Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

July 25, 2011

Norwegian mass murderer’s ruminations on Marxism

Filed under: Fascism — louisproyect @ 3:03 pm

(Since posting this, I have learned that it was plagiarized from William S. Lind, a paleoconservative. That being said, it is still a useful indication of how the far-right in Europe sees our movement.)

The Historical Roots of “Political Correctness”

Western Europe is today dominated by an alien system of beliefs, attitudes and values that we have come to know as “Political Correctness.” Political Correctness seeks to impose a uniformity of thought and behaviour on all Europeans and is therefore totalitarian in nature. Its roots lie in a version of Marxism which seeks a radical inversion of the traditional culture in order to create a social revolution. Social revolution has a long history, conceivably going as far back as Plato’s Republic. But it was the French Revolution of 1789 that inspired Karl Marx to develop his theories in the nineteenth century. In the twentieth century, the success of the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 in Russia set off a wave of optimistic expectation among the Marxist forces in Europe and America that the new proletarian world of equality was finally coming into being. Russia, as the first communist nation in the world, would lead the revolutionary forces to victory. The Marxist revolutionary forces in Europe leaped at this opportunity. Following the end of World War I, there was a Communist “Spartacist” uprising in Berlin, Germany led by Rosa Luxemburg; the creation of a “Soviet” in Bavaria led by Kurt Eisner; and a Hungarian communist republic established by Bela Kun in 1919.

At the time, there was great concern that all of Europe might fall under the banner of Bolshevism. This sense of impending doom was given vivid life by Trotsky’s Red Army invasion of Poland in 1919. However, the Red Army was defeated by Polish forces at the battle of the Vistula in 1920. The Spartacist, Bavarian Soviet and Bela Kun governments all failed to gain widespread support from the workers and after a brief time they were all overthrown. These events created a quandary for the Marxist revolutionaries in Europe. Under Marxist economic theory, the oppressed workers were supposed to be the beneficiaries of a social revolution that would place them on top of the power structure. When these revolutionary opportunities presented themselves, however, the workers did not respond. The Marxist revolutionaries did not blame their theory for these failures. They blamed the workers. One group of Marxist intellectuals resolved their quandary by an analysis that focused on society’s cultural “superstructure” rather than on the economic substructures as Marx did.

The Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci and Hungarian Marxist Georg Lukacs contributed the most to this new cultural Marxism. Antonio Gramsci worked for the Communist International during 1923-24 in Moscow and Vienna. He was later imprisoned in one of Mussolini’s jails where he wrote his famous “Prison Notebooks.” Among Marxists, Gramsci is noted for his theory of cultural hegemony as the means to class dominance. In his view, a new “Communist man” had to be created before any political revolution was possible. This led to a focus on the efforts of intellectuals in the fields of education and culture. Gramsci envisioned a long march through the society’s institutions, including the government, the judiciary, the military, the schools and the media. He also concluded that so long as the workers had a Christian soul, they would not respond to revolutionary appeals.

Georg Lukacs was the son a wealthy Hungarian banker. Lukacs began his political life as an agent of the Communist International. His book History and Class Consciousness gained him recognition as the leading Marxist theorist since Karl Marx. Lukacs believed that for a new Marxist culture to emerge, the existing culture must be destroyed. He said, “I saw the revolutionary destruction of society as the one and only solution to the cultural contradictions of the epoch,” and, “Such a worldwide overturning of values cannot take place without the annihilation of the old values and the creation of new ones by the revolutionaries.” When he became Deputy Commissar for Culture in the Bolshevik Bela Kun regime in Hungary in 1919, Lukacs launched what became known as “Cultural Terrorism.” As part of this terrorism he instituted a radical sex education program in Hungarian schools. Hungarian children were instructed in free love, sexual intercourse, the archaic nature of middle-class family codes, the out-datedness of monogamy, and the irrelevance of religion, which deprives man of all pleasures. Women, too, were called to rebel against the sexual mores of the time.

Lukacs’s campaign of “Cultural Terrorism” was a precursor to what Political Correctness would later bring to Western European schools. In 1923, Lukacs and other Marxist intellectuals associated with the Communist Party of Germany founded the Institute of Social Research at Frankfurt University in Frankfurt, Germany. The Institute, which became known as the Frankfurt School, was modelled after the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow. In 1933, when Nazis came to power in Germany, the members of the Frankfurt School fled. Most came to the United States. The members of the Frankfurt School conducted numerous studies on the beliefs, attitudes and values they believed lay behind the rise of National Socialism in Germany. The Frankfurt School’s studies combined Marxist analysis with Freudian psychoanalysis to criticise the bases of Western culture, including Christianity, capitalism, authority, the family, patriarchy, hierarchy, morality, tradition, sexual restraint, loyalty, patriotism, nationalism, heredity, ethnocentrism, convention and conservatism.

