversed form of Nazism where white European Christians ends up at the bottom of the food chain instead of on top. Exactly how the Jews according to National Socialist doctrines automatically were blamed for everything that went wrong in society. Multiculturalisms doctrine teaches that “white racism” is the cause of all problems in our societies. The indigenous peoples of Europe are increasingly exposed to more violence, ridicule and persecution in cities all over Western Europe. This does not result in any sympathy whatsoever. The multiculturalists become increasingly hateful in their rhetorical attacks against us the more we are humiliated by Muslims, groups they mass import to our countries. This tells us everything we need to know about their real intentions.

*****

There have already been thousands of preemptive strikes from brave Europeans all over Europe. However, the majority of attacks have been impotent “poop in mailbox” operations with zero to little ideological effect. In order to successfully penetrate the cultural Marxist/multiculturalist media censorship we are forced to employ significantly more brutal and breath taking operations which will result in casualties. In order for the attack to gain an influential effect, assassinations and the use of weapons of mass destruction must be embraced. When employing such methods the Justiciar Knight becomes a force multiplier, he becomes a one-man army. The continuation of these “humiliating strikes” on the Multiculturalist system will contribute to destroy the cultural Marxist hegemony in Europe.

*****

The true definition of racism vs. the Marxist definition

Don’t let the multiculturalists define what racism is or isn’t. Keeping an African againsthis will in your basement as a slave is racism. Loving your extended family/your ethnic group and fighting for ethnic and/or indigenous rights does not make you a racist, quite the opposite in fact. It makes you a civil rights activist. Creating a pro-indigenous and/orpro-ethnic movement does not make it a “white supremacy” movement but rather an Indigenous rights movement or even a civil rights movement. Anyone who calls you a racist due to these reasons proves very clearly that HE is the real racist, as he obviously ONLY attacks European rights movements. He is therefore an anti-European racist supporting the anti-European hate ideology known as multiculturalism. The cultural Marxists/multiculturalists have gone to great lengths to change the very definition of the word; racist. Europeans having African slaves on a plantation WAS racist, the apartheid system WAS racist (deportation and a two state solution would have been the right way to go). However, loving your ethnic group and fighting for the interests of your tribe is NOT and will never be racist. Nevertheless, the cultural Marxist systems would have everyone think otherwise.

*****

Race-mixing and interracial relations; necessary to create the global utopia lead by the Marxist-Islamic UN or the ultimate crime?

The PCCTS, Knights Templar, obviously, does not have any pre-defined specific policies or principles concerning race-mixing. The following are my own views concerning the theme. I have for a long time dreaded the thought of writing an essay about this subject. Primarily because it is considered politically incorrect by even many of the most dedicated conservatives and it is considered an efficient way to commit character suicide for individuals who have ambitions to appeal to the bulk of the masses in this early stage of the European civil war. On the other hand, if you’re Arab, Pashtun, Kurd, Pakistani, Japanese, South Korean or belong to any other non-European tribe then it’s a completely different matter. Then it’s all about showing cultural tolerance and respecting their customs. But if you’re a European and say the same thing, God forbid, then you’re a monster. This double standard effectively shows us the anti-European nature of multiculturalism. A large amount of the current multiculturalist elites in the EU/US, the category A and B traitors specifically, are focused on the destruction of European culture, Christendom, European identity and there is not a more efficient way of destroying the core of everything European than facilitating the gradual deconstruction of the European ethnic groups. The norm and practice for adopting non-European babies has more or less been institutionalised, bio-laws have been restricted, mass non-European immigration has been encouraged along with allowing and even subsidising the non-European explosive birth rates. The sum of these deliberate genocidal practices when mixed with Marxist procreation policies (feminism) is equal to the demographical annihilation of European ethnic groups if they are allowed to continue.

