On New Zealand shooting

https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/03/17/media-silence-surrounds-muslim-massacre-of-christians/

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47611811

Now, onto the case.

Mainstream media had reported that the shooter is suspected right-winger. The shooter – Brenton Tarant – has published a manifesto. Titled “The Great Replacement”, manifesto would seem to confirm the media’s reports. However, the text is psychologically suspect. It paints the picture of an average white supremacist, the way that the Left sees them. It reads almost like a carricature, a comedy piece on white supremacism. Manifesto paints a picture of an uneducated, uninterested, lazy person, sprouting half-cooked phrases and maintaining contact with various right-wing groups.

But having had discussions with people ranging from far-Left globalists to far-Right groups, I can relatively safely say that that is not how even a neo-Nazi would write it. It is, however, the way how a leftist trying to act like a right-wing extremist might write it. It shows limited understanding of politics, psychology and society. Shooter is shown in rather stereotypical terms, as described before. It has a significant number of grammatic mistakes. Manifesto ponts to military and law enforcement as being places where far-right people are disproportionately employed. This serves no purpose for the goals of far-Right, but it may enable the Left to try and take over the control of these services, and use them for furthering their own agenda – similar to how they had taken over universities and politics.

His explanation on why he chose firearms for the attack also makes no sense – but it does make sense if one was to assume that the attack was to be used by the Left to abolish right to bear arms. He also talks about “invaders” and “traitors”, terms that a right-winger may use in anger, but hardly in a written text of such length. Likewise, his answers on whether he hates Muslims in general are not extremist; this is the point, as they may – and likely will – be used by the Left to paint any sort of nationalist, anyone who opposes globalism, as a potential mass murderer.

Soon in the text, he contradicts himself, first claiming that the attack is an “end in itself”, and immediately after that it is “meant to promote ideals”. So which one is it? Further it makes reference to 1300 years of war and invasion Islam had caused – a historical fact, but one that is extremely uncomfortable to the Left, and if tied to this attack in such a manner may become (even more) “politically incorrect” to discuss, allowing the Left to further its control of the discourse. Manifesto also discusses diversity, again helping the Left push the narrative that any form of diversity but their own – “diversity” that destroys actual diversity – is racist, hateful and genocidal.

Further pushing the leftist narrative/agenda, he claims that he is racist because he believes that “racial differences exist between peoples and they have a great impact on the way we shape our societies”. But that is not racism, that is racialism. Racism is a belief that one race is superior to others, and all others have to be exterminated or at least subjugated. It was used as a post-facto justification of colonialism (e.g. 19th century scientific racism) and of Nazi genocides (yet greatest genocides in history were either class-based or religion-based, not race-based). Racialism, on the contrary, believes that all races are distinct, unique, and of equal value. Racialism, similar to ethnic nationalism, would serve to prevent genocide, slavery and other evils of racism, as it would keep races separate and safe – from each other, at least, though obviously not from themselves. However, by pushing the idea that racism and racialism are the same, and that they both lead to mass murder, he is further promoting the leftist narrative which makes no distinction between the two.

His statement that he is “ethno-nationalist” immediately places ethnonationalism into guilt by association – a logical fallacy most of the time, but a very powerful one indeed. Again, this serves the Left, and in no way helps the Right. Other one-liner answers are also stereotypical of what a modern-day right winger, especially an ethnonationalist, might say, providing the Left with the so-useful “smoking gun”. However, he also outright states that he is an “eco-fascist”, and that closest country to his view is People’s Republic of China – two statements that not only contradict each other, but rest of the text as well. He is also a “supporter of Donald Trump” as a symbol – Left on Capitol Hill will sure love that – as well as Brexit, two things that are currently very painful for the Left, and to be discredited by any means necessary.

Following answers are mostly one-liners, used to reinforce the view that the attacker is an ethno-nationalist conservative. His answer about video-games however serves to further support the leftist crying point about video games being “dangerous”, even though there is no proof that playing video games – even first-person shooters – increases agression in everyday life. But then, every moral guardian knows that Bluebeard was a Battlefield 2142 addict, that Hitler constantly played Doom 3 and that Blackbeard had Sid Meier’s Pirates! installed onboard his flagship. It does show how Left is trying to milk the attack for everything it is worth.

He also calles himself an eco-fascist, which is a relatively new ideology, in exposure if not in existence. He reaffirms Australia’s connections to Europe, by implication compromising the entire West. Next few points are stereotypical Nazi talking points about the “future of white people” etc. His statement “I will let my actions speak for themselves” is clearly meant to compromise any form of conservativism, or at least ethnonationalism.

Further writing serves to further reinforce the idea of him as a cretin, particularly rant about his combat capabilities which seems to paint him as a junior Call of Duty player. He continues by supporting every single thing that the Left opposes – providing the Left with a “point-by-point” support of their views. This includes Left’s attempts to control violence, as well as to counter claims that democracy is controlled by the globalist forces at the time that European union is attempting to increase its authoritarian control and integration. He also states that racial differences are a fact – another view Left is opposing. He claims that he attacked Muslims because they are the most hated, thus supporting the attempts to censor any and all criticism of Islam.

He continues by supporting some conservative talking points that are very painful for the Left – such as Muslim rape gangs in Europe, dangers of diversity to society, consequences of leftist policies on radicalization, the failure of assimilation. Again, these are used to paint them as necessarily murderous, and thus support the Leftist narrative. Manifesto is even used to provide shield to Merkel, Erdogan, by claiming that they are enemies of Europe, and thus connect their right-wing critics to the shooter. It also claims that diversity means inequality, thus supporting Left in attempts to create a unified global Borg Collective.

He draws a connection to Battle of Vienna in 1683., which in itself is one of showcases for dangers of Islam. By connecting rational discussion of potential dangers of Islam to this attack, it helps censor yet another thing that is painful to the Left. The same is repeated with a fact of leftist takeover of educational and media institutions and dying of the West, the thoughts on populist movements – which are a big problem for the Left which had abandoned and betrayed the very people it is supposed to defend, the fact that people are driven by the emotion. He especially supports memes, which had proven so damaging to the Left, and which Left had been trying to ban for the some time. Likewise, he points out the truth of capitalists using open borders policy to import cheap work force and reduce everybody else’s standards of living; calls for “Europe for Europeans”; and supports “with strong traditions, gender norms, societal norms;the poor and the religious, usually a combination of all” – that is, everyone that the Left hates. He also attacks globalized capitalists – correctly, but this allows them to defend themselves simply by screaming “racism” at any opposition to globalism.

It should be noted that the latter part of the text seems to have no grammatic mistakes, contradicting the introductionary part. Text itself covers literally every single social issue of contention between the Left and the Right.

Overall, the attack has served to put Right on the defensive – which was likely the whole idea. For at least the next few weeks, being a right-winger will become a crime – even more than it usually is.