These criticisms, known collectively as Critical Theory, were reflected in such works of the Frankfurt School as Erich Fromm’s Escape from Freedom and The Dogma of Christ, Wilhelm’s Reich’s The Mass Psychology of Fascism and Theodor Adorno’s The Authoritarian Personality. The Authoritarian Personality, published in 1950, substantially influenced Western European psychologists and social scientists. The book was premised on one basic idea, that the presence in a society of Christianity, capitalism, and the patriarchal-authoritarian family created a character prone to racial and religious prejudice and German fascism. The Authoritarian Personality became a handbook for a national campaign against any kind of prejudice or discrimination on the theory that if these evils were not eradicated, another Holocaust might occur on the European continent. This campaign, in turn, provided a basis for Political Correctness. Critical Theory incorporated sub-theories which were intended to chip away at specific elements of the existing culture, including “matriarchal theory,” “androgyny theory,” “personality theory,” “authority theory,” “family theory,” “sexuality theory,” “racial theory,” “legal theory,” and “literary theory.” Put into practice, these theories were to be used to overthrow the prevailing social order and usher in social revolution. To achieve this, the Critical Theorists of the Frankfurt School recognised that traditional beliefs and the existing social structure would have to be destroyed and then replaced. The patriarchal social structure would be replaced with matriarchy; the belief that men and women are different and properly have different roles would be replaced with androgyny; and the belief that heterosexuality is normal would be replaced with the belief that homosexuality is equally “normal.”

full: http://www.scribd.com/doc/60739170/2083-a-European-Declaration-of-Independence


  1. Yes. And?

    Comment by Cecilieaux — July 25, 2011 @ 3:39 pm

  2. What is the purpose of your question? My aim was to inform my readers of the contents of a 2011 version of “Mein Kampf”, as should have been obvious.

    Comment by louisproyect — July 25, 2011 @ 3:43 pm

  3. so Political Correctness is good?

    Comment by Karl — July 25, 2011 @ 3:52 pm

  4. It’s a damn sight better than mass murder, but just as subject to misrepresentation by the Right. Let’s put it that way.

    Comment by W.Kasper — July 25, 2011 @ 5:10 pm

  5. A marxist take on PC: http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/isj61/molyneux.htm

    Comment by herrnaphta — July 25, 2011 @ 6:09 pm

  6. and mass murder is “better” than whole-planet destruction…


    Comment by Karl — July 25, 2011 @ 8:31 pm

  7. molyneux’s screed is empty, typical Marxist puffery full of splitting and self-impression, jargon and cant,

    so many words, so little actually advanced

    Comment by Karl — July 25, 2011 @ 8:36 pm

  8. I was thumbing through the Declaration this morning, curious as to whether or not this was really fascist ideology or just something conservative. I found a very interesting use of democracy in it: basically, that liberal democracy was a “plus” (classical fascists AFAICT didn’t care for it in the slightest, seeing it as weak and feminizing), but that it should be restricted to a “demos” who had, somehow, some pre-existing right to it (muslims, of course, couldn’t be part of that group). It seems like the writer (and I’m not sure it’s just one writer for the whole thing) is coming really close to that Romantic concept of “Volk” and is trying to place (European) democracy within that frame, in keeping with a conservative tendency to restrict democracy as much as possible. If the rest of this stuff doesn’t go into out-right fascism (fwiw, this was posted to Stormfront), I’d say it’s definitely reaching in that direction.