*****

The great Satan, his cult and the Jews

Whenever someone asks if I am a national socialist I am deeply offended. If there is one historical figure and past Germanic leader I hate it is Adolf Hitler. If I could travel in a time-machine to Berlin in 1933, I would be the first person to go – with the purpose of killing him. Why? No person has ever committed a more horrible crime against his tribe than Hitler. Because of him, the Germanic tribes are dying and MAY be completely wiped out unless we manage to win within 20-70 years. Thanks to his insane campaign and the subsequent genocide of the 6 million Jews, multiculturalism, the anti-European hate ideology was created. Multiculturalism would have never been implemented in Europe if ithadn’t been for NSDAPs reckless and unforgivable actions. Eastern Europe would have remained free, the US and Russia would never have risen up as super-powers. The balance of power would have remained in Europe. And it would be a beautiful Europe with beautiful cultural conservative policies – very similar to the ones you now find in Japan and South Korea. Hitler almost destroyed everything with his reckless and unforgivable actions and he will forever be known as a traitor to the Nordic-Germanic tribes.

*****

3.153 Interview with a Justiciar Knight Commander of the PCCTS, Knights
Templar

The following interview was conducted over three sessions. It might be considered irrelevant to many people. However, I decided to add it as I personally would enjoy reading a similar interview with another resistance fighter. The interview covers politics, society and the struggle: the Western European civil war, the PCCTS, Knights Templar and other armed pan-European and National Resistance movements. It also covers personal reflectations and information. ...

Q: If you were to coin a word for the ideology or movement you represent, what
would it be?

A: Cultural conservatism or a nationalist/conservative direction known as the Vienna school of thought. As for the political movement; I would describe it as a National Resistance Movement, an Indigenous Rights Movement or perhaps a Conservative Revolutionary Movement. Justiciar Knights are not an ideologically homogenous group. Many Justiciar Knight Commanders would probably reject some of my personal views as I would with theirs. Some are deeply Christian while some are Christian agnostics or even atheists. Some are individualists while others not so much so, some puritans. The primary factors that unites us is that we are all nationalists, anti-Marxist, anti-Islam(isation), we support indigenous rights and we are revolutionary, willing to martyr ourselves.

Texas Fred Steps In It Again!

Shoot, it's been a helluva long time since I've wrangled with old Texas Fred, but he's still up to his old tricks!!

If you check out Flopping Aces, our trigger-happy Fred-ster's done 'dere shown up in the comments, and with a beauty no less:

I detest Islam and every goat loving turd that calls it a religion, and not being the most politically correct blogger from Texas, screw em, kill em ALL and let allah sort em out!

Yep, just like the old Texas Freddie we all know and (not) love! When our Lone Star Patriot's not riding range on the U.S.-Mexico border taking shots at the women and children of illegal immigrants, he's ready to nuke a few ragheads and send them back to Mecca.

Attaboy, Fred! You've still got it, son!

Rightwing Extremism is Serious: And Boy, Lucky They Didn't Take Down a Skyscraper or Two ... or Something*

Geez, I'm getting linked by lefty media folks all over the place this week. But I wonder if idiots like JBW are gonna hammer Alan Colmes for his verboten cut-and-paste hack job, "Why Are Some Right-Wingers Defending Terror Suspects?":

Is terrorism only terrorism when it’s instigated by Muslims? It seems so, to those who want to give a pass to so-called “Christian” militia groups, but make excuses when it’s right-wing alleged offenders. Nine militia group members were arrested over the weekend, with charges such as seditious conspiracy and use of WMD. So is the anti-terror crowd pleased with the FBI’s good work? Not quite.

I seriously doubt Mr. Colmes read my essay cited at the link, or the FDL airhead who linked it in the first place. (Although, checking the posts, I'm listed right up there with Glenn Reynolds -- so there's that at least.) These folks need some kind of PR victory these days, so exploiting the arrests of some obscure militia sounds about right. Of course, it'd make my day if Janet Napolitano put as much effort into interdicting terrorists like Malik Nadal Hasan and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, to say nothing of securing the border.

But hey, can't say she didn't telescope her intentions: "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment."

* And just in case anyone snarks, rightwing militias are indeed a serious threat. My point is that perhaps Democratic-leftists might widen their field of vision to also take serious the threat from Islamic jihad domestically... some day, perhaps.

RELATED: At NYT, "9 Tied to Militia Charged in Plot to Murder Officers." (Via Memeorandum.)

Also, from Brian Doherty, "The Hutaree Arrest and Getting Tough on Terror From Left and Right."

Charles Johnson, Ron Paul, Stormfront, and Glenn Greenwald

I've forgotten all about Charles Johnson this last couple of months. He may have peaked with the fawning Los Angeles Times piece a while back, but he was doing some serious damage control on his blog following the surprisingly non-fawning New York Times write up sometime thereafter.

