Monthly Archives: May 2013

The Norwegian fascist party and the Nordic league

A screenshot of an application by Commander Breivik, send February 19th, has been published by the Norwegian press. The application is for the creation of an association named ‘The Norwegian fascist party and the Nordic league’.


The screenshot states as following:

Political organization

Further description of the party’s activities I would like included if possible.

The party’s purpose is democratic fascist power in Norway to win parliamentary support for the establishment of a Norwegian-Nordic indigenous state in south-Østfold, named, Norway Yggdra.

(If it is not possible to include the text I request that the process continues with no delays)

The application apparently also states that for the time being this will be a one-man party.

March 21 the application was rejected, this because Breivik applied to create an association, which requires at least two people.

In order to create an actual political party Breivik needs 5000 signatures. In a true democracy people vote anonymously, and by requiring 5000 signatures this means that if there are 5000 patriots willing to sign, their political preference will be conveniently documented by their benevolent totalitarian government.

Breivik’s lawyer, Tord Jordet, stated he knows little about the party, except that Breivik wants to conduct his political activities in a legal and democratic framework. Jordet also stated that the strict letter control, preventing Breivik from writing anything with a political content, makes it difficult for Breivik to cooperate with supporters.

It’s unclear how to interpret this. Obviously there is no democratic or peaceful solution, but separatist political parties are a crucial component to radicalize and polarize society. The Basque separatist ETA movement comes to mind. So starting separatist political parties is a crucial component.

Breivik’s use of the term fascist could be seen as an attack on political correctness by being provocative while staying true to the ideology described in 2083. As he’s been completely silenced by the tighter letter control that was started in August 2012 this is one of the few ways for him to get a message out. His use of the term fascist seems a little bit out of character, so the main intend must have been to provoke, or perhaps Breivik has given up on consolidating conservative forces and is instead focusing on the radical right.

Of course any political movement in a time of conflict will need a focus on strong leadership, ultranationalism, ethnocentrism, and militarism in order to survive, and the proper term for this would indeed be fascism. Fascism is essentially a form of ultra-patriotism. If we win the civil war the fascist government would be replaced with a conservative government, this process is outlined in 2083. It’s important to remember that fascism and totalitarianism are not the intended goal, the intended goal is to end destructive anti-nationalism and totalitarianism so the European people can live in freedom. This will most closely resemble the USA prior to WW2.

If we lose the civil war we’ll live under an equivalent of Stalinism. Under Stalinism minorities were placed in a position of power over the indigenous population of Eastern Europe. Under multiculturalism minorities will be placed in a position of power over the indigenous population of Western Europe. Why? Because more and more people will do what Breivik did, making it impossible for the ruling class to trust anyone with light eyes and light skin.

One advantage Norway has is that the Sami people are recognized as an indigenous people with the right to preserve their cultural, genetic, and territorial heritage. Of course they can’t be openly racist, but that’s why the Sami get to speak their own language, so anything out of the ordinary can be safely ignored. The same goes for Muslims, if they glorify terrorism in Arabic it’s alright. As obtaining a democratic majority is impossible the focus of a European indigenous rights movement would be to get the same recognition for Europeans, either politically, or by using various forms of civil disobedience.

A Norwegian activist could for example try to find out to what extend the Sami are protected by trying to move into Sami territory, ask Sami women out on dates, and question their dedication to multiculturalism. If the Sami indigenous rights include racial protectionism, the question could be raised why Nordics are not entitled to racial and cultural protectionism.

If a political solution becomes available this would mean that territory is assigned to indigenous Europeans, which allows them to form an autonomous democratic socio-economic government. This indigenous government would have authority over who is allowed to live in the indigenous reservation, including the right to cast out people. A strong constitution would need to be created to protect this reservation.

At the center of the reservation a walled city could be build. This because an indigenous European reservation would likely attract wealthier people (wanting a safe place for their children to grow up) which in turn will attract criminals as is the case in South Africa.

This solution is not going to work in the long run, if you look at South Africa the European population will eventually become a democratically insignificant minority who is hated by the poor non-European majority, who will vote in favor of communism and forcibly redistribute the wealth. So not only should the goal be to have a reservation, but to pay the bare minimum in taxes, and to have the right to create an army.

If no political solution is allowed there is always the option to create gated communities, with the neighborhood association functioning as a make-shift government. Islands can be bought for this purpose as well. These communities might be forcibly disbanded for racial discrimination, and would obviously be disbanded in the long run as the political climate changes in favor of communism, as it inevitably will as seen in South Africa and South America.