    Comment by Todd — July 25, 2011 @ 9:00 pm

  9. yeah if it ain’t Marxist clearly it’s fascist


    Comment by Karl — July 25, 2011 @ 9:16 pm

  10. Interesting that the enemy is so-called cultural marxism and not revolutionary marxism. Clearly the welfare state of Norway is becoming an intolerable burden for the Norwegian monopoly imperialist class and not even a load of old politically correct wallpapering is tolerable any longer and is sufficient to induce huge paranoia about socialism by stealth. The agitation of the petty bourgeoisie though dangerous for the Norwegian state, in that they can go any way and their destabilisation can potentially open a road to the revolutionary workers, is clearly seen as necessary but how desperate is this high risk strategy and why embark on it? They shot young socialists from the establishment and ruling Norwegian Labour Party for goodness sake not some `Bolshevik’ menace. The ruling class cannot rule in the old way or they are going to find themselves holding a load of worthless bits of paper. That loss has to be socialised and those bonds paid out or a lot of today’s super wealthy are going to find themselves super poor double quick. This is the case too in the rest of Europe even where there are already huge gaps between rich and poor and not much welfare state left and of course we have seen desperate assassinations and the emergence of the Tea Party in the US. Everything has changed since the credit crunch. Raw class struggle is the only thing on the agenda with no niceties or pretense. But as even the mildest labour movement bureaucrat and his innocent children becomes a target for fascism those same bureaucrats or their leaders will be blaming the far left for the fascist menace and demanding they rally around the defence of liberal capitalism as the far right will be blaming immigrants for the actions of this assassin.

    Comment by David Ellis — July 25, 2011 @ 9:56 pm

  11. Clearly the welfare state of Norway is becoming an intolerable burden for the Norwegian monopoly imperialist class

    you are a fool. that guy got all of his political ideas from English-language blogs, he isn’t a product of norwegian political discourse, and he doesn’t care about welfare at all if it is directed at the “right” people.

    that’s not marxism what you are writing, it’s a stupid mechanist idea of fascist conspiracy by the ruling class. that’s not how ideology works

    Comment by PfromGermany — July 25, 2011 @ 10:19 pm

  12. and the capitalist class isn’t actively promoting sites like “gates of vienna” where Breivig got a lot of his ideas. they come into existence form the bottom-up

    Comment by PfromGermany — July 25, 2011 @ 10:23 pm

  13. Thanks for finding these quotations, Louis

    If you enter the document’s search engine at the bottom of the screen, and enter words like Cuba, Fidel Castro and Che Guevara, who are characterized as mass murderers and terrorists (as the Miami exiles often describe them), you will find additional references. The document is well over a thousand pages long, and so I’ve neither read nor printed it out, but there’s enough available via a web search to make the man’s mindset perfectly clear.

    There are 119 references to Iran in the document, including things like this:

    Examples of systematic deletion/ignoration of important issues

    The Western European governments have sanctioned deleting and ignoring large chunks of our history, including censorships of school curriculum’s on the following fields:
    “The West’s unwillingness to prevent or defend Christian Lebanon against Jihadi invasions by the Global Islamic Ummah (among them many Muslim countries including Iran, Syria,Egypt, Jordan). This Jihad eventually lead to the fall of the Christian state of Lebanon. In1911 there were 80% Christians in Lebanon, today there are less than 25% left, a minority who are still being persecuted)”

    FAIRNESS AND ACCURACY IN REPORTING (FAIR) has a terrific and very detailed analysis of how the dominant US mass media’s obsession with hostility to Islam, Iran and so on led many to immediately blame this attack on Islamic radicals when, as was quickly learned, it was rightist Christian anti-Communist and anti-Islamic thinking which provided the ideological underpinnings of this attack.

    Here’s FAIR’s take on the Islam-bashing:

    Walter Lippmann
    Los Angeles, California

    Los Angeles, California
    Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews
    “Cuba – Un Paraíso bajo el bloqueo”

    Comment by Walter Lippmann — July 25, 2011 @ 11:15 pm

  14. Karl, have you even read any of it (or what anyone else has written)?

    >rolls eyes<

    Comment by Todd — July 26, 2011 @ 1:58 am

  15. Fascinating historical synopsis of these schools of thought, Louis, but with all due respect I got to the end of this nail biter and also immediately thought: “Yes, And?” — as a “2011 version of Mein Kamp” definitely wasn’t obvious to me, never having read Hitler’s opus, since I’m convinced he would have remained a historical nobody had not Trotsky lead the Bolsheviks to victory in the Russian Civil War.

    Unless the sociological truisms of the origins of fascism articulated foremost by Trotsky are wrong — then predictions of fascism as a successful ideology in the near future are over-rated.

    Proyect may no longer consider himself a Trotskyist but one thing I believe he believes in his bones is that there will be no successful Hitleresque movement without a powerfully organized working class movement that actually threatens the foundations of the bourgeois order since with all the military power & sophisticated propaganda monopolies at their current disposal they have no need to resort to such meat cleavers like Gestapo tactics.

