Nothing new under the sun: Propaganda by the Deed

Ever hear of Propaganda by the Deed?

At the beginning of the 20th Century, anarchists were in the middle of what was known as the ”˜Propaganda by the Deed’ period. The idea was that by killing members of the ruling order, not only would the ”˜fear of God’ be put into them but that it would eventually inspire the masses into rising up against their masters. This tactic was put into practice repeatedly in Russia and on 29th July in Italy, King Humbert I was assassinated…

Sometime in 1901, however, Detroit born 29-year-old Leon Czolgosz (pronounced “Colgosh”) of Russian-Polish parentage had become an anarchist after attending a talk by the famous anarchist Emma Goldman and had decided he wanted to do something to help the international working class movement. With Propaganda by the Deed being the most visible tactic used by anarchists at the time and finding out that the President would be going to Buffalo, Czolgosz went to Buffalo to wait for him.

We all know what happened next.

I had never heard the term Propaganda of the Deed until I saw it recently in the comments section of some blog. The connection, of course, was to Breivik. Although Breivik was not an anarchist as far as I can tell, his “argument” in favor of the violent acts he perpetrated seems to have been nearly identical to theirs.

Breivik, who appears to have read up on a great many things, may not have been familiar with this particular piece of history. Pity. Because if he had understood that anarchists abandoned the approach because it had discredited their cause immeasurably and led to very opposite results from what they had originally intended, a great many murdered young people in Norway might still be alive today.

Some great articles and comments at Pajamas Media:

By Phyllis Chesler: The 5 Biggest Lies Told about Oslo Shooter Anders Breivik

The Norwegian government’s refusal to deal with the reality of hostile, separatist, un-assimilated, and violent Muslim enclaves in its midst is what finally forced Breivik’s hand. The proof is that Breivik did not murder Muslims. His was a mainly Caucasian-on-Caucasian, infidel-on-infidel, Norwegian-on-Norwegian massacre. Breivik turned on what he viewed as a fifth column, the Norwegian elite. They had the power to insist that Muslim immigrants speak Norwegian and embrace European Enlightenment values. They refused to do so. His message to Norway’s “progressives” is chillingly clear. Their teenage children, already well indoctrinated, will not live to carry out what Breivik viewed as their parents’ failed multi-cultural policies.

The Norwegian government’s refusal to deal with the reality of hostile, separatist, un-assimilated, and violent Muslim enclaves in its midst is what finally forced Breivik’s hand. The proof is that Breivik did not murder Muslims. His was a mainly Caucasian-on-Caucasian, infidel-on-infidel, Norwegian-on-Norwegian massacre. Breivik turned on what he viewed as a fifth column, the Norwegian elite. They had the power to insist that Muslim immigrants speak Norwegian and embrace European Enlightenment values. They refused to do so. His message to Norway’s “progressives” is chillingly clear. Their teenage children, already well indoctrinated, will not live to carry out what Breivik viewed as their parents’ failed multi-cultural policies.

Writers work with words; killers write in blood. Breivik could have read all our anti-jihadic work. Like the Dutchman, Geert Wilders, he could have run for public office or launched an educational campaign. True, he would have had to live with being demonized as a racist and criminally sued; ironically, Breivik’s violent approach has led to a similar outcome. Breivik could have made a film about the normalized violence against Muslim-European girls and women at the hands of their families or about the honor killing of Muslim-Norwegian women– but Breivik might have risked the Dutchman Theo van Gogh’s fate and been butchered by an Islamist. Breivik could have penned some fairly innocuous “Mohammed” cartoons, as the Swede Lars Vilks did – but he would have had to live in hiding and with round the clock security. Or, like Lars Langballe, a Danish parliamentarian, he could have spoken his truth and been prosecuted for “hate speech,” just as Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff was in Austria.

And at Belmont Club: Universal Guilt is Universal Condemnation

The left is diabolical. It’s straight out of Machiavelli’s “The Prince.” Coercion and repression by proxy. Populate the conquered land with your own people, just as the English did in Northern Ireland. In Norway they import an ideologically alien population for the sole purpose of repressing their own people and ultimately destroying their own culture. Then they expect the people to assist them in mass suicide. Unbelievable!

Breivik is no madman. He is an isomer, a mirror image of the left’s genocidal destruction of european culture. He is the abyss peering back into the face of nihilism. They should fear him and live in dread of what he represents. For he is them. But they won’t. Instead they will use him to strengthen their stranglehold on European freedom.

Breivek is reprehensible, a monster. He was also inevitable.