But King Charles is looking for "racists" and "Birchers" as intensely as the likes of Keith Olbermann, and in the case of the latter that interest is mainly a periodic one to keep in good graces with the Daily Kos hate-masters. For Charles Johnson, the search for the ever-elusive key to the alleged GOP/white supremacist connection is all consuming. And because of that, this post (a safe Google link here) is extremely fascinating, "Neo-Nazi Sites Love Ron Paul." Here's the Stromfront quotation from King Charles' post:

Polymath
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,966

Re: Ron Paul Wins CPAC Poll

There is a Jewish Supremacist hate site called “Little Green Footballs” and this kind of thing drives them crazy, because they PRETEND to be conservatives and when a real conservative and all-American man like Dr. Ron Paul wins so many conservative polls, they go crazy with whining.

These LGF Jews are the most unpatriotic Israeli-first traitors the United States sees in the blogosphere. They are vile and disgusting rats. “Charles Johnson” is the shabbat goy that fronts this obvious Zionist hate site, and even if this “Charles Johnson” moron claims to be Christian, he could care less about Christianity in the Holy Land, which is getting wiped out by Zionists, and it fared far better under the Arabs before the Khazar (Ashkenazi) fakes came to the Middle East.

Now reading this, it's extremely perplexing to figure out the lines of ideological affilation or repudiation.

Charles Johnson wants to destroy the tea party movement as an extremist neo-Nazi falange. But this Stormfront guy -- if that's who he really is -- is smearing King Charles with the worst anti-Semitic hatred. Which itself goes to show, frankly, that the tea partiers have absolutely nothing in common with such legitimate hate groups.

It's ridiculous, but that's not all. Glenn Greenwald, the radical leftists who claims to be a constitutional libertarian, has a post up today claiming that the original tea party activists were "Paulbots." See, "The GOP's "Small Government" Tea Party Fraud":

There's a major political fraud underway: the GOP is once again donning their libertarian, limited-government masks in order to re-invent itself and, more important, to co-opt the energy and passion of the Ron-Paul-faction that spawned and sustains the "tea party" movement. The Party that spat contempt at Paul during the Bush years and was diametrically opposed to most of his platform now pretends to share his views. Standard-issue Republicans and Ron Paul libertarians are as incompatible as two factions can be -- recall that the most celebrated right-wing moment of the 2008 presidential campaign was when Rudy Giuliani all but accused Paul of being an America-hating Terrorist-lover for daring to suggest that America's conduct might contribute to Islamic radicalism -- yet the Republicans, aided by the media, are pretending that this is one unified, harmonious, "small government" political movement.

The Right is petrified that this fraud will be exposed and is thus bending over backwards to sustain the myth. Paul was not only invited to be a featured speaker at the Conservative Political Action Conference but also won its presidential straw poll. Sarah Palin endorsed Ron Paul's son in the Kentucky Senate race. National Review is lavishly praising Paul, while Ann Coulter "felt compelled [in her CPAC speech] to give a shout out to Paul-mania, saying she agreed with everything he stands for outside of foreign policy -- a statement met with cheers." Glenn Beck -- who literally cheered for the Wall Street bailout and Bush's endlessly expanding surveillance state -- now parades around as though he shares the libertarians' contempt for them. Red State's Erick Erickson, defending the new so-called conservative "manifesto," touts the need for Congress to be confined to the express powers of Article I, Section 8, all while lauding a GOP Congress that supported countless intrusive laws -- from federalized restrictions on assisted suicide, marriage, gambling, abortion and drugs to intervention in Terri Schiavo's end-of-life state court proceeding -- nowhere to be found in that Constitutional clause. With the GOP out of power, Fox News suddenly started featuring anti-government libertarians such as John Stossel and Reason Magazine commentators, whereas, when Bush was in power, there was no government power too expanded or limitless for Fox propagandists to praise.

