As most of the world reeled in reaction to the tragic shooting of scores of Norwegians by right-wing extremist Anders Behring Breivik, anti-Semitic professor Kevin MacDonald, editor of the white nationalist website Occidental Observer, prepared his analysis of the pros and cons of Breivik’s deadly spree.
In a long piece posted Sunday night, MacDonald described Breivik as a “serious political thinker with a great many insights and some good practical ideas on strategy,” who “sees Christianity (correctly) as a historically powerful force for the preservation of Europe rather than mainly about religious faith.”
MacDonald, who is best known for his theory that Jews are genetically driven to destroy Western societies, is obviously perplexed by Breivik’s professed support for Israel. He speculated that it could be a “tactical” move in the face what Breivik saw as the more immediate threat of Islam. “In my experience, racially conscious Scandinavians are quite aware of Jewish media control,” he wrote. “In any case, he is certainly right in characterizing multiculturalism as an ideology of hate.”
In the short term, MacDonald predicted, “revulsion” over the killing of children would add fuel to multiculturalists’ fire and prove a setback to the white nationalist cause. But, he continued, Breivik’s rampage was not without its silver lining: “[I]t is possible that in the long run European elites will understand that the glorious multicultural future will not be attained without a great deal of bloodletting (including themselves and, as in this case, their children) and realize they will have to change their ways.”
White nationalists on other websites fretted about the public perception of their movement.
With its tall, blue-eyed blonds and active anti-immigrant and neo-Nazi groups, Norway (along with the rest of Scandinavia) is something of a fetish among white nationalists in America. As it became clear that Breivik espoused beliefs that overlap with their own, their primary concern seemed to be what one commenter on the popular website American Renaissance called a “public relations disaster.”
“No matter who was responsible, it shows the public relations disaster of such ‘lone-wolf’ vanguardist-type attacks,” wrote “Dutchman” on Friday night. “Who could sympathize with someone mowing down teenagers at a camp? Even if they are potential Marxists. I hope it is revealed that this guy was either a deranged leftist, or someone with a non-political grudge, or a convert to Islam, or a false-flag attack.”
“I’m devastated by this case,” commenter “Frak” wrote Sunday. “This evil monster has destroyed everything that I believed in. Gone forever is the moral high-ground we once had. How in the world can I possibly call any other race violent, and bad for Europe, and America, after this psycho did what he did. With one event, he has destroyed all that has been so delicately, and incrementally endeavored for. People with our beliefs will forever be associated with this event. This bastard has tolled our global death knell.”
At the other end of white nationalism’s spectrum lies Holocaust denier David Duke, whose anti-Semitic vitriol is far harsher than anything MacDonald’s pseudo-intellectual approach will permit. While American Renaissance commenters despaired for their cause and MacDonald indulged in contemplating both the good and the bad in Breivik, Charles Coughlin, who blogs on Duke’s website, could only deplore Breivik as a “pro-Zionist neocon” whose actions are an unredeemable distraction from “the real problem facing White people” – i.e., “Jewish control of the news media and the governments of White nations.”
“The Jews are promoting policies to flood every White nation with Third World people,” Coughlin wrote. “We need to expose this sinister situation. Lunatics going off on shooting sprees, whatever their intentions, only pave the way for more gun control and hate crime laws.”