I’ve just had a very brief look at Brenton Tarrant’s ‘manifesto’. It’s freely available on BitTorrent, if you search his name.
He self-identifies as a fascist, and claims to mostly agree with the ideas of Oswald Mosley.
It’s become somewhat popular to look for the ‘false flag’ in actions that aim to drive divide in our societies, and not unreasonably so. Some white-nationalists will be wont to claim that this is a false flag operation, by a stooge, meant to discredit them. Naturally this will be dismissed as ludicrous and offensive by the right-thinkers.
But here is where things get interesting: In the same sentence that Tarrant claims alignment with Oswald Mosley, there’s a big curveball.
I mostly agree with Sir Oswald Mosley’s views and consider myself an Eco-fascist by nature.
Now let’s be absolutely clear on this. Brenton Tarrant SELF-IDENTIFIES as an Eco-fascist. Who can dispute his right to do so? And who is to say that he cannot be what he purports to be because he does not meet the definition according to some established white-European historical standard that lacks relevance in today’s more progressive society? Would it not be grossly offensive to do so? Tantamount to a hate crime, I’d say.
And elsewhere in his document:
Why focus on immigration and birth rates when climate change is such a huge issue?
Because they are the same issue, the environment is being destroyed by over population, we Europeans are one of the groups that are not over populating the world. The invaders are the ones over populating the world. Kill the invaders, kill the overpopulation and by doing so save the environment.
Reading on through the document, Tarrant seems in many respects to be an old school Malthusian. Much like most greens.
So then. Are we to expect greenies (like this loony) to make the contortions necessary to assert that this is not a false flag insofar as it’s purported to be an act of white-nationalism, but it is an absolutely appalling misrepresentation of the aims of the green lobby?
Are we to expect the babbling heads to nod sagely at assertions that this is a gross contortion of green philosophy, but a precisely accurate enactment of white-nationalist principles?
I think we are.
A slight aside, but I could not bring myself to listen to the stomach-churning sanctimonious nonsense from the British media on this event, so I had to turn to RT.com for the latest updates.
2 thoughts on “There are false flags and then there are false flags”
We should be treating yesterday’s #ClimateStrike kiddies as worthy of being on a watchlist…
The ‘useful idiots and contenders for the Owen Jones Laurie Penny haemorroid cushion prize for Literally Hitlerature’
Personally, I take no notice of them, because they fall into 3 categories of people that we have always had.
1) Sanctimonious precocious little girls who should be ignored until they have done something of merit in the real world (i.e. not the public sector), and probably way beyond that.
2) Lads who think that by agreeing with the sanctimonious precocious little girls, they’ll get laid (i.e. beta orbiters).
3) Lads who just fancied a day out and couldn’t give a fuck what the cause is, so long as they get to slide off for a crafty spliff, then fingerbang (1) preferably while (2) is watching.