The Oslo Massacre: “Kill Them All And Come Back Alone”
By Farooque Chowdhury
02 August, 2011
Countercurrents.org
The Kill them all and come back alone massacre in Norway shatters the tranquil appearing Norwegian socio-political surface standing on a base full with unresolved contradictions. The hatred-stuffed rightist social act through “an” individual is a product of an advanced capitalist economy, not a mindless act by a mindless man.
An anti-people murderous philosophy has got manifested in the atrocity, whose name is rightist “revolution”. And, the world system fabricates logic of weapons of mass destruction to occupy a land while the system’s philosophy produces a “single” gun trotter to commit mass murder. Similar gun trotters are training their guns in many other lands.
A political psychology a politics produces in me-only-economy has got manifested as it gets and has gotten manifested many times in similar economies with broadly similar crisis. At times, it is in and through individuals, and, at times, it is through group(s). At times, it is with explosives and fire arms, and, at times, through competition, grab and hatred. At times, it is in politics, and at times, it is in employment, education, media and wage. All these form a culture, a culture of domination, unilateralism, jingoism and hatred.
Tail of the incidents
The New York Times identified the Norwegian mass murderer, Anders Behring Breivik, as “A lone political extremist”. (July 22, 2011) Citing the Norwegian police NYT also identified the man as “a Christian fundamentalist with right-wing connections”. (July 23, 2011) A London datelined AP report said: European security were “aware of increased Internet chatter from individuals claiming they belonged to a group called the new Knights Templar, that has been allegedly linked to the suspect in Norway’s deadly attacks.” They were investigating claims that Breivik and other far-right individuals attended a London meeting of the group in 2002. (“Euro officials report increased far-right chatter”)
Breivik borrowed almost word for word from the writings of “Unabomber” Ted Kaczynski, and saw his attacks as “necessary” to defeat liberal immigration policies and spread of a religious faith. To have “the desired ideological impact of the strike”, as his online manifesto “2083-A European Declaration of Independence” announces, he decided “to kill too many…” Sections of the manifesto are literally quoted from far-right documents that also target a particular religious faith. Citing his lawyer an Oslo datelined AP report said: The man was motivated by a desire to bring about a revolution in Norwegian society, “wished to attack society and the structure of society.” His fury is against “all cultural Marxist/multiculturalist elites” and “liberal European political establishment”. He along with similar others “are in the process of flagging every single multiculturalist traitor in Western Europe”, and plan to punish them, and “employ significantly more brutal and breathtaking operations, which will result in casualties.”
Rightist Oslo mass murder followed the Oklahoma bombing and other incidents, basically, with same class character and politics.
On April 19, 1995, a truck bomb killed 168 people including 19 children and injured more than 800 in Oklahoma.
In March, 2010, AP reported from Detroit: The US attorney leading the prosecution against nine suspected members of Hutaree, a Michigan-based Christian militia, said: The group appeared as an imminent threat against police. The group plotted to kill police officers and use bomb to kill many more at the funeral of the killed officers, “all in hopes of touching off an uprising against the government.” Raids in Michigan, Ohio and Indiana led to their arrest. (“Feds: Christian militia needed to be taken down”)
In mid-July, 2010, a Phoenix datelined AP news said: Jason “J.T.” Ready, an ex-Marine and “reputed neo-Nazi”, was “leading a militia in the Arizona desert”, was “taking matters into his own hands, declaring war on ‘narco-terrorists’ and keeping an eye out for illegal immigrants.” Ready’s heavily armed group outfitted with military fatigues, body armor and gas masks “identifies with the National Socialist Movement, an organization that believes only non-Jewish, white heterosexuals should be American citizens and that everyone who isn’t white should leave the country ‘peacefully or by force’.” Ready said: “We’re not going to sit around and wait for the government anymore. This is what our founding fathers did.” (“Man with neo-Nazi ties leading patrols in AZ”)
Norway and the US are not exceptions. There are Freedom Party, Alliance for the Future of Austria and Volkstreue Ausserparlamentarische Opposition in Austria; British National Party and English Defense League in Britain; Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest) and Bloed, Bodem, Eer en Trouw (Blood, Soil, Honour and Loyalty) in Belgium; Dansk Folkeparti (Danish People's Party) and National Socialist Movement of Denmark in Denmark; True Finns and National Socialist Workers' Party in Finland; Front National (National Front), Nomad 88 and Bloc Identitaire in France; Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands (National Democratic Party of Germany) and Autonome Nationalisten in Germany; Jobbik and Magyar Garda (Hungarian Guard ) in Hungary; Lega Nord (Northern League), Movimento Sociale-Fiamma Tricolore (Tricolor Flame) and Veneto Fronte Skinheads in Italy; Freedom Party, Nederlandse Volks-Unie (Dutch People's Union) and Netherlands National Youth in Netherlands; Progress Party, Vigrid and Bootsboys in Norway; Democrats, Svenskarnas parti (Party of Swedes) and The Swedish Resistance Movement in Sweden. (Time, “Europe's Right Wing: A Nation-By-Nation Guide to Political Parties and Extremist Groups”, July 29, 2011) All these are rightist political forces germinating hatred with a particular class interest. It is not the “animal spirits”, as Keynes tells in The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money: “a spontaneous urge to action rather than inaction, and not as the outcome of a weighted average of quantitative benefits multiplied by quantitative probabilities.” Rather, it is politics of a section of capital that is consciously motivated to create a frenzy to get rid of problems it is encountering and failing to resolve.
