De community ruimte is een vrije online ruimte (blog) waar vrijwilligers en organisaties hun opinies kunnen publiceren. De standpunten vermeld in deze community reflecteren niet noodzakelijk de redactionele lijn van De verantwoordelijkheid over de inhoud ligt bij de auteur.

Conspiracy Theories  as a Form of Psychotic Politics?

Conspiracy Theories as a Form of Psychotic Politics?

maandag 24 januari 2022 16:00
Spread the love


On the occasion of an evening online conversation on conspiracy theories with philosopher and psycho-analyst Isabel Millar and Katrien Jacobs, author of a book on extreme right sex (in the frame of the RITCS research week ‘FUTURE NARRATIVES III: The New abnormal’ – click here for more info and reservation), I publish the translation of two texts, first a philosophical gut reaction to the terrorist attack of Anders Behring Breivik, from 2011, and then a version of a recent text on the great replacement or repopulation (‘Omvolking’) by Cultural Marxists, to be published soon  in Dutch in a book by EPO. But first let me briefly introduce the theme by quoting the blurb for the event:

“The world is full of conspiracy theories. Why? Big question. Not only because they are eagerly spread by perfidious agencies and people are trapped in an information bubble controlled by feedback loops of algorithms. But also and particularly because people no longer want to accept the world as it is, and so prefer an alternative delusion.  Climate change is a hoax, a fiction, a hysteria, spread by the ‘climate church’ to install a ‘climate dictatorship’. Migration is a deliberate ‘replacement’ by ‘cultural Marxists’ to destroy Western Christian culture. This hallucination can lead to acts of terror: Anders Behring Breivik, Brendon Tarrant, Jürgen Conings. The Corona pandemic is a flu Bill Gates is using to have us injected with nanochips. And so on and so forth. And, you did not know it yet but …the earth is flat. Beside conspiracy theories on the pandemic one can speak about a true pandemic of conspiracy theories. Bruno Latour called the rejection of the common world a new political attractor: ‘hors-sol’, away from the world. The ‘rejection’ of reality was for Freud the defining process of psychosis, as opposed to neurosis based on ‘repression’. Time to address the riddles of psychotic politics.”

In fact the event in the research week was to be the culmination of a course. As my research and my classes are one continuum (as our school thinks it should be, and I fully agree with this),  I worked with Master students from RITCS on this theme, and they had to do presentations on cases to be perfected for our final three colloquim last december, some worked on Jürgen Conings (whom we will meet later on), others on the corona pandemic conspirary, a group worked on sects or cults, one girl on INCELS (we will meet them in the presentation of Katrien Jacobs during the event, or will have met them), one group on climate change as a hoax, and one group gave a general introduction. We didn’t get far in theorizing though. But we did find a definition, in a very good report on extreme right conspiracy theories for the European Union, As it would be nice and handy to have a definition of conspiracy theories to conclude this introduction, I quote it rather extensively:

“Conspiracy theories are morality tales based on archetypal narratives about right versus wrong, good versus evil. Providing “black and white” world views, they foster societal divisions between in-groups and out-groups by exacerbating intolerance against “the other” and delegitimising different voices as being part of the conspiracy. Extremist groups use conspiracy theories as a tool for recruitment and to advance their radical agendas exploiting uncertainties, fears, socioeconomic issues and mental health disorders amongst vulnerable people. In recent years, right-wing extremism has proven to be active and efficient in the dissemination of conspiracy theories aimed at targeting individuals or groups blamed to be responsible for the evil in society. Shielding the audience from the risk of being drawn into the conspiratorial labyrinth of these groups is crucial to push back the ability of conspiracy theorists in mobilising extremist action and violence. (…) Conspiracy theories are a global phenomenon affecting almost every field of human activity. The belief that complex historical or political events, especially when they lack a clear explanation by the competent authorities or by the scientific community, are the result of secret conspiracies controlled by a small cabal of powerful people with malevolent intents has become a mainstream phenomenon in society. Such theories can be seen as attempts to give meaning to distressing events, to disclose their ultimate causes, and to connect the dots with what one may perceive as anomalous, suspicious or unexplained. In some cases, they are harmless and can be considered as part of the democratic discussion. In many other cases, however, conspiracy theories may be associated with radical behaviour, racist views, authoritarian attitudes and extremist ideologies with a deeply negative impact on society. Amongst the most serious consequences is the fact that conspiracy theories may enhance the appeal of extremist narratives (e.g. providing seductive “black and white” explanations of polarising events), erode the trust between people and governments (e.g. promoting the idea that governments are controlled by shadow elites), spread hate speech (e.g. identifying a definitive group or person as being culpable), demolish the respect for evidence (e.g. attacking experts and their knowledge without having the necessary competence to perform verifications), mobilise violence (e.g. identifying targets), and even cause death (e.g. inducing people to refuse vaccine protection through the anti-vaxxer propaganda).”

