Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Thus passes the great hero Anders Breivik into martyrdom

I can't speak for others, but my read from scourge is that he's in a similar boat to most of us: gosh, we'd love non-violent solutions. We love the idea of war, if it's a just war, but not as a blanket solution. That's subtarded. We also hate the idea of harming people, including those we would exclude from the political process. We think The Holocaust was stupid and cruel. Need I go on?

However (you knew there'd be one of those) if our society doesn't change course, we're all dead or destroyed, and we'll take this planet down with us.

This my friends is a morally complex issue, not the candy-cane artificially simple shit in Disney movies. "Do I murder Bambi, or just order a cheeseburger?"

Agree. Revolutions are painful but necessary (in the proper understanding of Revolution)... but we must accept that Breivik was a lone wolf that helped in no way to the conservative revolution, but quite the contrary. Damn, if some people here is shiting on Breivik is because he is not only insane and unnecessarily cruel, but also ultimately inept, even a farse... stop invoking sentimentalism... this is not Disneyland.

Is anyone getting sick of that asinine Vikernes yet?

Is anyone getting sick of that asinine Vikernes yet?

Not I. He is an endless source of mirth and whimsy in an otherwise stale interweb.

Quote from: Varg Vikernes
Jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews jews. The children.

That's hilarious. Does anybody think he's just being jealous?


Nazi germany was a prime candidate for utilizing emotional appeal and co-opting the vulernable psychology of those around them.

The NSDAP utilized a leftist worker's movement appeal (method) while making good on their promises unlike the Bolsheviks, in order to get into power (goal). That accounted for the bulk of the democratic momentum. Yes, they also added many peripheral items to appeal to the Volkish, to the Catholics, to adjacent fascist allies, and to the remnants of the native constitutional conservative upper class. That accounted for the support from much of the elite behind the democracy. I would say it was quite a bit more complex than your portrayal.

That's a good talking point.

It was a quote from some silly movie that seemed to fit the discussion.
”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793

The NSDAP utilized a leftist worker's movement appeal (method) while making good on their promises unlike the Bolsheviks, in order to get into power (goal). That accounted for the bulk of the democratic momentum. Yes, they also added many peripheral items to appeal to the Volkish, to the Catholics, to adjacent fascist allies, and to the remnants of the native constitutional conservative upper class. That accounted for the support from much of the elite behind the democracy. I would say it was quite a bit more complex than your portrayal.

The NSDAP rose to power primarily as an anti-Communist party only a few years after a Communist revolution in .de

They combined the moderate liberal party with the traditional values conservatives and appealed to a defeated, horrified, confused and shamed nation.

Had they stopped there, history would remember them as a miracle.

They tried to take on too many threats, and not enough real ones.

If they had thrown all their effort into crushing the Soviets, and liberating mainland Europe later, there would have been no will to oppose them.

At that point, the USA would have had leadership change and the new administration probably would have given them diplomatic recognition.

Luckily, they did not make it to that point -- the atomic age was instead fought by the two least decisive forms of government, Communism and Democracy.

Sane and constructive thoughts from elsewhere:

Quote
The most adaptive course for Westerners is to find a way to restore a sustainable birthrate and ethnic consciousness within the framework of the Western tradition, which forms the vital cultural aspect of our identity. That cannot be achieved if we misconstrue the content and nature of Western cultural identity, as does Stephen Walt, or if we apply military tactics to what is an intellectual, cultural, and political problem, as did Anders Breivik.

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2011/08/does-the-norway-atrocity-make-nationalism-illegitimate-a-reply-to-stephen-walt/#more-9588
”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793

Sane and constructive thoughts from elsewhere:

Quote
The most adaptive course for Westerners is to find a way to restore a sustainable birthrate and ethnic consciousness within the framework of the Western tradition, which forms the vital cultural aspect of our identity. That cannot be achieved if we misconstrue the content and nature of Western cultural identity, as does Stephen Walt, or if we apply military tactics to what is an intellectual, cultural, and political problem, as did Anders Breivik.

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2011/08/does-the-norway-atrocity-make-nationalism-illegitimate-a-reply-to-stephen-walt/#more-9588

I'm not so sure about the last thought of that quote anymore. Western people are surrounded by enemies who are out for our blood and land. It's getting worse with all the flash-mobs and Mexican cartels' assaults on Americans in the S/SW. Breivik probably should have targeted minorities or liberal universities and other pro-globalist institutions if he had to go out with a bang. I don't want to have a militant "vangard" attitude, but the pressure is on. I agree that Westerners desperately need to work on self-identity and creating a better culture in the meantime, but we should have the attitude that violence is ultimately a push forward to meet our ends.

Sane and constructive thoughts from elsewhere:

Quote
The most adaptive course for Westerners is to find a way to restore a sustainable birthrate and ethnic consciousness within the framework of the Western tradition, which forms the vital cultural aspect of our identity. That cannot be achieved if we misconstrue the content and nature of Western cultural identity, as does Stephen Walt, or if we apply military tactics to what is an intellectual, cultural, and political problem, as did Anders Breivik.

