http://bit.ly/n5WGOX
Øyvind Strømmen
August 5, 2011
The identity of Fjordman has been revealed. He revealed it himself, realising that media would sooner or later figure out who he is. Personally, I don’t find his identity all that interesting, but it is a good thing that we now know. Just yesterday, someone else was “exposed” as being Fjordman on wikipedia, and in journalist circles in Norway, there’s been several rumours.
Some of these rumours have been outright laughable, one of them pointing at a fellow who has battled conspiracy thinking for years. Others have been more plausible, at least pointing at people who share a considerable number of ideological ideas with Fjordman, people who have bought into the same kind of conspiracy thinking as him. The fact that Fjordman’s identity is now known will stop that rumour mill, and that’s all for the better.
What’s interesting about Fjordman, however, isn’t his identity, but his ideas; and I would recommend that journalists writing about them also take the time to check out some of his articles. Almost 40 of Fjordman’s essays have been included, in full, in the Norwegian terrorist Anders B. Breivik’s manifesto, and reading those essays will not merely give you an insight into Fjordman’s thinking, they will give an insight into the ideas which inspired the terrorist atrocities.
Gates of Vienna – one of the central blogs in the “counterjihad” universe – now writes:
Fjordman is the best of us. He is not just a brilliant scholar and a fine writer, but also the most decent, gentle, and humane person I have ever met. He is a man of utmost integrity, and it shines through in his dealings with others as well as in the millions of words he has written.
Ole Jørgen Anfindsen, who included an essay of Fjordman in his book “Selvmordsparadigmet”, seems to also think quite highly of Fjordman, but in the Norwegian radio program Dagsnytt 18 earlier today, he did note that the rhetorics of Fjordman is “too hard”. I’ve got a newsflash for Anfindsen: The main problem with Fjordman is not his rhetorics, but his ideas. And I will point to a few examples.
Let’s start with Fjordman’s essay “Native Revolt: A European declaration of independence”, one of the many included in the terrorist’s manifesto, which – incidentally – carries almost same name, but with “2083″ added to it. Fjordman wrote this essay in 2007. It’s long – like most of his essays. It’s angry, too, like most of them. It’s an essay worth reading, if you want to get a glimpse of “the utmost integrity” of Fjordman. Let’s start with Fjordman’s opinion of the European Union:
Why is this pan-European EU dictatorship still functioning? Because seeing is believing. Most Europeans still don’t know that EU leaders are using their money without their consent to merge Europe with the Arab world because their media don’t [sic!] tell them this.
Now, that’s actually a very good summary of Fjordman’s conspiracy thinking. The European Union, one of the largest democratic experiments in world history, is a dictatorship. Its leaders are allegedly using our money to “merge Europe with the Arab world”. And the media is in on the conspiracy, too, since it doesn’t tell us anything about it. But, to be sure, the conspiracy theory goes deeper than just that. On the news blog document.no (which is very critical of current immigration policies, and of Islam, but which does not belong in the “counterjihadist” category), both Fjordman and the terrorist Anders B. Breivik commented on the same post in November 2009, a post on the minaret ban in Switzerland, and on reactions to this. Below, you will find a translation into English. If you’re looking for the original Norwegian, you will find it in another recent post at my blog.
First, the terrorist:
This is only the beginning of a long-lasting campaign of psychological warfare against the Swiss [written with capital S in Norwegian, too, which is a break with grammatical rules suggesting a somewhat unhealthy reverence with national states]. The worst thing of it all, is that this is very effective, as we saw with Austria a few years back. The Swiss people will cave for the demonisation, like the Austrians and the Serbs before them. The fact that European and American mainstream media, 95% of the NGOs and 80% of the political parties are all controlled by cultural marxists is possibly the foremost reason for us having to suffer multiculturalism (cultural marxism) and islamisation for at least another 20-70 years. [...]20 years at the earliest is my bet (70 years at the max). So, change will come, it’s guaranteed, we will just have to be patient.
(Do note that the idea of “Cultural Marxism”, too, is lifted from Fjordman).
Then Fjordman:
My prediction is that the European Union will apart from the inside within 20 years, and that there is a full-scale civil war in at least one European country before this happens. Sooner or later common people will discover that the European Union and European leaders have already decided – behind the backs of the population – that a continued Muslim colonisation of our continent is to be given free reins. This is the largest betrayal throughout world history, and it is infathomable that our socalled critical press, including the largest newspaper VG, does not write a single word about it. The fact is that Western leaders are conducting demographic and judicial warfare against the white majority population in Western countries in order to break them down, all to the benefit of an authoritarian, post-democratic world order with themselves at the top.