(I would add terrorism under the last brackets, as we will see). Sorry for this overlong quote, but I hope and believe it to be most useful (it is a very interesting report, see for yourself). But, what I take from this, the essence, the shortest possible general formula for conspiracy theories could be: a cabal or elite (1) having a hidden (2), malicious (3) outlandish (4) plan (5), most often for total world control (6), having polorazing effects (7) and even leading to extremism (8).

Of course, to complicate matters, we cannot deny that conspiracies exist (also something my students kept reminding me, to my irritation sometimes). My first confrontation with that irritating fact was in early 2004. In an article in the New York Times, then still the International Herald Tribune for European subscribers, a certain, then famous columnist David Brooks wrote a piece, where he called all the allegations of the web of lies and hidden plan behind the invasion of Iraq, conspiracy theories that were entirely outlandish and belonged, on ‘Planet Chomsky’. I remember that formula, and I think it was the only time I saw Chomsky mentioned in all the years I read the New York times (that was in the early 2000s, unfortunately I lost my nerve later). But the invasion in iraq was a conspiracy! I wrote extensively on the PNAC and its lobbying for the war. We devoted a hearing on the responsibility of the Project for a new American century, for their responsibility in this plan, it was called the BRussells Tribunal and it was the opening session of the World Tribunal on Iraq. So my first confrontation with the term conspiracy theories, almost, the first time this strange, utterly weird, almost mindblowing phenomen, was quite traumatic (politically speaking I mean). Hence I coined the sloganesque reply to this David Brooks (a neocon of course, at least in those days): ‘there is conspiracy going on against conspiracy theories’. This was of course an gigantic overstatement, just a joke really. It could lead us astray before we even get started, into a meta-conspiracy theory even, so without further ado, let me introduce, Anders Berhing Brevik and the extreme right theory of repopulation by cultural marxists, which will be our case for tonight, I mean the above mentioned event, which was the occasion for this small collage of texts under a somewhat ambitious, if not pretentious title and which you are about to finally begin to read.



(DeWereldMorgen, 26 July 2011)

The Norwegian mass murderer shocks our moral sense and defies our imagination. But he is not mad, or at least: there is method in the madness. And this is not just any crime. This is a political act. Of course it’s also madness. But one doesn’t preclude the other. If this outrage proves anything it is this: ‘political madness’ is no longer an overwrought metaphor and the jihadis certainly do not have a monopoly on it. Their most extreme antagonists are equally insane. What we have here is what I would call ‘Psychotic Politics’. Its adherents suffer from a form of ‘political psychosis’.

We all know what politics is – or at least we think we do – but what is psychosis? It is the total blurring of reality and fiction: the weak self is haunted by what it rejects, and thus hears voices: its own super-ego that goes tilted, because it has been rejected. Or the I gets hallucinations: the unconscious gets free rein – hallucinations are just nightmares from which you don’t wake up because you’re already awake. It could well be that Breivik’s psyche is psychotically structured: his extreme narcissism and self-stillness point in that direction, but it is not necessary.  Now, the psychotic is no longer just a mental illness – the psychotic structure has also begun to march in all sorts of recent social phenomena.