A long quote, I know. But the context is needed when reading Greenwald's next passage:

These fault lines began to emerge when Sarah Palin earlier this month delivered the keynote speech to the national tea party conference in Nashville, and stood there spitting out one platitude after the next which Paul-led libertarians despise: from neoconservative war-loving dogma and veneration of Israel to glorification of "War on Terror" domestic powers and the need of the state to enforce Palin's own religious and cultural values. Neocons (who still overwhelmingly dominate the GOP) and Paul-led libertarians are arch enemies, and the social conservatives on whom the GOP depends are barely viewed with greater affection. Sarah Palin and Ron Paul are about as far apart on most issues as one can get; the "tea party movement" can't possibly be about supporting each of their worldviews. Moreover, the GOP leadership is currently promising Wall Street even more loyal subservience than Democrats have given in exchange for support, thus bolstering the government/corporate axis which libertarians find so repugnant. And Coulter's manipulative claim that she "agrees with everything [Paul] stands for outside of foreign policy" is laughable; aside from the fact that "foreign policy" is a rather large issue in our political debates (Iraq, Israel, Afghanistan, Iran, Russia), they were on exactly the opposite sides of the most intense domestic controversies of the Bush era: torture, military commissions, habeas corpus, Guantanamo, CIA secrecy, telecom immunity, and warrantless eavesdropping.

Now you can really see the ideological lines coming back together. Charles Johnson hates the tea parties, and links them to neo-Nazi Ron Paul websites. Glenn Greenwald hates the tea parties BECAUSE he thinks the movement's trying to co-opt Ron Paul. It's amorphous, but I'll tell you: I've been to dozens of tea parties, political rallies, and protests over the last year, and the only place I saw a major Ron Paul (antiwar) contingent was at the communist ANSWER demonstration at the Wilshire Federal Building last October. Indeed, the folks from Antiwar.com were marching, and their organizer, Nick Hankoff, commented at my report.

So folks can now figure out where they'd like to draw up ideological lines: Would you prefer to be associated with the leftist/Ron Paul/Stormfront strange-bedfellows alliance (that in fact includes all of these folks, C.J, Greenwald, and Ron Paul) or with Sarah Palin and the tea parties? For despite Greenwald's long list of indicators suggesting that the tea party movement is going all in for Ron Paul and his protege, it's foreign policy that'll be the dividing line. Ann Coulter said it best, and I noticed this over the weekend: "she agreed with everything he stands for outside of foreign policy." Exactly!

And pay special attention to Greenwald's excoriation of the "neocons." Stormfront folks hate the neocons (for their support of Israel). But Sarah Palin's a neoconservative hero, as I've long noted. And that makes it easy to figure which side of the ideological line you'll find me. Genuine conservatives favor a strong national defense, for without security, all of our freedoms here at home are at risk.

Tea Party Express Calls Out David Weigel at Washington Independent

I'm not involved with top-level planning whatsoever, but I just got word from the folks at Our Country PAC/Tea Party Express that the Washington Independent's David Weigel is making erroneous statements regarding the organization's place in the tea party movement. See Weigel's piece, "Discord in the Tea Parties?":

I’m hearing — though the players have not yet responded to my questions — that there’s some serious friction between one of the main organizations of the Tea Party movement and one of the late-comers. The main organization is Tea Party Patriots, the genuine grassroots group (with some marginal ties to FreedomWorks et al.) launched in February, after Rick Santelli’s CNBC “rant.” The late-comer is the Tea Party Express, the offshoot of the conservative, GOP-centric Our Country Deserves Better PAC.

Our Country Deserves Better is repudiating the "late-comer" characterization. See, "We’ve Been Proud Supporters of the Tea Party Movement." This screencap from the post shows a February 23 entry at the Our Country PAC MySpace page:

And here's the response:

A reporter for a Washington D.C.-based newspaper referred to the Our Country Deserves Better Committee this week as “late comers” to the Tea Party movement. We had a good chuckle over this misrepresentation, because the Our Country Deserves Better Committee has been involved in supporting the tea party movement since it all began way back in February 2009. We’ve learned to be patient when members of the press get their facts wrong about the tea party movement and the goals of all of us who are involved in fighting for our country’s future.

So to make sure the record is set straight here’s the history of our involvement in the tea party movement – it is one that we are very proud of. We’ve been honored to work with hundreds of thousands of tea party supporters all across America – and our work has only just begun!

David Weigel's a talented young reporter, but he's by no means objective. He was formerly at Reason, so his shift to the radical left is particularly interesting in terms of the left/libertarian axis. Anyway, he's not to be trusted. See my earlier entry as well, "What's Up With David Weigel?"