Rise of Nazi and hatred based sociopolitical forces, and politics with hatred are not an exceptional phenomenon. A common pattern is found among these forces and parties. The pattern is not only in areas of ideology, program and method of work including propaganda and publicity, but also in the base of support these are winning over, and the economic interests these parties fundamentally, not with apparent posture, uphold. Their widening support base in some countries is some times misinterpreted.
It has been argued: “Since the end of the 1990s, the large literature about the radical right has reported an increasing proletarianization of right-wing populist parties’ electorate.” (Daniel Oesch, “Explaining Workers’ Support for Right-Wing Populist Parties in Western Europe: Evidence from Austria, Belgium, France, Norway, and Switzerland”, International Political Science Review, 2008, Vol. 29, No. 3) A section of scholars have also argued that during the 1990s right-wing populist parties “have turned into a new type of working-class party” (H.-G. Betz, 2004, “Exclusionary Populism in Western Europe in the 1990s and Beyond,” UN Research Institute for Social Development; M Lubbers, M Gijsberts, P Scheepers, 2002, “Extreme Right-Wing Voting in Western Europe,” European Journal of Political Research 41, cited by Oesch).
But, the arguments/terming, “proletarianization”, “a new type of working-class party”, confuse misguiding a broad populace, winning their support with promises of solving out problems in their life, problems of bourgeois democracy with class character and elements that form class character of political parties. It is not only support base that determines class character of political party. There are bourgeois democratic countries having crown at its head, and the crown enjoys blind allegiance of wide section of common persons. The wide, sometimes appearing wild, support does not proletarianize the monarchy or make a new type of working class monarchy. The style of analysis shows a vulgar face of political science. This vulgarization will treat Hitler as a leader of the working class and his Nazi Part as a working class party as at one time the hatred spewing Nazi leader and his party pulled wide support of the electorate including working populace. In this political world, there are many such examples in many countries.
At the same time, a new discourse has ensued, especially after the Oslo massacre. It is: Islam/Moslem versus Christian, religious faith of the person committing the massacre, the way Islam/Moslems are targeted, the Oslo case was not a Moslem extremist act, etc.
A section of progressive appearing columnists/authors/e-journal contributors is concentrating discussions on mainstream media’s way of targeting Islam/Moslems as they are pointing out their fingers to the faith of the Norwegian killer.
On the other hand, Amy Sullivan, contributing writer at Time has specifically cited the double face of a section of conservatives while encountering the extreme right, the way Islam/Moslems are vilified. (“The Conservative Double Standard on Christian Terrorism”, July 29, 2011)
This type of discussion – not-we-it’s-they – is, in essence, sectarian, communal as it fails to look into the causes active under surface, and as it confines discussions/analyses within a community compartment, as one community/religious faith criticizes other on the basis of other’s faith based outlook or other’s shrewd tact of hiding core problems behind the shroud of defending a certain faith or denouncing certain type of acts of a section of certain believers.