These communities should not be viewed as a hiding place, but as fortifications once it dawns on enough Europeans that multiculturalism is a self destructive ideology that will result in the genocide of the European people. Burying your head in the sand is an evolutionary dead end.

Breivik International: Czech, English, and Norwegian translations

Commander Breivik’s opening statement has been translated to Czech. It’s linked from Breivik International. A more direct list of translations of Breivik’s opening statement is available on the Breivik Timeline.

The first psychiatric report is now available in properly formatted HTML in Norwegian and English.

The second psychiatric report is also available in properly formatted HTML in Norwegian and English.

In the English version particular attention should be given to Chapter 17 which contains summaries of interviews with Breivik, this chapter is a human translation and much easier to read than was previously the case.

As chapter 17 consists of about 50 pages of text I’ve decided to highlight some interesting quotes for those who lack the time or interest to read the entire thing themselves.

On 17 february 2012 Breivik agrees to a second psychiatric evaluation on the condition that each session is recorded.

Breivik admits to having paid for sex with two prostitutes in Prague in 2010 in an attempt to get in touch with Czech criminals in order to purchase illegal weapons. Breivik was too humble to say so himself during the interview, but these were two out of many sacrifices he made for the cause.

Breivik explains that his speech on February 6, 2012 was intended for his supporters. He demanded to be released and be given a medal of honor. He explains it as an orchestrated show intended as an act of defiance.

Breivik addresses the claim by the 1st report that he made grandiose claims about having earned a total of 4 million kroner. That Breivik earned a large sum of money, and engaged in tax evasion, was later established to be a fact during the trial.

Breivik mentions that one thing that particularly upset his father was that he send him three dog food bowls for Christmas, one with the dog’s name, one with his father’s name, and one with his stepmother’s name. Breivik’s sense of humor might come from the mother’s side of the family.

Breivik refuses a MRI scan of his brain or an EEG study to determine whether he has brain damage. He might consider doing so if the Labor party’s parliamentary representatives get their brains scanned as well, given they are allowing Islamic mass immigration. He adds that he’s kidding.

Breivik doesn’t see himself in a leadership position after his release because he has too much blood on his hands. On the other hand he did buy his mother a puppy when she broke up with his stepfather. Now I am imagining the following conversation:

Cultural Marxist: He killed 77 people!

National Socialist: But he bought his mother a puppy!

Cultural Marxist: 77!!

National Socialist: 88??

Breivik mentions he gets more mail than he can respond to, and as time progresses there is less hate mail, and subsequently more mail from supporters. There are Swedish, German, Danish, French and Norwegian letters. Some say they have been inspired by him and have become more extreme as a result of 7/22.

Breivik says he created the term Suicidal Humanist himself, as humanists are so naive that they embraces a culture that makes them exterminate themselves.

Breivik says that on 7/22 he stopped the car a few hundred meters before the government quarters and felt extreme anxiety, remembering only bits and pieces of what happened afterwards. After he had placed the bomb and returned to the getaway car at Hammersborg square his mind returned to normal, until he arrived at Utøya and executed the camp leader, after which he was in an altered state of mind until after his arrest.

Breivik emphasizes what he wanted to achieve on 7/22:

1. To distribute the compendium to those on the threshold of becoming militant nationalists.

2. Trigger a witch hunt on moderate cultural conservatives, so they will lose faith in democracy, and there will be a polarization of the population.

3. Send a message to all who betray the European culture through support for multiculturalism and Islamisation, that treachery is punishable by death, ie “strike fear into the hearts of our enemies.”

Breivik states he is not going to take his own life as it goes against his Catholic and Orthodox views.

Breivik mentions Fjordman and asks the experts to read “Will the Netherlands Survive the 21st century?” which he considers to be Fjordman’s most important essay.

He describes his relationship to the woman from Belarus. He was in love with her, but it lasted a week, and he found out that she was a gold digger.

Breivik stresses the importance of Bushido meditation, and explains his promotional video on YouTube can be used for this purpose. The music combined with visualizing the video strengthens his fighting spirit. He also explains it’s a form of self indoctrination to stay committed to his cause. Breivik says he tried praying, but that this didn’t work all that well for him, possibly because he’s not very religious. He started meditating in 2006, with a particular focus on becoming emotionless, with a particular focus on removing fear.

Breivik says he feels guilt to some extend, but does not regret his actions. He says he is proud to have conducted a successful operation after years of preparation  but that he finds it upsetting that the operation was needed.

Breivik adds that another attack will happen unless the government abandons multiculturalism.

When asked if he still sees himself as a “Justiciar Knight” he answers he does not distance himself from the system proposed in 2083, but that he’s open to suggestions from other militant nationalists.