Added: Weigel has updated with another post, "Tea Party Patriots vs. Tea Party Express."

Census Worker Was Naked, Bound: Leftists Blame Bachmann, Beck, Limbaugh, Malkin, and Palin

At the New York Times, "Witness Says Census Worker Was Naked, Bound" (via Memeorandum). Of course, that's confirmation that Bill Sparkman's death couldn't have been suicide. You know, the right-wingers killed him. From airhead Larisa Alexandrovna:

I ... think it is absolutely fair to ask why someone would target a census worker (and sadly, a single father of two)? I have never heard of a Census worker being murdered before. I am sure it happens and has probably happened even in recent times, but I simply have never read or heard another instance of such a crime. So at the very least we can say it is a rare crime.

And I think that it is also fair to question the role Rep. Michelle Bachmann [sic] (the psychotic, drooling, knuckle-dragger, ill-informed conspiracy theorist, birther and hater masquerading as a member of Congress) jihad against the Census Bureau had something to do with it.

Okay. Right.

And since Charles Johnson's also advocating this meme, it's no doubt ironclad! (Memeorandum link only - trying to observe the LGF embargo.)

How about at Democratic Underground, "Handy Guide to how Republicans and Fox News are Responsible For Census Worker Being Hanged":

We need to absolutely expose Glenn Beck, Michele Bachmann, Michelle Malkin, CNN's Lou Dobbs, Michael Steele, Rush Limbaugh and the legion of others parroting right-wing lies for trumping up this nonsense and getting people to now commit murder in a hideous fashion.

Conservatives getting people to commit murder?

Okay. That's a really credible hypothesis coming from folks who post with murderous Che Guevara avatars. It's kinda like, you know, communists don't have to "get" anyone to murder people - they just go out and cut down their opponents without provocation.

And how about that "Fed" graphic above? Oh, that's from The Brad Blog, "Was the 9/12 Murder Related to Inflammatory Rhetoric of Beck, Bachman, and Fox 'News'? Or to Recent Local Events That Have Rocked the Rural, Poor, Republican County? Or All of the Above?" Geez, all that, and the Photoshop's already enough for an indictment!

But wait! Maybe it wasn't the right wing after all. Even the nihilist Firedoglake is skeptical:

Before we assume that this apparent homicide was a response solely to the attacks Michele Bachmann and others have made on the census, it's worth recalling how Clay County made news earlier this year, when a bunch of local officials were indicted for vote fraud.

Whew! I feel better already. All that Fox viewing is turning me into a murderer!

Related: "Sparkman: Casualty of Methland, USA? Or Victim of Anti-Government Bile?" (via Memorandum). Plus Lindsay "Don't Spell My Name Wrong You Nazi Stormtrooper" Beyerstein's on the case, "Meth and Anti-Government Extremism Not Mutually Exclusive."

Michael Lind Smears Conservative Activists as 'Teabaggers'

I was looking to give Michael Lind's a fair shake in his essay today, "Intellectual Conservatism, RIP."

Interestingly, Lind offers decent background discussion to neoconservatism (most appropriate, following the death of Irving Kristol), but he loses me when he joins Janeane Garofalo in smearing conservative activists as "teabaggers":

In its origins, neoconservatism was a defense of New Deal/Great Society liberalism at home and abroad, both from the radical, countercultural left of the era and from its own design defects. The early neocons were Kennedy-Johnson liberals who believed that liberal reform should avoid naive utopianism and should be guided by pragmatism and empirical social science. The '70s neoconservatives were so focused on the utopianism of the '60s campus left, however, that most paid too little attention to a far greater threat to their beloved New Deal tradition, the utopianism of the libertarian right. Ultimately Milton Friedman and other free-market ideologues did far more damage to America than the carnival freaks of the counterculture.

But the early neoconservatives were right to defend mainstream liberalism against countercultural radicalism. Like today's right, the '60s and '70s left was emotional, expressivist and anti-intellectual. (One of its bibles was Abbie Hoffman's "Steal This Book!") Like today's right, the '70s left favored theatrical protest over discussion and debate. The prophets of the Age of Aquarius and the "population explosion" were every bit as apocalyptic as Glenn Beck. And just as today's right-wing radicals play at Boston Tea Parties, so Abbie Hoffman dressed up as Uncle Sam. The teabaggers are the Yippies of the right.