Simultaneously, a section joins the anti-imperialism/anti-capitalism camp with the appearance of opposing imperialism and defending rights of a section of people persecuted by imperialism or its allies while the section keeps itself confined in the narrowest limits of communal/retrogressive world outlook. It is a shrewd tact adopted by the section that denies considering the working people as a whole, that considers people on the basis of color, etc., that today is borrowing credibility and credentials of anti-imperialist forces standing on a scientific ground transcending all communal, sectarian limits. But, the shrewd tact-adopters are ready for getting allied to imperialist camp tomorrow to act as capital’s storm troopers as has been done in the just-bygone days. Even, today, this act of turncoat is being carried out in some countries.
The community/religious faith centered dissection of the Oslo massacre strengthens this narrow effort, fails to identify the hindrances being made on the path of struggle of the working people, migrant and non-migrant, brings divisions in the camp of the working people, and denies seeing the characteristics and crises of capitalism. It is the same game, other side of the coin, a section of capital is playing/fanning up: let the working people forget their slogan: Workers of the world unite. It denies looking at capital, its characters, its acts in society and politics. It denies dissecting capital in a scientific way. It denies class and class struggle but gets concerned with only a community’s rights and fights. It turns blind to the suffering, persecution and deprivation of working people irrespective of color or faith. It thus turns partner to capital in capital’s politics with the tools for dividing people, creating hatred among them, plotting pogrom, etc. It is a hate political crime by a section of capital with a particular political affiliation that is determined to safeguard its space of privilege. The hate-politicians are trying hard to impose their programs, political, economic, social, cultural, by denying legitimate debate on aspects related to the issues of dominance of and deprivation by a class.
Section of capital is engaged with politics of immigration, a fuel for firing up politics of hatred. Capitalism’s politics with the issue of immigration is not new. The US ruling elites’ war on “legal” or “illegal” immigration is almost an old “tale”. Dan Stein, executive director of The Federation for Immigration Reform, once “warned that if Congress didn’t act, ‘a bloody battle’ over immigration ‘would be settled in the street.’” (The Village Voice) The immigrants issue is big to the countries exploiting immigrants as it is related to billions of dollar, cheap labor, lower wage, higher profit, a large reserve army of labor, keeping labor under control, etc. Even, education and students from other lands is a big source of flow of money in many advanced capitalist economies. One such recent example is the debate over the cost to Britain’s economy of curbs on overseas students, about £3.6bn., and comment of Maurice Glasman, dubbed as Ed Miliband’s “philosopher king”, favoring a total ban of immigration to drive wages up. (The Guardian, July 21, 2011) Electoral activities, legislative proceedings, mainstream media plays, educational steps, etc. in many advanced capitalist countries bear witness to this. Dominating classes create this politics although, as a fact, Michael D. Yates associate editor of Monthly Review, writes, “anti-immigration politics have little basis ...” (“Don’t Pity the Poor Immigrants, Fight Alongside Them”, review of David Bacon’s book Illegal People: How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants, 2008) Even, some emerging economies don’t get spared from this politics. As example, riots against Moslems in India are a much cited fact. There are also acts of arson and killing of Christians in parts of south India. Years back, Assam, an Indian state, and the world famous Darjeeling experienced sectarian political agitation. Bangladeshi push back is a “famous” program of an Indian fundamentalist political party. Malaysia has its similar problems and politics. China is having similar experience. Russia and a number of components constituting erstwhile USSR had the communal “lesson” including Nagorno-Karabakh and others. Australia is not free from the “dynamics”. Parts of Africa are rife with this type of politics, which in most case is fuelled by MNCs or a legacy of colonialism, in essence, “contribution” by capital. Naturally, concentrating entire discussion on community/faith base instead of on class serves none but capital as the discussion pits one community/faith against the other and hides the core culprit – capital.