    Gestapo tactics lead to “The Resistance” which is what they want to avoid when they can so easily subjugate by other means.

    I predict this entry will get lots of hits and an unusually (or annoyingly) large number of responses.

    Comment by Karl Friedrich — July 26, 2011 @ 2:10 am

  16. Some interesting stuff here:


    Comment by Todd — July 26, 2011 @ 2:10 am

  17. #11 ` you are a fool.’

    Bit strong. Any particular reason you’d rather engage in insult than debate? I don’t think we’ve engaged before so that is a very peculiar way to open. Have I upset you before by any chance?

    Comment by David Ellis — July 26, 2011 @ 5:40 am

  18. Ah, so he did rip this from Lind? I knew the trash about cultural Marxism sounded so familiar.

    Also, it seems that despite all the “sources” he used, he made the common mistake of attributing the “long march through the institutions” to Gramsci, when it was Rudi Dutschke who raised that as his slogan.

    Regardless, I expect increased interest in “cultural Marxism” in the coming weeks, and unfortunately most references on the Internet originate ultimately from Lind’s conspiracies.

    Comment by RC — July 26, 2011 @ 7:57 am

  19. “so Political Correctness is good?”

    Well, that depends what you mean by that stupid right-wing cliche. If “political correctness” means opposing racism, sexism, homophobia, etc, then, yes, it’s good.

    Comment by John — July 26, 2011 @ 7:19 pm

  20. Let us get this straight, only the crazed far reaches of the far right believe in this cultural Marxism conspiracy. I think the combination of fascist and fantacist is a pretty dangerous cocktail.

    He is a fascist. This talk that he supports ‘democracy’ so can’t be a fascist is bullshit. Has no one noticed that far right groups have ditched the Nazi programme due to it being totally unpalatable to most people due to the repeated history channel docs, films etc etc reminding everyone about the evil Nazi’s were etc etc etc. Todays fascists have had to update their image, they have been skilled at doing this. But come on, their fascism is never far from the surface.

    Comment by SteveH — July 26, 2011 @ 8:25 pm

  21. If we’re talking Europe, they want ‘democracy’ to be as restricted as they want citizenship (or rights) to be. They want to maintain ‘democracy’ as a mythical Enlightenment/colonial Euro-tradition ‘unthreatened’ by the demands or self-determination of marginalised groups. This why they constantly harp on about Muslims, immigrants, the unemployed etc. not sharing those ‘values’. And with that, blaming feminists, socialists, gays etc. for ‘softening’ this muscular ‘tradition’. This how fascism re-brands itself – and enters the mainstream. There are those who would consider themselves far from fascist, who have similar attitudes (including those claiming to speak for the ‘left’). White identity is the only ‘identity politics’ they wish to promote, as pandered to by Merkel, Sarkozy, Cameron etc. etc. There seems to be a similar situation among the Right (whether or not they call themselves such) in the US too.

    Comment by W.Kasper — July 26, 2011 @ 8:42 pm

  22. It’s funny how right-wingers always point out any non-proletariat origin stories of Marxists – “son of a wealthy banker”, “born into a comfortable middle class life”, “owner of a factory”, etc etc. I guess it’s the result of their ahistorical thinking.

    Comment by Brian Gallagher — July 27, 2011 @ 2:55 am

  23. Right, Gallagher.

    The social backround of a revolutionist is a red herring used by reactionaries as a diversion, akin to redbaiting or scape goating, just as is race, gender & sexuality.

    The ahistorical right (which has reduced the history departments in every Western University to virtual pauperism while those departments that serve militarism wallow like lotto winners) loves to historically ignore the social backrounds responsible for the intellectual impetus of the French Revolution — when heads really fucking rolled and sanscoulotte kids kicked the skulls of the Aristocracy around like soccer balls.

    What ultimately counts is what side of the barricades an individual is on when the bells of the class struggle are tolling.

    Comment by Karl Friedrich — July 27, 2011 @ 3:29 am

  24. The ahistorical right (which has reduced the history departments in every Western University to virtual pauperism while those departments that serve militarism wallow like lotto winners) loves to historically ignore the social backrounds responsible for the intellectual impetus of the French Revolution — when heads really fucking rolled and sanscoulotte kids kicked the skulls of the Aristocracy around like soccer balls.

    The Enlightment as sponsored the bourgeoisie pretty much ended with the French Revolution, when they saw things were getting out of hand. They haven’t added much philosophically since.