Read the whole thing, if you want.

In addition the Janeane Garofalo, I'm reminded of the post over at Voting Female, "Maxine Waters Calls All Tea Party Protesters Homosexuals in her Latest Attack on Free Speech: For Those Who Haven't Figured It Out Yet ...'Tea Bagger' is a 'Male Homosexual'." (That's the best discussion you'll find of what a "teabagger" really is.)

Michael Lind's not too far from Maxine Water's if he's going to attack concerned citizens as teabaggers. So much for conservative intellectualis, or at least Lind's version of it.

What's Up With David Weigel?

You have to really shake your head at the ideological alliances of today.

Take David Weigel, who's got a piece up today on the GOP, "‘Right-Wing’ Rhetoric on Hold After Museum Shooting." It's a pretty strong attack on those who take exception to the left's smear against the conservative movement as a bunch of "Christian fascist eliminationists."

Weigel's a reporter at The Washington Independent, but previously he was a contributing editor at the libertarian Reason Magazine. In the latter position he'd be expected to advocate small government and the protection of liberties from the expansion of state power. On the whole, Reason would appear to support the libertarian wing of the GOP. But often the ideological lines get blurred, and some hardline libertarian activists are essentially "unpatriotic paleoconservatives" who veer over into hardline leftist territory - and, of course, some of that activity includes not just opposition to robust national defense, but even things like 9/11 trutherism and tin-foil hats.

So it's interesting that Weigel's moved from the Reason bench over to the hard-left Washington Independent, where such Bush-bashing nihilists as Spencer Ackerman also hold court. Such "libertarians" also include the America- and Israel-hating Daniel Larison, and the "liberaltarian" posse at Ordinary Gentlemen. These guys riff on (pothead) Will Wilkinson quite a bit. And they also gain sustenance from the likes of Andrew Sullivan. "Sully," of course, is a deranged Obamaton who feeds on the writings of Charles Johson at Little Green Footballs.

The respectable Matt Welch put the kibosh on these strange dalliances in a recent post. He notes:

The focus on political teams blurs one central, overriding truth: When it comes to bailout/stimulus/econ, there is no significant break in policy between George W. Bush and Barack Obama, no matter how much it benefits enthusiasts and detractors from pretending there's a sharp break between the two.

Welch, of course, is no fan of neoconservative foreign policy, so he naturally opposes the forward role of the U.S. in conflicts such as Afghanistan and Iraq. But he's good to distance himself from all the crazed left-liberal hoochy-kootchy.

Anyway, I mention all this just as hardline leftist Steve Benen is citing David Weigel in support of his attacks on the conservative movement.

Folks need to be careful about their allegiances.

I don't know David Weigel personally (although my blog-buddy Robert Stacy McCain calls him a good friend). No matter. Connecting the dots here - even with an admittedly broad brush - gives you some idea of what's really going on with the left-libertarian coalitions today: It's all anti-(neo)conservatism, all the time.

Thank goodness Sarah Palin's a neocon!

GOP at Risk of Becoming Monochromatic Party?

Here's Ronald Brownstein on the implications for the GOP of Arlen Specter's defection to the Democratic Party:

In one sense, Specter's defection merely continues a generation-long trend. Since the 1960s, each party's electoral coalition has grown more ideologically homogenous as conservatives have migrated away from the Democratic Party, and liberals and moderates have moved away from the GOP. That ideological resorting has thinned the ranks of Republican House and Senate members from left-leaning areas such as the Northeast and the West Coast and has culled Democrats from conservative regions, principally the South.

This ideological and geographic sorting-out has narrowed each party's reach. But Democrats in recent years have maintained a broader coalition, both in Congress and among voters, by demonstrating more receptivity to diverse views. In the Senate, for instance, Democrats hold 22 of the 58 seats representing the 29 states that twice voted for George W. Bush. And just 40 percent of self-identified Democrats consider themselves liberals, according to Gallup polling; the rest identify as moderate or conservative.