Now, please note that this is not merely an anti-Islamic ideology. The ideology is anti-Western. Fjordman really believes that there’s a grand conspiracy which includes leading politicians and the media. Here he is 100% in agreement with Breivik, or – to be precise – Breivik is in 100% agreement with him. Now, of course Fjordman claims – both as Fjordman and as Peder Jensen – that he has never encouraged violence. Well, frankly, I don’t think you have to. If you’re saying that Jens Stoltenberg, for instance, is actually a worse traitor than Quisling, if you’re saying that Europe is being occupied and colonised, if you’re saying that politicians, journalists and academics – across the political scale – are willingly playing a part in this… if you’re saying all of this, politically motivated violence does not seem like an absurd idea; the step onto violence is not a very far one.
That said, in his “declaration”, Fjordman poses a number of demands. He does this, of course, on the behalf of “we”, “the European peoples”, a rather megalomaniac concept for an anonymous blogger from a small town in Western Norway to throw around. The demands include the dismantling of the European Union, trials against people having taken part in the alleged conspiracy and betrayal, a process of “de-Eurabification”, a halt in all Muslim immigration to Europe (regardless of cause), etc. And if these demands are not met, Fjordman writes – in 2007 – then “we”, “the European peoples”, must conclude:
If these demands are not fully implemented, if the European Union isn’t dismantled, Multiculturalism isn’t rejected and Muslim immigration isn’t stopped, we, the peoples of Europe, are left with no other choice than to conclude that our authorities have abandoned us, and that the taxes they collect are therefore unjust and that the laws that are passed without our consent are illegitimate. We will stop paying taxes and take the appropriate measures to protect our own security and ensure our national survival.
Now, of course, Fjordman never tells us what these “appropriate measures” actually are. But to pretend that the problem with this text is “rhetorics”, well, that’s rather poorly played by mr. Anfindsen, and this should be rather clear.
Of course, it doesn’t stop there. Fjordman has written a large number of essays, covering a large number of topics. In one of them, “The Coming Crash“, he attacks the United States. It’s an interesting example of his writings, because of the overt racism in it. Once again, the problem is ideas, not merely rhetorics.
If the Soviet Union was the Evil Empire then the USA is the Diversity Empire, committed to spreading Multiculturalism and genetic Communism around the world, especially to white majority countries.
[…]
When I see how Nidal Hasan was treated by the US military I don’t think I want these people involved in my affairs. They would probably say that native Euros are Nazis who oppress the poor Muslims. Then they would bomb us and say it is for our own good, just like they did to the Serbs. The United States will not survive this century. It will be split into several countries according to ethnic, racial and perhaps even ideological lines. There is no such thing as a universal nation. People want to live with their own kind. The only ones who are not allowed to do so are whites, and they are starting to get tired of this double standard.
[…]
Self-preservation is a natural instinct for all living things down to plants and bacteria. It’s about time that whites reclaim the same right without apology. I am increasingly convinced that the developments we are witnessing are deliberate. The lies we are being served are virtually identical in every Western country. I’ve had some discussions about this with my friend Ohmyrus who thinks this is about a structural failure in our political system. I don’t necessarily disagree with that, but I also believe there is a planned long-term goal of breaking down all white majority nations to create a new global oligarchy. Anti-white ideologies are now taught in every Western university and were arguably elevated to national ideology in the USA with the election of Obama.
His friend Ohmyrus is, by the way, a Chinese blogger arguing the ills of democracy. Now, Fjordman says that he does not necessarily agree with that, but in his book “Defeating Eurabia” he approvingly quotes a British blogger who notes that “this is an existential war”, and “if this means that we need to suspend parliamentary democracy for the duration — so be it”.
Let me point to another essay by Fjordman, another one which Breivik decided to include in his cut-and-paste-manifesto. The essay is called “The Failure of Western Feminism“. In it Fjordman notes:
The truth is that any nation is always protected from external aggression by the men. The women can play a supporting role in this, but never more than that. For all the talk about “girl power” and “women kicking ass” which you see on movies these days, if the men of your “tribe” are too weak or demoralised to protect you, you will be enslaved and crushed by the men from other “tribes” before you can say “Vagina Monologues”. Which means that if you break down men’s masculinity, their willingness and ability to defend themselves and their families, you destroy the country. That’s exactly what Western women have done for the last forty years.