    Comment by purple — July 27, 2011 @ 5:17 am

  25. A Marxist take on him from our comrades in Norway



    Comment by Harry Monro — July 27, 2011 @ 9:06 am

  26. My understanding is that this is a palimpsest; he stole chunks from a wide range of US/UK rightwingers, including Ted Kakzinski the Unabomber and changed certain terms to “cultural Marxist” or “Islamist.” So this is no Scandinavian “SCUM Manifesto” or “Myth of the 20th Century”; it’s like a readymade or cheap Mad-Libs exercise. I think it says a lot about how much rightwing crap is out there that Breivik could just steal 1000 pages worth and slap it together like that….also his crimes remind me too much of certain videogame scenarios like the brutal “No Russian” level of “Modern Warfare 2” where a team of thugs mow down everybody at a fictional airport in Russia. Everything seems to be generic with this guy.

    Comment by Strelnikov — July 27, 2011 @ 10:14 am

  27. Reading through his “manifesto, I was struck by its lack of passion. There’s no stormfront-like call outs of the WHITE RACE or bad Jewish puns (i.ei “Jew York City”). Breivek truly is the bitter fruit of the gone-to-college racism of the Public Interest types.

    Comment by Rojo — July 27, 2011 @ 5:50 pm

  28. As it is used on the Right the phrase “cultural Marxism” generally refers to what in Lenin’s day was called “Bernsteinism” or something in that vein. Eduard Bernstein had argued that the period of recurring crises within capitalism that the 19th century saw was now over and from here on there would be an evolutionary trend for capitalism to gradually transform itself into socialism through the democratic process, without any actual proletarian revolution ever occurring. The label of “cultural Marxism” is usually used by the Right-wing to brand liberals who advocate reformist measures justified under a “multi-culturalism” banner.

    This is one more reason why I consider it a disaster-in-the-making whenever anyone claiming to be a “socialist” of some type declares their support for a Reagan-admirer like Barack Obama. Obama is clearly not looking to the Left for any advice. But when alleged “socialists” try to cast Obama’s victory in 2008 as some type of “victory for the Left” then it simply feeds the Right-wing legend that behind Obama’s election there is a secret “cultural Marxist” agenda, even when Obama himself clearly doesn’t give a hoot what any of his vaunted “Left-wing” supporters think. Feeding the Right is all that is accomplished by such tripe.

    Comment by PatrickSMcNally — July 27, 2011 @ 7:49 pm

  29. afaik, “cultural marxism” is often used as a codeword for jewish influence, but that aspect seems not to be very important to Breivik

    Comment by PfromGermany — July 27, 2011 @ 8:50 pm

  30. Although one can find sectors of the Right which ascribe “cultural Marxism” to the Learned Elders of Zion, the term has always had a much more specific meaning than that. It refers to the idea that somehow a “Marxist agenda” can be enacted without the proletarian revolution which Marx himself had theorized about but rather by working through the legal apparatus of bourgeois democracy in order to enact by stealth a cultural change which achieves what is, allegedly, the true Marxist goal (while proletarian revolution is regarded as merely a cover invented by Marx to deceive the naive followers). Although this line of argument can be phrased in terms of Jewish influence, it really has a more precise separate meaning.

    Comment by PatrickSMcNally — July 27, 2011 @ 9:26 pm

  31. “Everything seems to be generic with this guy”, and

    “Breivek truly is the bitter fruit of the gone-to-college racism of the Public Interest types”

    Right, exactly, and that is what is interesting, in a bad way, about this case. It indicates that the conditions, in the form of the rot of “mainstream” bourgeois social discourse, for the appearance of a mass neo-fascist movement have “ripened” to the point that it can spontaneously ignite a consolidated neo-fascist ideology and practice in an otherwise relatively “normal” individual afflicted with a common set of neuroses of the sort that might afflict us all: “mama’s boy”, “obsessive video gamer” and so forth. Ho-hum.

    In contrast to the “insane” theme already being propagated in the media so as to get this uncomfortable story off the pages as quickly as possible, it is clear that Breivek rationally acted out the role assigned to him by a clearly “received” ideology, as a Christian Knight Martyr. He also cut and pasted his “received” plagiarisms in a very coherent manner. It actually all holds together quite well. The ideology is insane; the individual, quite lucid.

    Comment by Matt — July 28, 2011 @ 8:31 pm

  32. smug Marxists are amusing. they assume I’m a right winger because I disagree with Proyect and Kasper.

    pure brilliance, that deductive illogic.

