Terrorism in New Zealand

#162

To my shame, he is actually from here.

He is an immigrant in NZ, whining about immigrants.

11 Likes

#163

Ah, but he’s a white one. Which makes all the difference in his propagandized mind.

14 Likes

#164

Its been pointed out elsewhere that he believes Muslims are taking land from “indigenous” white people, apparently missing the obvious point that the land was taken from other people in the first place.

15 Likes

#165

I think with pewdiepie this is less about the speech and more about the example. Even if I give them the broadest benefit of the doubt, you have someone whose shtick is doing antisemitic, misogynist, god knows whatever else-ist* content for the sole purpose of building fame/infamy. As much as this was a racist murder, it was also a livestreamed murder. They could have ended their video of real killings with “please like and subscribe.”

It feels like we are slow walking towards a Running Man future and this guy decided to sprint.

/* I have never watched a second of the content, so I only know the times they ended up in the news for being awful

19 Likes

#166

This is quite mainstream, they call them “infiltrators”:

2 Likes

#167

From this reddit thread:

The party he was running with got 9.19% of the popular vote in Queensland. In Australia we are able to vote below the line and preference the party candidates, but <1% of people actually bother doing it requires substantially more effort. That’s where his 19 specific votes came from, most likely all from friends or family members.

But basically the person above him was ruled ineligible to serve, so he was given the seat. However, he was kicked out of the party for being too radical before being sworn in, and was also kicked out another party more recently for comments that he made, thus is now sitting as an independent and practically has no chance of being reelected.

7 Likes

#168

I love Film Crit Hulk.

13 Likes

#169

I can only echo everyone else’s sympathies for the victims and families of this utter senselessness. The real threat still remains far right white supremacists and the link to certain high profile gamergaters/conspiracy theorists surely can’t be denied, i’m not saying they are the cause either but there’s a thread of toxic masculinity through so much popular culture now.

Also, watching the news coverage i’m reminded that the 24 hour news channels still have a responsibility and are still failing that responsibility.

7 Likes

#170

Network and Max Headroom both hit pretty close to reality

6 Likes

#171

Trump says white nationalism is not a rising threat after New Zealand attacks: “It’s a small group of people.”

2 Likes

#172

“And among that small group are some very fine people.”

16 Likes

#173

Of course. For him and his ilk it’s a rising opportunity.

10 Likes

#174

Oh man, that’s rich. Did this guy think white people are indigenous to Oceania or something?

12 Likes

#175

[deleted because it was sent too early by a wrong key combination]

0 Likes

#176

I am fully willing to admit my brain works weirdly, where I some times focus on a specific detail that catches my eye. In this case I think it is an important detail. Racially, religious, and anti-immigrant motivated violence is nothing new. Neither are mass shootings. But the question people have is why they seem to be more frequent. I think the chance for a nobody to be a somebody and the attention society and the media give them is a huge factor. In this specific case, it was done to maximize media attention, complete with music, live streaming, and a document you can use to spring board a TV movie of the week with (with poetry, perfect for the intro!). This focus and fascination will be used to prompt the next one, whether it’s another white supremacist, someone angry at society, a misogynist who hates women, a confused homophobe, or another type of fundamentalist.

You’re right, in my first sentence I did focus on the fact that he wanted attention on himself. But my fourth sentence said, “He made it clear his intentions behind his actions and WANTS you to spread his message far and wide.” Is this not a focus on the “white supremacist fuckery” you want called attention to? And it worked! Mission accomplished. I have sitting on my desktop racist garbage I never would have read otherwise.

I was under the assumption that the purpose of BB comments is to exchange ideas and perspectives and opinions. That means there are going to be different view points and people looking at stuff in different ways. If it wasn’t like that, we would all just repost the gif of Rickman flipping a table for 200 comments. What you see “distraction of attention”, others may see as another part of the problem. I wasn’t alone in my observation that this was orchestrated in order to be a “show”, re: the quote from @zikzak. Though they also went into the condemnation of his ideology, I didn’t feel the need to reiterate the very obvious point that bad ideologies are bad. White Nationalist Islamaphobes are bad. If one was unclear if I felt that way or not, one may have asked something like, “Do you think his white supremacist fuckery was a factor in/reason for this attack?” or similar question, instead of accusing me of ignoring the message. The message we both agree White Supremacists and those leaning that way will say, “Right on.”