By contrast, the GOP is becoming an increasingly monochromatic party, dominated by the most conservative voters and regions. This process enormously accelerated under Bush and Karl Rove, who built their governing strategy on energizing the Republican base rather than on expanding it by courting swing voters. Today, Democrats hold their largest advantage in party identification over Republicans since President Reagan's first term, and 70 percent of the shrunken GOP core identifies as conservative. After Specter's leap, Republicans hold just two of the 36 Senate seats in the 18 mostly affluent and secular "blue-wall" states that twice voted against Bush -- and that have now voted Democratic in each of the past five presidential elections.

Notice Brownstein's framing: The Democrats have reached out "more receptively" and "maintained a broader coalition," while the Republicans have "thinned the ranks " and have become "an increasingly monochromatic party."

The Repubicans, in other words, have emerged as a "fearmongering neo-fascist hate-machine."

That's all well and good for the Democratic/progressive Republican political establishment that wants to turn the GOP into the party of gay marriage and cap-and-trade.

But as the power of the Tea Party movement is demonstrating, Republicans won't return to power by "running as a less enthusiastic version of big-government Democrats."

See also, Nice Deb, "For You Slow Learners Who Still Haven’t Figured Out The Tea Parties."

GOP-Smearing Image Credit: David Hoogland Noon.

Charles Johnson's Strange Alliance with Andrew Sullivan

Sometime back I posted on "On Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs." I noted at the post that "it turns out that yesterday Johnson basically joined the likes of Glenn Greenwald in attacking Glenn Beck for SIMPLY HYPOTHESIZING the possibility of an American anarchy ..."

Well now we have Johnson attacking the "Project 912 Glenn Beck Tea Party" as a society of "book burners." But get this: Andrew Sullivan joins in with an approving link, "A Tea Party Tantrum."

I earlier suggested "I have no personal quarrel with Johnson..." Unfortunatelty, it's hard for me to say the same thing today. Pamela Geller is in the midst of an ongoing flame war with Little Green Footballs. A recent post was titled, "Neo-Nazis Link Up With Charles Johson, Little Green Footballs Smears Beck, the GOP and Conservatives." Previously, Pamela published an essay titled, "Charles Little Green Footballs: The New Fascism ... on the Right."

Readers can check the veracity of Pamela's claims at her posts. But the meme is familiar irrespective of the particulars: Charles Johnson's mounted a long campaign against a number of neoconservative bloggers in the U.S., and that's on top of blogs such as Gates of Vienna and Brussels Journal in Europe.

What's interesting to me, especially, is that Johnson still continues to attack the Obama administration collectivism, all the while aiding and abetting the left's nihilist campaign against religion and social conservatism. Strange, no? But wait! Johnson's also been busy with attemps to repudiate some previous recognition from Andrew Sullivan: "There’s nothing like a left-handed compliment from Andrew Sullivan to totally creep you out."

I've got news for you, Charles, you're just as creepy as Sullivan, and just as dangerous.

On Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs

You know, I've been thinking about Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs.

When I go over there nowadays I get confused. Last year LGF was doing some of the best pushback-blogging against leftist crazies like Markos Moulitsas. But now it seems Johnson's done an about face against conservatives, especially people of faith. I'm not a "creationist," but I've noted that Stephen Jay Gould's "doctrine of nonoverlapping magisteria" suggests a compatibility between Christian beliefs and scientific evolutionary theory.

Well, it turns out that yesterday Johnson basically joined the likes of Glenn Greenwald in attacking Glenn Beck for SIMPLY HYPOTHESIZING the possibility of an American anarchy:

There's not going to be any mass anarchy, and there's not going to be any sedition. Glenn Beck isn't going to bring about the End Times, or a financial crash.

But what he IS doing is encouraging and inciting the real nutjobs out there to do violence. One on one violence, stoked by paranoid fantasies.

It's crazy, and it's wrong, and it's irresponsible.

It's crazy? I'm sure many said the same thing about New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina, despite the warnings of the National Weather Service and the National Hurricane Center.

I have no personal quarrel with Johnson, although I'd just note here his tremendous inconsistency. On the one hand he attacks radical Islamists for practices such as child killing, and then on the other he attacks people like Geert Wilders for attacking, well, the exact same thing.

For some related matters, see Dr. Pat Santy's comments on the controversies Johnson's had with folks on questions of Islam and terror (see, "My Response to Blackmail Threats").

