New Zealand Assailant: 'Eco-Fascist' Not 'Right Wing'
Some useful comments in the article below but let me expand them.
Brenton Tarrant displays a mix of ideas in his manifesto, though, as we shall see, it is a rather familiar mix. His overriding idea is a dislike of Islam in general and Jihadis in particular. His massacre was a clear answer to the Jihadis. He says: If the Jihadis can slaughter Western men women and children indiscriminately, I am justified in slaughtering Muslim men women and children indiscriminately. It is Old Testament justice.
And it is that hostility to Islam that the Left identify as "right wing". And conservatives do indeed voice strong reservations about Islam. But conservatives are not alone in that. There can surely be few people in the Western world who are happy about the constant assaults on Western people by Jihadis.
The only people who seem to like the Jihadis are the Left. They do their best to protect Muslims from any retribution or any check at all. But their reason for that is clear. The Leftist's whole aim in life is to disrupt the existing society (to "fundamentally transform" it, in the words of Barack Obama and Bernard Sanders). So the disruptions caused by Muslims makes Muslims "fellow travellers" to the Left who must not be denounced.
So his dislike of Islam does identity Tarrant as non-Left in that regard but that does not make him conservative. His dislike is simply an extreme version of a normal reaction.
So what of his other views? What of his admiration of Communist China and Bernard Sanders? What of his describing himself as both a Fascist and an eco-fascist? What about his belief in global warming and other Greenie themes? Except for his ideas about Muslims he would make a pretty good Greenie and a pretty good socialist.
And liking both China and Fascism are not at all inconsistent. Although China is still ruled by the Communist Party, the Dengist reforms have given it a classical Fascist economy. Business is allowed to get on with business but the State keeps a watchful eye overall.
What makes his hostility to Islam particularly strong is his racial awareness. He sees himself as part of the white race and deplores attacks on it. So how common is that? Mention of race has been so thoroughly suppressed in our society that there could well be a large reservoir of racial sentiment just below the surface. We don't know -- though Leftists regularly assert it.
There is no doubt, however, that seeing himself as part of an identity group -- whites -- was the key to Tarrant's behaviour. And the chief promoters of whites as an identity group are of course the Left. The Left are entranced by group identities and the big gorilla looming above all other groups is white males. Only a few extreme-Left whites take any notice of that but there was one white male who did -- Brenton Tarrant. There had to be one. He had been exposed to a lot of Leftist thought and suddenly it occurred to him when hearing talk about whites: "Hey! That's me!"
And according to the Left, whites are all powerful masters of the universe who control everyone else. And Tarrant liked that identity. So identify he did. And when he saw that there was an evil force -- Islam -- trying to tear down white civilization, he took up arms in its defence, as group members tend to do. And it is not pychopathic to take up arms in defence of your group. "Greater love hath no man ..." Tarrant was sucked in by Leftist identity talk and it all developed from there. Had he been a conservative, he would have rejected identity talk in favour of the centrality of the individual.
But where have we heard all that before? Where have we previously encountered a combination of socialism, environmentalism and racial loyalty? Yes. It was our evil twins, Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. Both were good socialists, good Greenies and strong racial loyalists. In short, Tarrant has reinvented historical Nazism in his own mind. He is a perfectly consistent Nazi in the historical sense of that term. And, like the Nazis of history, Tarrant attacked those he saw as his racial enenmies.
But he is NOT "Right wing" any more than Nazism ("National Socialism") was. Far from it. And his ideas are not "mixed up". They once dominated two of the biggest and most sophisticated nations in Europe, so they have their own consistency.
And it follows fairly strongly from that that Tarrant is not a psychopath/sociopath. I can see no evidence that Tarrant was a sociopath. I have done research into psychopathy/sociopathy and have a couple of articles on it in the academic journal so I know a bit about it but nothing stands out to me in Tarrant's manifesto that points clearly in that direction. Narcissism, yes. Psychopathy, No. He in fact displays a sense of humor fairly often, which is rare among psychopaths.
So Tarrant is not mad and belongs firmly on the Green/Left
Footnote: For Hitler's Greenie credentials see here For Mussolini's Greenie credentials see here
The brutal terrorist attacks on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, today, were, according to police, perpetrated by a sociopathic Australian. Three others were arrested in connection with the attacks. The assailant killed 50 people and wounded nearly that many more. He live-streamed part of the attack to Facebook, and posted it to other social media outlets — significantly enhancing the profile of this attack. He abandoned his assault and fled only when another man picked up a shotgun the shooter had dropped and fought back.
The primary suspect declared in a lengthy manifesto that he was inspired, in part, by racist fascists who perpetrated attacks in the United States, Canada, and Europe. For that reason, and because he mentioned President Donald Trump as “a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose” (though condemning some of his policies), the Leftmedia and others, including the Australian prime minister, are parroting the charge that he is a “far-right extremist.” But that’s just not the case.
Of course, after other Islamist terrorist attacks — including Paris, Orlando, San Bernardino, and most notably, the 9/11 attack — these same Leftmedia outlets lectured, ad nauseam, that Islam is the Religion of Peace™, and that we shouldn’t stereotype Muslims by associating all of them with a few extremists.
Fact is, there are brutal Islamic attacks against Christians in the Middle East and Africa daily, with virtually no media notice. But indeed, we should not embrace the stereotype that all Muslims support such violence.
That notwithstanding, we fully expect the Leftmedia’s reporting on this incident, and hate-profiteering by the Southern Poverty Law Center, to focus on the rise of “right wing” hatred in the age of Trump, casting that stereotypical shadow over all those who support Trump. But as we’ve said before, there’s nothing uniquely “right wing” about racism or nationalism.
For the record, the ideological spectrum is better understood as circular, not as linear. And in that sphere, fascism occupies the space between Left and Right. Anyone who asserts that fascism is uniquely “right wing” is either grossly misinformed or intellectually disingenuous. The New Zealand assailant was not what the Leftmedia commonly calls “right wing” — those advocating Liberty, individual rights, and limited government. Far from it.
The New York Times declared, “Writing that he had purposely used guns to stir discord in the United States over the Second Amendment’s provision on the right to bear arms, he also declared himself a fascist. ‘For once, the person that will be called a fascist, is an actual fascist,’ he wrote.”
But the assailant, who spent time in North Korea and Pakistan, specifically declared himself an “Eco-Fascist,” who advocated “Green Nationalism” and supported the socialist views of Bernie Sanders. He railed against humans for destroying the environment and causing global warming, and he advocated government control to stop it. He wrote, “The nation with the closest political and social values to my own is the People’s Republic of China.” That would be Communist China.
Right winger? Hardly.
For his part, President Trump said, “I spoke with Prime Minister Ardern of New Zealand to express the sorrow of our entire nation following the monstrous terror attacks at two mosques. These sacred places of worship were turned into scenes of evil killing. … It’s a horrible, horrible thing.”
A final note: Attacks on houses of worship are, tragically, nothing new. The Associated Press compiled a list of 18 such attacks just over the last decade. Churches, mosques, synagogues — nothing is safe. Such violent hatred is pure evil. Indeed, the assailant bore symbols of Satanism among his belongings. Responsible people should rise above that evil with our run-of-the-mill political disagreements.