For several years, I have said that Fjordman is indeed a fascist. Now, this is a word which is often thrown about much too easily. I’ve heard enough people speak of the Norwegian PRogress Party (Fremskrittspartiet) as fascist, suggesting that they do not know much about the Progress Party, and that they know next to nothing about fascism. When I call Fjordman as fascist, however, I’m using a rather common scholarly definition, that of leading fascism scholar Roger Griffin:
[F]ascism is best defined as a revolutionary form of nationalism, one that sets out to be a political, social and ethical revolution, welding the ‘people’ into a dynamic national community under new elites infused with heroic values. The core myth that inspires this project is that only a populist, trans-class movement of purifying, cathartic national rebirth (palingenesis) can stem the tide of decadence.
Now, Fjordman is obviously a nationalist, and – lo! behold! – he does call for a native revolt. In his works, he describes a political revolution, which he sees as necessary, to ensure a national rebirth of sorts. In fact, he writes of the necessity of “a new Renaissance, where European civilization can flourish once more”, and even says that “We need to make sure, though, that those who have championed the toxic ideas of Multiculturalism and mass immigration of alien tribes disappear with it”. And, Fjordman does speak of decadence as one of the root-causes of the European decay which plays a central role in his world-view, while of course focussing on Marxism – a rather wide category in his world (that’s hardly a new meme amongst fascists). He furthermore does call for massive “ethical” and “social” changes, amongst other things to ensure that (White) women have more babies. He seems willing to “suspend” parliamentary democracy. And on top of it all, he is obsessed with the idea of historical heroes, for instance Charles Martel and John III Sobieski. In his book, Fjordman writes:
The EU is systematically surrendering the continent to our worst enemies. [...] When an organization ignores the interests of its own people yet implements the interests of that people’s enemies, that organization has become an actively hostile entity run by a corrupt class of abject traitors. This is what the EU is today. [...]Those inhabiting the European continent are first and foremost Germans, Poles, Italians, Hungarians, Portuguese etc. “Europe” has existed mainly to protect the continent against Islamic expansionism. Charles Martel created Europe in the modern sense when he defeated the Arab invasion in the seventh century, aided by people such as Pelayo, who started the Reconquista in the Iberian Peninsula, John Hunyadi and Lazar of Serbia who fought against the Turks in the Balkans and John III Sobieski, King of Poland, who beat the Ottomans during the 1683 Battle of Vienna. The EU is actively working to undo everything Charles Martel and these men achieved. This makes it the anti-European Union.
In short, Fjordman neatly fits the definition of “fascism”. He is a neo-fascist ideologist. To boot, he does not seem to have any problems – whatsoever – in cooperating with political groups whose roots are decidedly and glaringly obviously found in the post-WWII movement of European neo-fascism. And you know what they say: If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
Notably, too, every single one of the ideas of Fjordman mentioned above are in one way or the other repeated by the terrorist Anders B. Breivik. Every single one. In spite of that, some people try to make rather daft excuses. One of them is Andrew Bostom, who writes:
An hysterical, morally cretinous press and blogosphere—Norwegian, other European, and American— [...]continues to persist that he was Brevik’s “main inspiration,” a charge akin to accusing the Beatles of “inspiring” Charles Manson, or Jody Foster “inspiring” John Hinckley.
News flash for Andrew G. Bostom: The Beatles did not peddle an ideology of hatred, and the lyrics of Helter Skelter do not really spell the recipe of “race war”, like they did for Charles Manson. Fjordman, on the other hand, did not write lyrics for a melody. For 6 years he has written a large number of blog posts peddling a world-view where leading politicians are guilty of treason and Europe is being occupied. And that makes sort of… well… a difference, don’t you think?
I do wonder, though, mr. Bostom, would you make similar excuses for an Islamist blogger who had inspired an Islamist terrorist? You wouldn’t? Quelle surprise.
Updated: Fixed a spelling mistake which a Facebook friend was kind enough to point out. Added webcitation-links, and also added a reference to another Fjordman essay pointed out by Sigve Indregard. 05.08 – 23:37