1 Like

#177

I think you are right. But still, I have a problem with what you are saying, and it confuses the hell out of me. You see, I’ve heard this all before.
I’ve heard right-wingers say it about Islam after every Islamist terror attack. They say there’s only a difference in degree between the “moderate” Muslim and the Islamist terrorist. They say it’s never a “lone wolf” or a “bad apple”, but always an excrescence of a global ideological trend. They see everything from praying in the wrong direction to refusing pork to suicide bombings as one sewer mix of inter-related religious ideologies.

Of course murdering people is a bad thing. It’s easy to find both a right-wing voter and a devout Muslim who would agree that both the perpetrator here and the perpetrators of some Islamist attack are monsters. It’s not even hard to find both a extreme right-wing racist asshole and a medievel-style fundamentalist Muslim who will both agree on that.

But then, as the bodies aren’t even cold yet, people start taking the opportunity to draw lines. Obviously the murderers have been encouraged by an ideology that leads to murder. So whenever a Muslim kills someone and says it’s in the name of “Allah”, it’s a perfect opportunity to point out that Islam is evil, but people who don’t literally advocate ethnic cleansing are just upstanding patriots. But this time, it’s our turn. But where should I draw the line? Should I include everyone who sympathizes with one of the populist right-wing parties that are getting between 20 and 50 percent of the votes in Western countries now? They’re not getting my vote, so if it hurts them, it’s a good thing for me. Or should I focus on those who openly advocate violence? And let those who generate a negative climate get away with it? Should I strategically absolve some of my political opponents from any guilt by association, in order to gain them as allies against my real political enemies? Tell the right-wing voters that I “understand” their “concerns” in order to gain their trust and convince them that the right-wing agitators they are voting for are in cahoots with murderers?

I’m sick of it. People died. And while we were mourning, even more people died without us even noticing.

0 Likes

#178

“It’s a small group of people.”

Isn’t that how history often moves? How many Bolsheviks were there?

Other small groups of people:
The POTUS’s cabinet
The 9/11 perpetrators
The German Workers’ Party

6 Likes

#179

That’s because there is an informal recruiting and radicalisation network operating on behalf of militant Islamist ideology (as opposed to mainstream Islam), one recognised by the “reality-based community”* in addition to conservatives who use its existence as a jumping-off point for ridiculous conspiracy theories about “invasions” and such. The alt-right has in many ways emulated the radical Islamists’ approach in recent years. For example, both groups tend to target the same damaged and entitled personality types to be potential foot soldiers.

It’s not all that confusing.

[* that is, experts and academics who look at empirical evidence]

The killer in this case drew the line all by himself for all of us with his manifesto, quoting not only right-wing figures overtly promoting violence but also the ones who are more circumspect and sneaky in doing so (e.g. the “president” of the U.S.). In that way, he made a good case for their being de-platformed by reputable private media outlets, educational institutions, and social media sites.

If someone speaks with approval about such an incident or makes excuses for its perpetration (as many Breitbart regulars are, for example), that would be a reasonable place to do it. I’m also going to give the side-eye to the chin-strokers who JAQ off when they try to give supporters of a toxic ideology a pass because they’re not shooting people.

No. They’re hateful rubes, but I go on the assumption that for most of them their bark is worse than their bite. That said, your average rank-and-file average voter for a right-wing demagogue is a lot more of a problem in enabling terrorism than is your average rank-and-file Muslim, who likely cares little about making his faith political.

If someone is casually supporting Il Douche, or Orban, or Le Pen, or Farage, or Salvini, or Haider, or any one of the other right-wing populist scumbags poisoning public discourse and policy in the West, he is part of the problem in a way that someone who goes to the mosque to pray or observes Ramadan just … isn’t.

Well, yes, insofar as the right-wing agitators they’re voting for are providing tacit encouragment to murderers like this guy. It’s not like you’ll be able to tell them that if those right-wing agitators take full power and get their way (see Popper’s Paradox of Tolerance).

I’ll say it again: No quarter for fascists, no excuses for those who wittingly or unwittingly vote for, support, or enable them.

13 Likes

#180

This guy apparently wasn’t on a police watch list. Obviously, he should’ve been. It probably wasn’t all that difficult to “draw a line” in terms of what kind of apparent murderous intent he’d been displaying. This kind of murderous white supremacist conspiracy nut deserves more attention (and the organizations that feed his rage deserve more deplatforming).

10 Likes

#181

He’s soaking in it.

9 Likes