First there were the killer computer games, then came the ‘psychotic games’, like Big Brother and Expedition Robinson (I’ve written about them elsewhere[1], but very briefly: these games are psychotic because they have no rules – or only rules to further disrupt the game; make no distinction between game and reality – there is no outside, no ‘offside’; and have no fair play: everyone is everyone’s opponent – the war of all against all, so to speak; there is only one winner: the last one standing). Then there were movies that took that idea of realtiy games to the extreme: The Game, eXistenZ, Das Experiment and Battle Royale. Battle Royale is the most interesting one for us here: on an island (!) a group of young people (!) get instructions. They have to kill each other in three days until there is only one survivor, if not, they will all be killed, escape is impossible (!)… These psychotic games are a key to understand the scenario the Norwegian Rambo has built up in his head. Lone wolves, as they are called by anti-terrorism specialists. Anders Behring Breivik is not only a reincarnation of the Bezerkers, the Norwegian warriors who raged in an uncontrollable, trance-like fury, but also a new type of man: the ramboid. Or a relatively new sociopathological syndrome: the political serial killer. Without these psychotic reality games, I don’t think it’s possible to understand ‘Breivik’s syndrome’, if you will. Let alone his finely crafted scenario, which is straight out of a violent computer game.

In order to understand the political background, the islamophobia of Breivik, one can read ‘Native revolt: a European declaration of independance’ by Fjordman, published on the Belgian website The Brussels Journal by islamophobe Paul Beliën (husband of Alexandra Coolen and advisor to Wilders), from which Brevik derives the subtitle of his 1500-page compendium. He quotes Fjordman no less than 111 times, so we are dealing with his true teacher here[2]. In Fjordmam, too, the psychotic structure is already present: Islamisation is a conspiracy of Europe and especially of the dominant multiculturalism. Fjordman speaks of treason. This conspiracy thinking is in itself a form of paranoia. Islamophobia is thus serious, but it is compulsively structured, like any phobia. It still knows the difference between propaganda and reality, between dream and deed. However, this Islamophobic thinking (of Fjordman) has become the breeding ground on which Breivik has built his political psychosis. He has taken the conspiracy theory seriously and has started to murder the traitors of the future, the young socialists, on the island Utoya. The compulsion, the obsession of islamophobia, turns into paranoia in certain persons, whereby the distinction between word and deed, between reality and fiction, becomes blurred. And then it becomes explosive.

Psychotic politics is contagious: cases will continue to arise, as they study each other, copying each other and seeking eternal fame. But beyond this problem, it is important to understand that our society feeds political psychosis. Psychotic politics is the product of a world in which lonely individuals in cyberspace lose the difference between reality and fiction and thus merge into a black and white universe that is one big conspiracy, and in which extreme acts are therefore not perceived as extreme. Breivik does not feel guilty. For him it is a coherent paranoia, a necessary act, for society it is a nightmare.



Unvölkung or Great Replacement

The term ‘repopulation’ (Umvölkung) is one of the key terms used by the new extreme right, including and especially by the white supremacists, self-proclaimed neo-Nazis such as Anders Behring Breivik and Brenton Tarrant, who believe that the Jews want to exterminate the white race through mixing: ‘the white genocide‘.[3] It was popularized, with the omission of anti-Semitism, by Renaud Camus as ‘the great replacement’ , which is a plot by ‘élites remplacistes‘ (replacement elites) to replace the French and by extension European population with foreigners, especially Muslims.[4]

The term goes back to the National Socialist term ‘Umvölkung’, the policy of depopulating parts of Eastern Europe by elimination and deportation, and repopulating it with ‘pure race Germans’. Repopulation is thus a clear reference to the Nazis’ death policy disguised as biopolitics of racial purity. The need for ‘living space’ (Lebensraum) for the superior German race was an alibi for depopulating Eastern Europe (especially Poland) in order to make room for Germans. Not only is the term derived from Nazi jargon, but above all it is a contemporary conspiracy theory, which exists in many variants.