But also check out Stogie's post at Saberpoint for more on what folks are noticing about LGF:

I rarely read the blog "Little Green Footballs" any more. I have discovered that, as time goes by, I have less and less in common with its owner, Charles Johnson. Frankly, he acts like someone who is developing a brain chemistry imbalance. If so, he should consider a psychotropic medication like Prozac or Paxil. Personally I prefer Zoloft. Since I started taking it, I notice the ax murders are fewer and further between. Yes, we don't see that much of Mr. Hyde anymore.

Charley's latest gambit is to trash Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch and to oppose Geert Wilders. Seems Charley is very adamant about the right of individuals to freedom of religion, apparently any religion, regardless of their practices, e.g. honor killings, genital mutilation, wife beating, polygamy, jihad, insistence on Sharia rather than democracy. No doubt Aztecs performing human sacrifices of virgins would be just fine with him. You can't oppose "freedom of religion" after all. Charley is so open-minded and tolerant that he would probably accept an invitation to dinner by a tribe of cannibals, and never notice when they shove an apple in his mouth and push him into a big pot of boiling water.

Another of Charley's annoying habits is that he has become a fanatical supporter of Charles Darwin and the theory of evolution. That's fine if that's your bag, but every other post is an ideological screed in support of this pseudo-science. Who cares?

Evolution, says Charley is absolutely true and beyond criticism. Today he was running an article entitled "Transitional Fossils Do Exist."

Charley should know. He's one of them.

My main interest here is as it relates to the broader internal debates I've been discussing on the freaky left-libertarian alliance of "liberaltarianism," as well as the continued and self-evident power of neoconservative clarity in combating the creeping totalitarianism of Islamic radicalization.

At lot of folks are focusing on electoral schisms within the GOP, but some of the more overarching issues of foreign affairs and moral authority are going to be increasingly important to the emergence of the next right-wing governing coalition.

More later ...

**********

UPDATE: Critical Thinker add this, from the comments:

Methinks ole Charlie might need to go back to playin' Jazz and leave the world of bloggin'. Seems he is turning into a control freak and might be the one going off of the deep end.

Obama to Rekindle LBJ's Foreign Policy!

Melanie Phillips, with her usual aplomb, concisely lays out the danger of a Barack Obama administration in foreign affairs:

Obama thinks world conflicts are basically the west’s fault, and so it must right the injustices it has inflicted. That’s why he believes in ‘soft power’ — diplomacy, aid, rectifying ‘grievances’ (thus legitimising them, encouraging terror and promoting injustice) and resolving conflict by talking. As a result, he will take an axe to America’s defences at the very time when they need to be built up. He has said he will ‘cut investments in unproven missile defense systems’; he will ‘not weaponize space’; he will ‘slow our development of future combat systems’; and he will also ‘not develop nuclear weapons,’ pledging to seek ‘deep cuts’ in America’s arsenal, thus unilaterally disabling its nuclear deterrent as Russia and China engage in massive military buildups....

Obama dismisses the threat from Islamism, shows zero grasp of the strategic threat to the region and the world from the encirclement of Israel by Iran, displays a similar failure to grasp the strategic importance of Iraq, thinks Israel is instead the source of Arab and Muslim aggression against the west, believes that a Palestinian state would promote world peace and considers that Israel – particularly through the ‘settlements’ – is the principal obstacle to that happy outcome. Accordingly, Obama has said he wants Israel to return to its 1967 borders – actually the strategically indefensible 1948 cease-fire line, known accordingly as the ‘Auschwitz borders’.

There's more at the link, and when you're finished there, check out Daniel Larison, who sees the reincarnation of LBJ's liberal containment in an Obama presidency:

The people worried about the second coming of Carter ought instead of be more concerned about an administration more like LBJ’s, in which we would all probably agree that an excess of hawkishness rather than the lack of it was the central flaw.

Larison blogs at the American Conservative, the home of unpatriotic conservatives "at war with America":

They have made common cause with the left-wing and Islamist antiwar movements in this country and in Europe. They deny and excuse terror. They espouse a potentially self-fulfilling defeatism. They publicize wild conspiracy theories. And some of them explicitly yearn for the victory of their nation's enemies.

I genuinely doubt Obama will send hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops into foreign hostilities to fight our new "Cold War" against radical Islam!

But you've got to love those paleocons - they do know how to spice up an otherwise slow blogging night!