Breivik estimates the chances of being released as close to zero.

Battlefield Wikipedia

I was planning to write about Wikipedia at one point, but I moved doing so up the queue as recently journalists discovered one of Commander Breivik’s Wikipedia accounts and did a little bit of investigative reporting, if you can call it that.

The account in question is named Conservative and the 4 edits made by the account can be viewed on Wikipedia’s contribution log of Conservative. What is interesting in this case is that Breivik is accused of fabricating facts when he added notes to a text about Sigurd the Crusader.

In one part Breivik clearly emphasizes situations where crusaders freed people from Islamic oppression in Spain. This information was obfuscated in the original research article that Breivik’s adaptation was based on.

In another part Breivik is accused of changing a battle of Sigurd the Crusader against Vikings to a battle against Muslims. If you closely examine the text it becomes clear that Breivik added a note that Viking pirates off of the coast of Spain were most likely Muslim pirates, but he does clarify that the source he uses called it a Viking force. Sigurd’s crusade was documented by an Icelandic poet named Haldor Skvaldre, and the degree of historical accuracy is questionable, and it’s more than reasonable to wonder whether a Viking king on a crusade would attack Viking pirates.

The other accusation is more obscure, as Haldor Skvaldre describes a sea battle at the straight of Gibraltar without mentioning who the opponents were. One researcher claims this was a Viking force, but doesn’t provide any sources for this claim other than the description of Haldor Skvaldre, which doesn’t make a mention of Vikings. Breivik, who is clearly doing his own research based on original sources, draws the conclusion that the opponents were Muslims. I would have to side with Breivik here, and it’s clear that anyone wanting to make the exceptional claim that this was a Viking force would have to provide exceptional proof.

Of course this shows a weakness in society in general, most journalists are incapable of questioning the status quo because (like most people) they have a strong desire to conform, so the only conclusion (if Breivik says something out of the ordinary) is that Breivik is manipulating, delusional, or lying. There is scarce room for objectivity, not to mention there is nothing to gain and everything to lose by reporting objectively on Breivik.

What is interesting as well is Breivik’s edit of the entry of Kungälv, a Scandinavian city, and the flurry of activity that followed. At first someone deleted all of the information added by Breivik, which someone put a stop to. Then one paragraph and a source was removed with the claim that the source did not back up the text in the paragraph. The source most likely did back up the text, but like everyone else I don’t care enough to double check, and go back and forth with some idiot trying to get the information to stay until some admin with Cultural Marxist leanings blocks you for disruptive behavior.

What might dawn on some from this example is that Wikipedia is perhaps one of the most saddening examples of political correctness. In order to write anything on Wikipedia you need a source from a respectable publication, and in order for a publication to be respectable it needs to be political correct. Even if you find one source that’s politically incorrect there will be ten sources to counter it, and Cultural Marxists will be quick to engage into a game of tug of war once they notice that you are trying to rewrite political correct history or reality.

If you create a new account and edit the most controversial and sacred articles first you’ll most likely get banned right off the bat for being a ‘single purpose’ account. This may seem retarded, especially if you correctly source your contributions, but that’s how Wikipedia works. This means that in order to edit controversial articles you first need to spend a considerable amount of time editing a variety of uncontroversial articles.

Even if you manage to create a good enough reputation to avoid getting banned (without a trial) you’ll find out quickly that Wikipedia is in essence a utilitarian democracy, meaning that the group with the most fanatic idiots wins. In recent years this means that Muslims have gained a lot of influence on Wikipedia, with some help from their Marxist friends.

Wikipedia remains useful for uncontroversial articles. An alternative for Islamic articles is WikiIslam which was created by Wikipedia editors who were tired of seeing their contributions erased by Muslims and their appeasers. The quality of WikiIslam is mediocre however, as is often the case with Wikipedia offshoots.

Metapedia is a White Nationalist clone of Wikipedia, but if you look at the article about Anders Behring Breivik it quickly becomes clear that the same type of people are in charge who’ve made any kind of meaningful nationalist resistance impossible for the past decades. It’s difficult to classify this group, but their mental state is highly emotional (just like with Cultural Marxists), and one important benefit of 7/22 is that a line has been drawn in the sand that separates the wheat from the chaff.

One project of interest could be to list all Wikipedia articles that show an inherit bias, and include the omitted information. This has the added benefit that you can get a clear overview and concentration of knowledge that is deemed forbidden by the Cultural Marxist ideology. Creating our own version of Wikipedia is impractical for a variety of reasons, the most important one being that Wikipedia is the best environment to learn to create objective, factional, neutral, and well sourced/documented articles.