So it may seem puzzling at first glance why a term for what we would now call ‘ethnic cleansing’, and therefore a crime against humanity, is being put forward by the new right-wing ideologues as a description of the demographic changes in our population as a result of migration. It seems like a cynical move, but it is actually much more than that. For this term, which embodies the apocalyptic, biopolitical fear of the demise of the white race and Western Christian culture, may have an important signaling function.

A very interesting version of the ‘theory of the repopulation’ can be found in Doorbraak, the magazine of the Flemish nationalists, explained by Tom Vandendriessche, a member of the extreme right party, Vlaams Belang. The first line of the article states that it is about a ‘deliberate migration’. The core of his argument is that ‘cultural Marxism’ organizes a deliberate repopulation: “It deliberately wants to transform a monocultural society into a multicultural one. To replace the homogeneous majority with a heterogeneous group of minorities. In this way, one hopes to construct a Utopia through multiculturalism. This is Cultural Marxism. For decades now, the essence of left-wing policy has been aimed at this. It literally wants to import as many foreigners as possible.”[5] That is what repopulation means: we are victims of a replacement, an ethnic cleansing, if not a genocide, a conspiracy of cultural Marxists: ‘the cultural war of the left against our people’, by ‘forced mass migration’.[6]


The invention of cultural Marxism

 What are cultural Marxists? According to Wikipedia, cultural Marxism is “a conspiracy theory that assumes left-wing Marxist ideas and thinkers are responsible for undermining and overthrowing Western culture. Unlike classical Marxists, cultural Marxists would like to shake up the existing order not by economic but by cultural means, through their influence in cultural institutions and the cultural debate.”[7]

The inventor of the term ‘cultural Marxism’ is said to be the American fascist cult leader Lyndon LaRouche. [8] In the meantime, various figures from extreme right-wing circles have adopted the term. Thierry Baudet was the great promoter of this term in the Low Countries.

To give the concept credibility, several theorists have been declared fathers of cultural Marxism, regardless of the fact that their points of view are very far apart. First of all, Antonio Gramsci is often referred to, because of his emphasis on hegemony: transforming society is not only done by economic analysis, but by building a counter-hegemony, and this is done through cultural discourse.

Others who must pass as progenitors are Georg Lukacs, Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno, Max Horkheimer and Herbert Marcuse, in fact the entire so-called Frankfurt School. That is quite out of line, because none of these thinkers was in the least concerned with migration, rather with a radical critique of the capitalist culture industry. They were not trying to subvert western Civilization, on the contrary: With their critical theory they wanted to save Western civilization from capitalism and fascism. But, they are all Jews, and that’s fine, to appeal to the Antisemitism of a section of the far-right public with it. [9]

This term is also derived from Nazi jargon, from the term ‘cultural Bolshevists’, those (usually Jewish) fellows who, through their ‘degenerate art’, attempted to damage the mental health of the German people. Cultural Marxists are similar: they want to destroy Western culture through multiculturalism, which of course also constitutes a ‘degeneration’: our national character is lost, our national identity is expropriatedn, our white race at risk of extinction .[10]

The combination of the two terms, repopulation and cultural Marxism, in fact constitutes two conspiracy theories for the price of one: 1) The great replacement is a conspiracy of an elite, 2) The cultural Marxists want to undermine Western society through culture. Taken together, this means: the cultural Marxists want to undermine Western culture through repopulation. They do appear separately: in Renaud Camus there is no trace of cultural Marxists, and in the article in wikipedia on cultural Marxism, or in the texts of Maarten Boudry on the topic, no trace of repopulation. Maarten Boudry, a Flemish positivist publicist, for example, is not at all a neo-Nazi, but he is a great adherent of the term cultural Marxism.[11] It may come as a surprise that someone who prides himself on the scientific and critical thinking of the Enlightenment tradition should be so taken with what, on closer inspection, is an obscure term that belongs to the anti-Enlightenment tradition.

But the echoes of fascism in both terms are a nice touch, because they appeal to the neo-Nazi following and can appeal to tough guys who like a good joke. And at the same time they can be used in a seemingly innocent way because of their new meaning.