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2011/08/does-the-norway-atrocity-make-nationalism-illegitimate-a-reply-to-stephen-walt/#more-9588

I'm not so sure about the last thought of that quote anymore. Western people are surrounded by enemies who are out for our blood and land. It's getting worse with all the flash-mobs and Mexican cartels' assaults on Americans in the S/SW. Breivik probably should have targeted minorities or liberal universities and other pro-globalist institutions if he had to go out with a bang. I don't want to have a militant "vangard" attitude, but the pressure is on. I agree that Westerners desperately need to work on self-identity and creating a better culture in the meantime, but we should have the attitude that violence is ultimately a push forward to meet our ends.

Wouldn't this simply cause the same sort of backlash that Breivik faced in Norway? If we are going to use violence as a means toward our goals, it should probably be applied after a much greater sense of self-identity has been achieved. We need people of this mindset to come together first; allowing them to establish a fledgling society and it's goals. These people would probably have violence towards foreigners/invaders of any sort which could function as a central tenet of society. Forgive me if I misconstrued your post, it just seems that instantly jumping to violence would be a hasty decision.
"The traveler with empty pockets will sing in the thief 's face." - Juvenal

"When an inner situation is not made conscious, it appears outside as fate." - Carl Jung

"Time spent with cats is never wasted." - Sigmund Freud

Sane and constructive thoughts from elsewhere:

Quote
The most adaptive course for Westerners is to find a way to restore a sustainable birthrate and ethnic consciousness within the framework of the Western tradition, which forms the vital cultural aspect of our identity. That cannot be achieved if we misconstrue the content and nature of Western cultural identity, as does Stephen Walt, or if we apply military tactics to what is an intellectual, cultural, and political problem, as did Anders Breivik.

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2011/08/does-the-norway-atrocity-make-nationalism-illegitimate-a-reply-to-stephen-walt/#more-9588

I'm not so sure about the last thought of that quote anymore. Western people are surrounded by enemies who are out for our blood and land. It's getting worse with all the flash-mobs and Mexican cartels' assaults on Americans in the S/SW. Breivik probably should have targeted minorities or liberal universities and other pro-globalist institutions if he had to go out with a bang. I don't want to have a militant "vangard" attitude, but the pressure is on. I agree that Westerners desperately need to work on self-identity and creating a better culture in the meantime, but we should have the attitude that violence is ultimately a push forward to meet our ends.

Wouldn't this simply cause the same sort of backlash that Breivik faced in Norway? If we are going to use violence as a means toward our goals, it should probably be applied after a much greater sense of self-identity has been achieved. We need people of this mindset to come together first; allowing them to establish a fledgling society and it's goals. These people would probably have violence towards foreigners/invaders of any sort which could function as a central tenet of society. Forgive me if I misconstrued your post, it just seems that instantly jumping to violence would be a hasty decision.

Indeed. The use of violence in this phase stems from emotions and resentment, not enacting a plan to better organize society. Violence takes two steps back because it gives liberalism a stronger footing at a time when more sensible people are finally coming to see liberalism as parasitical. I disagree with Breivik’s actions because they take the focus of sensible people off of liberalism’s blunders. If manifesto types feel they must go out with violence, they should target liberal institutions and talking-heads.
Liberal regimes cannot sustain themselves because it’s in their nature to make increasingly higher demands on people to progress, making evident their totalitarian policies and unachievable ends. When liberal government eventually collapses, I don’t believe it will be an apocalyptic event, but I think it will leave a small window of anarchy. This is much needed for people to organize and regain autonomy. It also requires people who identify themselves as citizens of one country under one law and culture to strike at the “citizens of the world” who will refuse to comply with their autonomy.

The means to ends are said to be the following:

1. Unauthorized violence to cause state repression which forces identity to flourish in defense of itself
2. Identity in order to make unauthorized violence far more effective as a militant network rather than lone actors
3. Identity in order to first capture the means to harness authorized violence
”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793

You may read transcripts of his testimony here:

http://age-of-treason.blogspot.com/

Mr Breivik has released a mailing address for those who share his worldview:

Anders Behring Breivik
Postboks 150
1332 Østerås
Norway

http://wnthinktank.wordpress.com/2012/04/25/write-anders-brevik/


It truly is unfortunate that 77 15-20 year olds had to run in terror from one man with one pistol. I wonder how many actually tried charging Breivik to stop their friends from being murdered.

"When it comes to sexually transmitted diseases and the sexual revolution, it’s actually something that is underreported, and has created major problems in Europe. [This is a subtle and astute observation. Sex, reproduction, and the family together constitute the taproot of race and genetics.—Trans.] The ideal being upheld is to have sex with as many strangers as possible. Instead of focusing on the nuclear family, the focus is on dissolving it, and all the problems which that entails."

I hate to imagine how many children were born out of Woodstock. I think it is ridiculous that not the one veteran Marine decided it would be best to propagate his national ideals and toss a few hand grenades into the crowd there.
Your total consumer expenses come to 42 children, 7 virgin women, and 6 first born males. Thank you for shopping at Sanctity. Enjoy a bewildered day.

All as nothing. Do for die. Through knowledge you can't decide.