Comments

Nothing new under the sun: Propaganda by the Deed — 10 Comments

Curtis on July 27, 2011 at 5:26 pm said:

And with that, I think we have tracked Breivik quite well. Any more adjustments will likely be quite minimal–given no relevant new information comes in.
rickl on July 27, 2011 at 7:35 pm said:

Some great articles and comments at Pajamas Media:

By Phyllis Chesler: The 5 Biggest Lies Told about Oslo Shooter Anders Breivik

The Norwegian government’s refusal to deal with the reality of hostile, separatist, un-assimilated, and violent Muslim enclaves in its midst is what finally forced Breivik’s hand. The proof is that Breivik did not murder Muslims. His was a mainly Caucasian-on-Caucasian, infidel-on-infidel, Norwegian-on-Norwegian massacre. Breivik turned on what he viewed as a fifth column, the Norwegian elite. They had the power to insist that Muslim immigrants speak Norwegian and embrace European Enlightenment values. They refused to do so. His message to Norway’s “progressives” is chillingly clear. Their teenage children, already well indoctrinated, will not live to carry out what Breivik viewed as their parents’ failed multi-cultural policies.

The Norwegian government’s refusal to deal with the reality of hostile, separatist, un-assimilated, and violent Muslim enclaves in its midst is what finally forced Breivik’s hand. The proof is that Breivik did not murder Muslims. His was a mainly Caucasian-on-Caucasian, infidel-on-infidel, Norwegian-on-Norwegian massacre. Breivik turned on what he viewed as a fifth column, the Norwegian elite. They had the power to insist that Muslim immigrants speak Norwegian and embrace European Enlightenment values. They refused to do so. His message to Norway’s “progressives” is chillingly clear. Their teenage children, already well indoctrinated, will not live to carry out what Breivik viewed as their parents’ failed multi-cultural policies.

Writers work with words; killers write in blood. Breivik could have read all our anti-jihadic work. Like the Dutchman, Geert Wilders, he could have run for public office or launched an educational campaign. True, he would have had to live with being demonized as a racist and criminally sued; ironically, Breivik’s violent approach has led to a similar outcome. Breivik could have made a film about the normalized violence against Muslim-European girls and women at the hands of their families or about the honor killing of Muslim-Norwegian women– but Breivik might have risked the Dutchman Theo van Gogh’s fate and been butchered by an Islamist. Breivik could have penned some fairly innocuous “Mohammed” cartoons, as the Swede Lars Vilks did – but he would have had to live in hiding and with round the clock security. Or, like Lars Langballe, a Danish parliamentarian, he could have spoken his truth and been prosecuted for “hate speech,” just as Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff was in Austria.

And at Belmont Club: Universal Guilt is Universal Condemnation

The left is diabolical. It’s straight out of Machiavelli’s “The Prince.” Coercion and repression by proxy. Populate the conquered land with your own people, just as the English did in Northern Ireland. In Norway they import an ideologically alien population for the sole purpose of repressing their own people and ultimately destroying their own culture. Then they expect the people to assist them in mass suicide. Unbelievable!

Breivik is no madman. He is an isomer, a mirror image of the left’s genocidal destruction of european culture. He is the abyss peering back into the face of nihilism. They should fear him and live in dread of what he represents. For he is them. But they won’t. Instead they will use him to strengthen their stranglehold on European freedom.

Breivek is reprehensible, a monster. He was also inevitable.
rickl on July 27, 2011 at 7:36 pm said:

I was wondering where that first paragraph disappeared to.
Peter K. on July 27, 2011 at 10:39 pm said:

“Sometime in 1901” was, almost-by-2-days-ironically, September 9, 1901.
Curtis on July 28, 2011 at 12:31 pm said:

Have enjoyed your posts on this rickl. And the term “isomer” is superb in describing Breivik.
armchair pessimist on July 28, 2011 at 6:20 pm said:

There’s a famous Soviet painting, out of the socialist realist school, depicting an epochal moment in the career of their Lenin. He had an older brother who was one of the many terrorists who assassinated so many high officials of the Government, including a Czar or two. But brother was caught and hanged after an unsuccessful attempt. Anyway, the painting shows Ma Lenin and young Vladimir in their parlor. Ma’s in black mourning, weeping. Lenin still in his teens, I judge, is standing erect, a look of resolution in his face, although to me he looks more like a pouty cherub. Whatever. His famous words: “We will take a different path”, meaning that henceforth revolutionaries would abandon quickie assassinations and undertake instead the systemic conversion of the proletariat.

I think Breivik is completely correct about Islam in Europe and the criminal governing class that brought it there. But no more Breiviks, but maybe, pretty please?, a Lenin.
Richard Aubrey on July 28, 2011 at 7:07 pm said:

armchair
You would include a currrent version of a battalion of Lettish sharpshooters to disrupt Congress?
armchair pessimist on July 28, 2011 at 9:04 pm said:

Ask me again in 2041, after 30 thankless years of education, agitation, ever assisted by the arrogance & the imbellicities of the EU regime.
Indigo Red on July 28, 2011 at 9:57 pm said:

For the random stranger who may wander here and not know what happened next: Leon Czolgosz shot President William McKinley. From there, go do your own homework.
G6loq on July 29, 2011 at 12:32 pm said:

Propaganda by the deed… what a great post!

Methink that Gramscian methods were the next step. One seemingly innocuous step at a time.
Slice the baloney each slice real fine till it is all gone ……

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

The New Neo

A blog about political change, among other things

Nothing new under the sun: Propaganda by the Deed

Comments

Nothing new under the sun: Propaganda by the Deed — 10 Comments

Leave a Reply