A recipe for violence

So repopulation and cultural Marxism form a strong cocktail, a toxic mixture. And that’s the idea: the combination of an overstatement and a catch-all term can work wonders.[12] The demographic, almost biological threat posed by the new repopulation can drive people to action almost out of self-defense. It is certainly no coincidence that the State Security assessed the chance of extreme right-wing terrorism higher than that of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.[13] The combination of both terms provides a real dog whistle for extremists and white supremacists. Anders Behring Breivik heard it and understood it – witness his compendium in which both repopulation and cultural Marxism play a prominent role [14], by murdering 69 young, pro-multicultural young socialists, i.e. cultural Marxists. Why kill the perpetrators, the Muslims, when you can also kill the instigators, the cultural Marxists? Brenton Tarrant heard it, understood it, and attacked a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand. That one went for the executors of the conspiracy.

Jürgen Conings must have heard it too. Besides Marc van Ranst – if cultural Marxists existed, he would certainly be one – a mosque was also on his wish list. You see, there is method in the madness: you can either target the instigators or the perpetrators of the great replacement, or both of course. The fact that Van Ranst and his family were in hiding for five weeks during the summer of 2021, is the crowning of a years-long hate campaign by Vlaams Belang and its internet trolls. Pretty sick.

Part of the strategy is the seemingly naive use of the term ‘omvolking’ (repopulation).  The chairman of Vlaams Belang used the term ‘omvolking’ lavishly in the press, but pretended that he knew nothing about the context or origin of the term: ‘Do you have another word for the phenomenon whereby 30 percent of the children born in Flanders in 2020 do not speak Dutch to their mothers? I ­don’t understand the ­hysteria about the term’.[15] That Van Grieken doesn’t understand the hysteria is nonsense of course – he obviously knows the text of his Euro MP in Doorbraak – the opposite is true: He wants to sell the term as relatively harmless, but in the meantime he also wants to send a signal to the radical racist, islamophobic constituency, whether neo-fascist or not, and thus to fuel the paranoia. It continues to defy the imagination that both terms are borrowed directly from Nazi jargon, and that it is precisely this kind of sinister terms that are made socially acceptable. It is also entirely post-truth that it was not heavy industry that brought ‘guest workers’ here, thus triggering a mass migration, but the cultural Marxists. The history of migration doesn’t matter: it’s a conspiracy by those diabolical cultural Marxists against Western civilization. That’s all you need to know.

And that there is no other word for population is of course not true. There are many: internationalization, as demographer Patrick Deboosere calls it,[16] or superdiversity – those dammed cultural Marxists -, or simply globalization. It is a worldwide process: globalization involves not only flows of capital and world trade but also flows of migration. This is not a conspiracy, it is the way of the world. The process of ‘coloration’ through migration is also taking place just about everywhere in the world. Globalization can lead to total ruin in ecological catastrophes but also, unfortunately, to attacks.

In America in spring 2021 Trump supporters openly pleaded for a coup like in Myanmar. In Flanders 50,000 facebook users stood behind Jürgen Conings “as one man”. When it became known that he was an (ex?) member of his party, Van Grieken tweeted: ‘Et alors?’ But there is a connection, and that connection lies in the paranoia about repopulation; Conings had to take action, to protect the white race from extermination by Muslims and cultural Marxists. Hopefully more people will also start to realize what Vlaams Belang really is: a party which surfs on extremist, neo-nazi, racist conspiracy theories, and of course also on intimidation of ‘cultural Marxists’.

Finally, it is to be hoped that everyone will gradually begin to understand what the word ‘repopulation’ implies: it is a conspiracy theory, which is totally fictional, but is a script for polarization and even violence.


POSTSCRIPT (on truth production in and on conspiracy theories)

 To open the discussion of the evening, that will be long over most probably when you read this (as I write this the night before the event), and conclude this small collage of texts, I quote, with her permission, a third guest, dr Liesbet De Kock, from, Ghent university, also a philosopher and psycho-analyst, who politely declined, as she thought she was not ready to tackle this troubling problem of conspiracy theories, questioning also my little theory of them as ‘psychotic politics’, and hence representing the question mark in the general title of this piece (‘Conspiracy theories as forms of psychotic politics?’):

“The set-up seems particularly thought-provoking, and you put your foot right in the middle of the philosophical hornet’s nest that continues to fascinate me immensely, but where I cannot for the moment arrive at a position: the phenomenon of conspiracy theorists. Although I also originally interpreted the phenomenon in terms of a psychoticism, I am increasingly unable to be satisfied with that, or at least am inclined to problematize it. That it is symptomatic is obvious, but I am increasingly reluctant to decipher it. More and more people – including “ordinary neurotics” – are adopting a paranoid relationship to reality, primarily pushing forward figures of power and importance, and/or starting from intrusive experiences or fears (classic psychotic: injecting chips, etc.). Although this clearly has a delirious character, I am increasingly beginning to think that it may also be a response to an institutional delirium that has been taken for granted for too long: the narrative of disinterested science, of power-free knowledge, of intrusion of the public into the private (including through digitilazation, etc). The delirium, or the paranoid relationship, is also a moment of truth production. A truth that shows itself in the psychotization, not immediately in its paranoid content.”

This quote is really food for thought, is it not? Ideal to open our conversation, I thought. As said I worked with the Master students, but I must admit, as said, we didn’t get far in penetrating the subject, let alone theorizing. We even did get to deepen our research on psychosis and the applicability of the concept on the phenomenon. It could in the end well be that applying psychological frames, psychologizing a social, mediatic, political event in psychopathological terms, is not so helpful, even, who knows, misleading, at least leading away from a truly social, mediatic and political analysis. At least this metaphor of psychosis as structure can help explain how conspiracy theories merge and morph like hallucinations, they are clusters of narratives that can be combined in the most strange ways, like the merging of thre great replacement with cultural Marxists, but better examples are the pre-existing 5G conspiracy theories merging with the pandemic ‘Bill Gates conspiracy theort, or theories’. It is a most incoherent ever changing constellation of narrative fragments glued together and ever changing, like a psychotic phase, hallucinations and delusions. Resisting all counter arguments, and reading them as signs of the correctness of the delusions. Indeed a hornet’s nest.

My very provisional conclusion could be, very disappointing, but truthful – more an abdication of the little book I had in mind when I started this course and set up this evening for the Research Week on ‘the new abnormalcy’, than a conclusion: conspiracy theories are like porn, everywhere but hard to theorize.

Political pornography would have been then also a good title for this collage, for the title of a course, or an event, let alone a book, it would have been less suitable. The difference is maybe – I mean between porn and conspiracy theories – that conspiracy theories have a comic side (like Hilary Clinton leading a political pedophile network from a pizza joint, or Bill Gates injecting nanochips in our arms via the vaccines to control or exterminated – pick one – the world population and, by the way, Cultural Marxists are also a bad joke…) and porn has not. Humor in and about porn destroys the hypnotic effect thereof. But, I am afraid that laughing with conspiracy theories – they are funny, no? – will not help us, neither to theorize nor to fight them. It just gives us, like in Freud’s theory of the Witz spelled out, a narcissistic feeling of superiority. It is a short relief for our helplessness in the face of a very dark and threatening worldwide phenomenon. That much, I hope, should be clear by now. The rejection (Verwerfung in psycho-analytic terms!) of a common world by an outlandish, alternative, fictious, toxic, extremist worldview, for, in Latourian terms an ‘hors-sol’ political attractor, ‘away from the world’, is literally threatening the cohesion of our societies, and could an even lead to massive violence, if not civil war, as the storming of the Capitol proves, on January 6 2021 proves. The increasing violence after the anti-corona-measure demonstrations, in Brussels and elsewhere, are also probably a symptom of this. In psycho-analytic terms this is called, I believe, ‘passage à l’acte’.