    Comment by Karl — July 30, 2011 @ 1:49 am

  33. No Karl. My guess is they assume you hold dear some potentially reactionary politics when you cannot imagine that a viable socialist movement is going to inevitably have to accommodate enormous leeway & deference to historically oppressed peoples, which include women & gays, who through either class or other social struggle & affirmative action have earned a position to have their righteously loud & pushy voices heard. The more the socialist movement shows them a future the less boisterous will be their demands. Bottom line is the issue is largely a red herring insofar as we socialist revolutionaries have much bigger fish to fry, starting with stopping 3 predatory wars and 3/4 of a trillion each year of working people’s sweat equity squandered maliciously & viciously for the benefit of a handful of the richest & most parasitic corporations in human history.

    Comment by Karl Friedrich — July 30, 2011 @ 2:28 am

  34. whatever the case, they’re shockingly stupid and narrowminded, tribalist, condescending and… wrong.

    quite a cocktail, and clearly they’ve drunk several pitchers of it

    deep irony in their smug onanism

    Comment by Karl — July 30, 2011 @ 4:02 am

  35. also if you’re among them, oh Glossy One, apology for saying “they” and not “you”

    Comment by Karl — July 30, 2011 @ 4:04 am

  36. So Karl –
    You’re too chickenshit to engage with the comments on my blog, so you throw it over here?

    “narrow-minded (wishing you were broader-minded), tribalist (not your tribe), condescending (smarter than you) and… wrong (do the math for that one).” ?

    Every now and then, you’re on the right track but the blinkers overwhelm you.

    Comment by W.Kasper — July 30, 2011 @ 9:50 pm

  37. Karl wrote:

    “they assume I’m a right winger because I disagree with Proyect and Kasper.”

    No: we know you’re a dick because you act like one.

    Comment by Todd — July 31, 2011 @ 2:42 am

  38. If the Perpetrator Been from the Third World… 
    By Manuel E. Yepe 

    A CubaNews translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann.

    Behring Anders Breivik, the Norwegian confessed perpetrator of the horrible Oslo and Utoya Island massacres that shocked the world leaving 76 dead, posted to the Internet a “manifesto” defining the ultra-rightist, anti-Islamic and anti-communist ideology which moved his repulsive mass murderer’s behavior. Although the 1518 page “manifesto” under the title 2003: A European Declaration of Independence, was placed on the Internet on July 22nd with the signature of Andrew Berwick, this is clearly a free English translation of the Norwegian murderer’s name.

    When arrested that same day, Friday July 22nd. Anders Behring Breivik, declared he was responsible for the massacre of the young participants in the summer camp organized every year by the Youth Branch of the Government Labor Party in Utoya, a small forest island resort. He also admitted responsibility for the bomb attack which had killed 7 people in the Oslo District government building a few hours earlier.       

    Behring, 32 years of age, was known from 1999 to 2004 to have been an active member of the Norwegian Progress Party, a popular extreme right organization which obtained 23% of the votes in the 2009 elections.

    In his “manifesto”, Behring argues that his country has been infiltrated by Marxism and is threatened by Islam. He says that in 2002 he joined a group of neo-Templars to fight the “Marxist cultural elite”. He also gives evidence of the Islamophobia of the populist right which considers Islam as an invading and conquering religion and which opposes the influx of immigrants, the loss of sovereignty which in his mind is represented by the integration of supra-national bodies, as well as multi-culturalism which he perceives as the destruction of the national identity.

    His “manifesto” contains typical Miami-style diatribes against the revolutionary leaders Fidel Castro and Che Guevara whom he includes among the Marxists he hates.

    The document left by the criminal to explain his motivations contains ten violently hostile references to the leader of the Cuban revolution and against the internationalist revolutionary guerrilla murdered by the CIA in Bolivia. He accuses both of being “terrorists and mass murderers”, joining the media campaign that Washington has been waging against Cuba’s revolution and independence for more than half a century. 

    The Norwegian criminal considers himself a “hunter of Marxists” and uses the same language of the radio stations that broadcast in Spanish from south Florida and the Miami journals (like El Nuevo Herald) to disparage the leaders of the Cuban Revolution; or the rhetoric of the Chairperson of the House Foreign Relations Committee, Ileana Ros-Lethinen, who openly promotes the assassination of the leader of the Cuban Revolution.  

    FULL: http://www.walterlippmann.com/docs3210.html

    Comment by Walter Lippmann — July 31, 2011 @ 2:49 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: