- Fréttir

We believe that, whatever emerges about the mental health of the ‘blond terrorist’ (note the significance of this adjective – everyone knows that terrorists, by definition, have black hair), he had nevertheless clearly absorbed the views developed over many decades by extreme right-wing parties in Europe and even, increasingly, by right-wing governments. The violence orchestrated by Breivik does not come out of nowhere. It was patiently nourished by increasingly legitimised political narratives, which have become commonplace in the public arena and disseminated at the highest levels of government. These are narratives which dehumanise ‘the other’ (especially Muslims, but not solely, as demonstrated by Breivik), thereby facilitating the possibility of total violence against him/her.

We have been predicting this for many years. When language promoting hatred and cultural differentiation and seeking to establish a hierarchy of groups, cultures, communities and individuals becomes normalised, it can only lead to violence. The full range of potential actions then becomes possible: from avoidance of social interaction all the way to genocide, and including systemic discrimination, exclusion, abuse, attacks on goods and property and murder. Thus it is demonstrated once again that language is not a pure, ideal object, set apart from reality and able to be managed outside any historical, social, cultural or economic context, but rather that its transformative power can lead to butchery in reality.

What made Breivik’s actions exceptional, heralding grave times ahead, is that his violence was not directed against the individuals or communities who are traditionally stigmatised by this sort of language (Roma, Muslims, Jews or gay people). Instead his target was people from the majority community who were actively involved in transforming Western society in order to embrace greater diversity, equality and multiculturalism.

No-one is safe

There are therefore two consequences. First, no-one is safe now from this extreme right-wing violence which, through its very scale, reveals how profoundly abject is its ideological template. It has also become clear that it is actually targeted at anyone who opposes its vision of society, regardless of whether or not they belong to a ‘minority’.

Secondly, the majority population (which until now has barely been affected by the concrete impact of this language of rejection and ‘national’ preference because it was something which ‘only’ targeted minorities) is beginning to become aware of the damaging effect of this rhetoric on society as a whole, including on the majority. For a moment we caught a glimpse of empathy with the minorities who have been on the receiving end of such violence for so long.

But what concerns us much more deeply is the general failure to deal with these tragic events in the political sphere. The extreme right-wing parties all appear to be at bay and in fear of seeing the words of their beloved leaders quoted in Breivik’s manifesto. They are all rushing to deny any personal responsibility and to lay all the blame on the deranged ‘lone wolf’.

Yet this is far too simplistic. While it is clear that it will not be possible to establish their criminal responsibility, their moral responsibility is overwhelming. As they desperately seek to justify themselves in both the political and the media arenas, this is a golden opportunity to hammer home the message and once and for all put these parties and their leaders on the back foot. However, neither the genuinely democratic parties (from the extreme left to the right) nor human rights activists in general seem able to find a way of translating this opportunity into success.

Admittedly, the financial crisis is absorbing a great deal of energy but we would be deceiving ourselves if we assume that these issues are not profoundly linked. The economic and social programmes of the extreme right frequently promote ultra-liberal economic policies combined with populist nationalism to expand their popular support. Thus one of the key tasks of the extreme right is to focus the attention of the voters away from the economic horror they are proposing and towards the ‘marginal’ issues of migrants, the excluded and secularism, issues which are very much on the periphery of the central theme of the distribution of wealth and power. This is tossing bones to the pack while the real ‘business’ takes place well out of sight. It is a technique which is as old as the hills, but it is highly effective.

Ultra-liberalism and hatred of ‘the other’ are two aspects of a broader issue and it is essential to be aware of the impetuses and the connections between the two, in order to avoid mistakes in our analysis.

It is for this reason that we wanted to bring together our analyses which seek, by contributing multiple approaches and points of view, to provide civil society and progressive forces with elements of political analysis and language which will allow them to engage more constructively and in a more structured way with the debates sparked by the Breivik case. We hope to open the eyes of our fellow citizens to the real consequences of the policies advocated today by a significant section of the right-wing spectrum.