[1] See Lieven De Cauter, ‘Over de opkomst van psychotische spelen’, in Nicole Vliegen en Lieve Van Lier (ed.) Een spel voor twee spelers. Game and Playfulness in Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, Acco, Leuven, 2007, And also: Rudi Laermans & Lieven De Cauter, The BeWILDerment of Pentheus. On the attraction of the Nature state and the Nature state as spectacle’, Kendell Geers Irrespectiv (catalogue), SMAK Gent, ACTAR, Barcelona, 2007 (also in French). The text is also included in my book Entropic Empire.

[2] Fjordman calls for civil disobedience and self-defence: “If the authorities refuse to uphold the laws designed to protect us and keep passing new laws that threaten the freedom of our children and the survival of our nations, we will sooner or later have to decide when civil disobedience becomes not just a right, but a duty.” In his best moments, he formulates a lamentation that is shared by broad layers of the European population: ‘Many European nations have for decades accepted more immigration into our countries in a shorter period of time than any other people has done peacefully in human history. Who can refute this? He continues with a sentence that will strike a chord with many, including very well-meaning citizens: ‘We are sick and tired of feeling like strangers in our own countries…’ He then switches to double forte but still we know what he is talking about. But at other times he paves the way for outbreaks of violence: ‘Europe is being targeted for deliberate colonization by Muslim states, and with coordinated efforts aimed at our Islamization and the elimination of our freedoms. We are being subject to a foreign invasion, and aiding and abetting a foreign invasion in any way constitutes treason’. That is political psychosis: the government is in a conspiracy and the country must be saved from this betrayal. Just think of Beirvik’s predecessor, Thimothy McVeigh. Exactly the same reasoning. But Fjordman continues unabated:  ‘If non-Europeans have the right to resist colonization and desire self-determination then Europeans have that right, too. And we intend to exercise it’. Sounds very threatening already. But the best is yet to come – his final salvo – a call for civil disobedience and worse, if the three demands of his manifesto are not met: ‘If these demands are not fully implemented, if [1] the European Union isn’t dismantled, [2] Multiculturalism isn’t rejected and [3] 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.” (my italics). Right. Stop paying taxes, stop respecting laws and arm yourself and start killing. Am I exaggerating? Elsewhere, Fjordman actually takes the step of arguing that citizens should arm themselves, also quoted by Breivik of course: “Ordinary citizens should arm themselves immediately since crime and violence is spreading fast throughout the Western World”. A golden recipe for a spiral of violence.

[3] On white genocide see : ‘White genocide conspiracy theory‘:

[4]  Renaud Camus, Le Grand Remplacement, available online:

In le grand remplacement, this text written as a speech, he starts from the observation that a region in France, le Hérault, has completely changed in terms of population composition and therefore character. This kind of nostalgia may be understandable, but it is deceptive because it pretends that the colouring, internationalisation and multiculturalisation of our society is total, whereas it is only a percentage, and moreover an international process.

[5] Tom Van den Driessche, ‘Omvolking is realiteit’ (Population is reality), in Doorbraak:

[6] Ibid.

[7] Wikipedia, cultural Marxism:

[8] Alexander Aerts, History of a cultural Marxist conspiracy, Lava 12, Spring 2020, pp 93-107.

[9]  Martin Jay, ‘the Dialectic of Counter-Enlightenment: the Frankfurt School as Scapegoat of a Lunatic Fringe‘.

[10]  Very instructive is the thesis on the term cultural Marxism by Alexander Aerts, with prof. Sami Zemni (-also undoubtedly a cultural Marxist and a convert of our so white universities! )

[11]  Maarten Boudry, The ghost of cultural Marxism exists, NRC :

[12] See on this subject Alexander Aerts, opus citatus

[13] State Security warns of extreme right-wing terror:

[14]  Anders Behring Breivik:

His compendium:

[15] De Standaard 31 May 2021 (online :

[16] De Standaard 14 January 2021: online: A very spicy debate between Van Grieken and Deboosere (and also Imade Annouri) can be watched on ATV ATV debate:

Creative Commons

dagelijkse newsletter

take down
the paywall
steun ons nu!