Appropriating immigrant labor, “legally” or “illegally”, in advanced capitalist countries is a necessity, sometimes dire necessity, for capital, a cheaper way of appropriating surplus labor, a method of dividing labor into sections and pitting one section against the other, and weakening labor’s bargaining power. Today’s world is having more than 214 million migrants. At the inception of the twenty-first century, it was about 200 million. In 1990, it was 154 million. About one in ten residents of advanced capitalist countries was an immigrant. World migration community covers 3% of the world population, in Europe. In Western Europe at the end of the 20th century, there were 20 million migrants, and around 3–5 million illegal migrants. (United Nations, Dept. of Econ. and Social Affairs, Population Division, United Nations Database, 2009, Trends in International Migrant Stock: The 2008 Revision; United Nations, 2002, International Migration, 2002; Eva Abramuszkinova Pavlikova, 2010, International migration and new mobility trends) This labor opens opportunity and brings problems for capital. With outsourcing and setting up of special zones (with special economic, export processing, etc. alluring names) for exploiting cheaper labor, often in slave like working condition and often cheaper than maintaining cost of animals in zoos, the problems widen and deepen.
With the “playful” act of exploiting cheap migrant labor, on the opposite, capital nourishes an element that strengthens capital’s forces of crisis during its period of crisis. Its capacity to bribe section of “indigenous” labor, as the rightists name, capacity to manufacture a shock absorber against labor’s pushes for a better life, diminishes with its increasing crisis. The present financial crisis has added an enormous burden on its shoulder. In countries, capital is facing this reality. It is pointing to a section of labor, migrant or black or Latino or follower of a certain faith, in a way they can be identified, as root of diminishing wage, decreasing employment opportunity and vanishing welfare arrangement while it is retaking space it once had yield to labor. As crisis engulfs capital, squeezes down its space for accommodation and its strength for shock absorption the immigrant factor raises its head of problem in its politics as capital fails to provide space to all – immigrant and “indigenous” labor. Inter- and intra-capital competitions surface as antagonistic rivalries get manifested into politics while capital transmits its inner incapacity and rivalry into the camp of labor – pitting “indigenous” labor against immigrant labor.
In Norway, in Arizona, and elsewhere, this is observed. Capitals’ rivalry transmitted into broader society is neither Christians against Moslems nor whites against blacks. The transmitted rivalry performs two functions on behalf of capital: blinds labor to push or pull it into a blood stained narrow blind alley that gives capital opportunity to reign, and, tries to win over support of unaware sections of labor for settling capital’s inner rivalry in its quest for escaping from crisis. This is observed in capital’s politics with immigrants versus “indigenous”, reflected in election manifesto of political parties representing sections of capital, and in legislative steps in advanced capitalist countries harboring notable immigrant population. (In the case of Nazis, it was the Jews).
Capitalist politics cannot escape the coercive laws of competition. These shape rival factions’ mode and method of action as they compete to grab bigger share of appropriated property, private and public. Capital’s competing factions take extreme” posture and adopt extreme slogans that a section of scholars/authors term “radical”, which is actually conservative and backward looking. Capitalism likes to keep its eyes blind to the fact that competition ultimately, as Alfie Kohn sees, “turns all … into losers.” (No Contest – The Case Against Competition, 1986) Competition for bigger share pushes political forces, manifested in persons and organizations and representing class/segments/faction interests, to stand against 3Ps – people, peace and the planet. The community/faith centric discussions now being conducted by a section hides this fact of capital’s politics.
There is no doubt that capital’s politics with community/faith/color should be exposed and opposed. But the way of making the exposure is not through creating community/faith centric discussions and analyses. Sectarian centric discussions only facilitate preparing ground in which capital likes to sow seeds of division among the working masses. It will be nothing but turning accomplice to capital’s heinous “game”, which is now being played by a section of peace/rights/anti-war activists occasionally uttering progressive slogans.
Whatever is the equation of rightist forces, whatever tact a section of retrogressive forces adopt by mingling with progressives and ready for making alliance with their master, imperialism, the hearts of the weeping Norwegian mothers who lost parts of their hearts, of humanity always shunning hatred and violence murmur: Today, today it’s not the same. Our shining lights snuffed out in shame. (From poetry cited in Oslo massacre victims’ memorial.) The politics of humanity, of people, of solidarity, of peace and love, the politics that the working classes uphold shall ultimately prevail as the toiling people stand against violence, clash, hatred, sectarian approach, as the toiling masses stand above all divisions, all sectarian and all we-aren’t-you-are approach but the class division, the division between capital and labor.
Dhaka based free lancer Farooque Chowdhury contributes on socioeconomic issues.
Comments are not moderated. Please be responsible and civil in your postings and stay within the topic discussed in the article too. If you find inappropriate comments, just Flag (Report) them and they will move into moderation que.
