So, just what was the Buffalo shooter's political ideology? [in his own words]

[Skye1300]

What the Buffalo Shooter's Alleged Manifesto Actually Says

“When I was 12 I was deep into communist ideology, talk to anyone from my old highschool and ask about me and you will hear that. From age 15 to 18 however, I consistently moved farther to the right. On the political compass I fall in the mild-moderate authoritarian left category, and I would prefer to be called a populist.

But you can call me an ethno-nationalist eco-fascist national socialist if you want, I wouldn’t disagree with you.” He also repeatedly attacks capitalists, and rejected the conservative label because, he wrote, “conservativism is corporatism in disguise, I want no part of it.”​

What difference does it make? A crazy nut case killed people. It doesn't matter what he believed. He could have said he was doing it for Jesus, he's still a nutcase who killed people. Crazy people will attach to anything to justify killing people. Whatever they believed means nothing. He was a racist nutcase. Period.

 

[TLK Valentine]

What difference does it make? A crazy nut case killed people. It doesn't matter what he believed. He could have said he was doing it for Jesus, he's still a nutcase who killed people. Crazy people will attach to anything to justify killing people. Whatever they believed means nothing. He was a racist nutcase. Period.

It makes a difference because his actions make the right look bad, but his words make the left look bad.

And if you can't trust the words of a mentally unbalanced mass murdering racist nutcase, who can you trust?

 

[NightHawkeye]

What difference does it make? A crazy nut case killed people. It doesn't matter what he believed. He could have said he was doing it for Jesus, he's still a nutcase who killed people. Crazy people will attach to anything to justify killing people. Whatever they believed means nothing. He was a racist nutcase. Period.

What difference does it make?

A post-incident analysis is usually said to be done in order to allow actions to be taken which could prevent future such incidents. (At least that's what those calling for changes say.) The initial claims made by the AP for instance were that the shooter was radicalized by Tucker Carlson and Fox News. The implication, of course, is that Tucker Carlson should be silenced and Fox News should fall in line with the old guard mainline media.

Now, however, we know the truth. The shooter had been a radicalized communist for many years but he had recently moderated to national socialism. Both ideologies are ensconced in hatred ... and minimizing the influence of both in modern society would be a noble goal.

 

[JustOneWay]

What difference does it make?

A post-incident analysis is usually said to be done in order to allow actions to be taken which could prevent future such incidents. (At least that's what those calling for changes say.) The initial claims made by the AP for instance were that the shooter was radicalized by Tucker Carlson and Fox News. The implication, of course, is that Tucker Carlson should be silenced and Fox News should fall in line with the old guard mainline media.

Now, however, we know the truth. The shooter had been a radicalized communist for many years but he had recently moderated to national socialism. Both ideologies are ensconced in hatred ... and minimizing the influence of both in modern society would be a noble goal.

The real issue is the ease at which disturbed individuals can get guns and cause mass murders. But the right just waves off that truth and the mass murders will continue, probably at a faster clip now than before.

Tuck is promoting communism! Republicans want a King! Democracy is dead.

 

[NightHawkeye]

The real issue is the ease at which disturbed individuals can get guns and cause mass murders.

Thank you for providing such a succinct example for post-incident analysis so quickly.

The counter argument, of course, is that people kill, not guns ... and that guns facilitate enforcement of the law and civility within society.

 

[durangodawood]

What difference does it make?

A post-incident analysis is usually said to be done in order to allow actions to be taken which could prevent future such incidents. (At least that's what those calling for changes say.) The initial claims made by the AP for instance were that the shooter was radicalized by Tucker Carlson and Fox News. The implication, of course, is that Tucker Carlson should be silenced and Fox News should fall in line with the old guard mainline media.

Now, however, we know the truth. The shooter had been a radicalized communist for many years but he had recently moderated to national socialism. Both ideologies are ensconced in hatred ... and minimizing the influence of both in modern society would be a noble goal.

I see his replacement theory rationale for the murders coming straight out of the American new right, which isnt "conservative" at all.

 

[NightHawkeye]

I see his replacement theory rationale for the murders coming straight out of the American new right, which isnt "conservative" at all.

In his case it seems to come from communism and national socialism (Nazism).

