Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: marthemaria

I believe that Breivik is not just sane, but that his actions were carefully and expertly planned, well executed, and importantly, achieved Breiviks goals. And in doing so, he has altered the future course of his nation.

Here is some background not widely covered by the media.

1) The Workers’ Youth League (Norway) was founded in 1927 with the merger of the Communist Youth League and Socialist Youth League of Norway. While it officially considers its founding based on the 1903 Norwegian Social-Democratic Youth League, its real impulse came in response to the formation of the Hitler Jugend in Germany, in 1922.

In all of these cases, whether communist or socialist, the purpose of these leagues was to create an ideologically pure generation to replace the current communist or socialist, socialist-fascist political leadership.

Importantly, over the course of almost 100 years, these youth leagues maintained the idealistic, ideological focus of their political movements. This is a winning strategy against conservatism in any form, because conservatives have no inflexible doctrines, and tend to use a static defense of retaining the status quo, whatever it is. Which invariably loses.

2) In modern internationalist-socialism, a primary goal is to eliminate national borders and national, cultural, and ethnic identities, as well as philosophies other than their own. To do this it encourages unrestricted immigration, on condition the immigrants give political loyalty to the left.

That the immigrants are also deeply ideological and in strong opposition to leftism is of small consequence to the left, because it sees them as inherently weak and corruptible, their ideologies far weaker than conservative nationalism.

Norway has a relatively tiny population of only 4.7m, so they are remarkably easy to infiltrate with immigrants until Norwegians are in the minority.

3) So the end result with be an absolute majority of political power for the left, the destruction of Norway as a unique nation, and the Norwegians as a unique people and culture, what remains being a “generic” administrative socialist district of Europe, lead by an ideologically pure elite of internationalists with no loyalty whatsoever to what had been Norway.

4) However, the left made a major mistake by “putting all its eggs in one basket”, with virtually its entire future generation of socialist leaders on an island with no ready means of escape.

Breivik first used a bomb to distract the socialist government, the arrived at the island to systematically kill everyone on it. Once he had achieved that goal, his mission was over and he surrendered peacefully.

5) What he achieved was to completely handicap not just that political party but their anti-Norway agenda. Almost by default, they will soon lose political power, and the more conservative opposition will derail the most destructive of their schemes, hopefully expelling a large number of these immigrants, requiring integration of the rest, restoring Norway’s national pride and culture, and to dismantle much of the socialist government’s bureaucracy.

As such, after many years, Breivik may be regarded as a national hero, though he will be bitterly vilified and cursed by the left even longer, as a “counterrevolutionary.”


5 posted on 04/02/2012 9:24:40 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy ("Why don't you ask Helga to get you a beer?" -- Mrs. Andrew Wyeth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
Your #5 is extremely valuable, however I believe the term "conservative" may be misunderstood in your narrative.

There is nothing conservative about either side in this incident in Norway.

It is easier to understand that a national communist lite (Breivik), delivered the strike you describe so well, on the International Communist establishment in power.

16 posted on 04/02/2012 10:47:31 AM PDT by Navy Patriot (Join the Democrats, it's not Fascism when WE do it and the law is what WE say it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
because conservatives have no inflexible doctrines, and tend to use a static defense of retaining the status quo, whatever it is. Which invariably loses.

I believe "conservatism" as the anchor against the the whirlwinds of idealistic change by "progressives" that may push society onto the breakers of history.
18 posted on 04/02/2012 10:54:23 AM PDT by RedMonqey (A politician's integrity is usually only as strong as his poll numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson