![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
oselleConservative Ross Douthat, in today's "liberal" New York Times:
Let's ponder what this means. Douthat is basically saying that that what happened in Norway was not carried out by a racist, bigot or fascist. Then what was he? A good man driven to radicalism by the misguided excesses of his own open society?
Ignore the token "monster" and "atrocity" labels and really think about what Douthat is saying here. In the previous paragraph, he told us that Breivik was not a bigot, racist or fascist. Here he tells us that Breivik may have been a "monster"...but he was one created by certain "realities" that have been ignored by the "governing classes" (which I suppose is a euphemism for "liberal elite").
He's also saying that atrocities like this will no doubt continue until the governing classes of Europe face up to the unpleasant realities of liberal immigration policies and multiculturalism.
In other words, Europe needs to adopt a more conservative stance on these issues to prevent further horrors. Which is exactly the goal of terrorists like Breivik -- using fear to force change. Committing explosive acts of violence to terrify a population or government into submission to their will.
Douthat does not think Breivik was a racist, bigot or fascist -- he doesn't even seem to think Breivik was crazy. No, he thinks Breivik had a point, and this atrocity, this appalling act of terrorism, should be a wakeup call to Europe -- not to root out right-wing radicalism, but to renounce multiculturalism and...think more like Breivik. Which of course, would mean that Breivik won, and that terrorism in this case, was not only justified but ultimately quite effective.
Way to go, Ross Douthat and the liberal New York Times. Way to go.
"For decades, Europe’s governing classes insisted that only racists worried about immigration, only bigots doubted the success of multiculturalism and only fascists cared about national identity. Now that a true far-right radical has perpetrated a terrible atrocity, it will be easy to return to those comforting illusions."
Let's ponder what this means. Douthat is basically saying that that what happened in Norway was not carried out by a racist, bigot or fascist. Then what was he? A good man driven to radicalism by the misguided excesses of his own open society?
"But extremists only grow stronger when a political system pretends that problems don’t exist. Conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic have an obligation to acknowledge that Anders Behring Breivik is a distinctively right-wing kind of monster. But they also have an obligation to the realities that this monster’s terrible atrocity threatens to obscure.
Ignore the token "monster" and "atrocity" labels and really think about what Douthat is saying here. In the previous paragraph, he told us that Breivik was not a bigot, racist or fascist. Here he tells us that Breivik may have been a "monster"...but he was one created by certain "realities" that have been ignored by the "governing classes" (which I suppose is a euphemism for "liberal elite").
He's also saying that atrocities like this will no doubt continue until the governing classes of Europe face up to the unpleasant realities of liberal immigration policies and multiculturalism.
In other words, Europe needs to adopt a more conservative stance on these issues to prevent further horrors. Which is exactly the goal of terrorists like Breivik -- using fear to force change. Committing explosive acts of violence to terrify a population or government into submission to their will.
Douthat does not think Breivik was a racist, bigot or fascist -- he doesn't even seem to think Breivik was crazy. No, he thinks Breivik had a point, and this atrocity, this appalling act of terrorism, should be a wakeup call to Europe -- not to root out right-wing radicalism, but to renounce multiculturalism and...think more like Breivik. Which of course, would mean that Breivik won, and that terrorism in this case, was not only justified but ultimately quite effective.
Way to go, Ross Douthat and the liberal New York Times. Way to go.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-07-27 01:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-27 02:47 am (UTC)"In general, however, it must be said that he is a serious political thinker with a great many insights and some good practical ideas on strategy...There is certainly great revulsion at the murder of young people. However, I suppose it 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 and realize they will have to change their ways."
Tell me that Douthat isn't saying exactly the same thing, just in a slightly more moderated tone. And he's saying it in "the newspaper of record," not some bullshit right-wing eZine. I especially like the slant of "It really sucks that some kids got killed but hey, sometimes you gotta break a few eggs, right?"
Then you've got Glenn Beck who essentially implied that maybe those kids deserved to die because they were sorta like Hitler Youth up on that island, weren't they? I thought the conservative media was just going to let this story fade into oblivion, but what they are actually doing is so much worse. Every time I think these people can't sink any lower, they drop a few more fathoms. They are completely out of control and have lost all connection to anything resembling even the most basic level of human decency.
no subject
Date: 2011-07-27 02:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-07-27 03:05 am (UTC)A Maine-based Tea Party website named Breivik "Man of the Year." It was also in Maine a couple of years ago (and elsewhere, I'm sure) that a few gun shops were selling "Liberal Hunting Permits." HAHAHAHA it's all in good fun, I'm sure.