Note that Communist China is likely the single most racist country on the planet.

 

[durangodawood]

In his case it seems to come from communism and Nazism.

Note that Communist China is likely the single most racist country on the planet.

China isnt communist by any definition. No more than DPRK is a "democratic republic". Dont let the names fool you.

As for the shooter. His replacement theory rationale comes straight from the American new right, whos violent racist extremists take inspiration from the NZ mosque shooter, and Norway's Brevik before that. China has zero to do with it.

 

[JustOneWay]

China isnt communist by any definition. No more than DPRK is a "democratic republic". Dont let the names fool you.

As for the shooter. His replacement theory rationale comes straight from the American new right, whos violent racist extremists take inspiration from the NZ mosque shooter, and Norway's Brevik before that. China has zero to do with it.

But, but the mass murderer said socialism. He has to be a socialist! Therefore, a democrat....definitions no longer matter.

 

[Bradskii]

In his case it seems to come from communism and national socialism (Nazism).

Even if the guy was an espoused nazi, and I've seen nothing to indicate that, then maybe you weren't aware that nazi ideology was one of blood and land. The purity of their particular race. The need to literally exterminate those they felt were lesser humans. To kill those they feared would dilute their racial superiority. Especially including blacks and Jews.

They wanted to prevent the Aryan being replaced. To preserve their 'culture'. How is that any different to what is being put forward by mindless right wing commentators? They are promoting nazi ideology!

 

[grasping the after wind]

I could care less about his so-called political affiliations. What I do care about is why he massacred ten innocent people. And that was because he had been convinced that there is a politically motivated move to replace his 'Anglo American' culture (read 'white') with one that he has been convinced is foreign and less acceptable. And needs to be violently resisted.

Those who propogate nonsense like this that invariably leads to tragedies like this - and will lead to more of the same, should hang their heads in shame.

Why would irrational people consider that their irrational notions are shameful. It takes a sane person to understand the difference between rational thought and emotional idiocy. Rational thought has become unpopular recently and speaking rationally has become politically incorrect. I find it somewhat unfathomable that people feel no cognitive dissonance for pointing fingers at the opposite political side for holding to irrational conspiracy theories and beliefs that deny reality while simultaneously embracing a raft of irrational conspiracy theories and holding to beliefs that deny reality. It comes down to the attitude that "my wild conspiracy theories and belief in things that have no basis in reality are better than yours because I'm a good guy and you wear a black hat. So any violence done by people that might have agreed with your conspiracy theories is your fault but any violence done by people that might have agreed with my conspiracy theories has nothing whatsoever to do with me."

In the current situation we have severely a deranged young man ( one who was known to be so btw) acting as a severely deranged young man. He seems to have cherry picked whatever political ideas might fit his need to feel oppressed from both sides of the political spectrum. I don't know why you would expect anyone to feel ashamed by that other than the young man himself and those that had an actual opportunity to address the young man's mental illness. As the young man does not live in a world of sanity, I cannot see him understanding the idea that he should feel ashamed. Expecting anyone that has voiced their political opinion either on the left or the right that the young man echoed in his "manifesto" to feel guilty of something other than expressing their opinion is unwarranted.

 

[NightHawkeye]

He seems to have cherry picked whatever political ideas might fit his need to feel oppressed from both sides of the political spectrum.

It is amazing that some here seem to feel there are only TWO sides to the political spectrum ... as if one side unerringly encompasses all that is good and just, while the other side must encompass all that is bad and unjust.

Such a stance makes rational discourse ... all but impossible.

 

[Fantine]

As I've written elsewhere, communism, socialism, and capitalism are just economic theories.

They go wrong when their countries are led by fascist, authoritarian, oligarchical leaders, often propped up by the "military-industrial-technological" complex.

In the U.S., looking at recent history, falling prey to authoritarian oligarchs in thrall to corporations is much more of a danger than "socialism."

When I look at the Buffalo shooter, I'd say he was vulnerable to conspiracy theories and fake news, listening to whoever spoke the loudest and made the least sense.

 

[durangodawood]

In the sense of a political compass, Communism and Nazism are not just closely allied, they are identical in most respects:

Why do the blue arrows all point toward "tyranny"?

 

[NightHawkeye]

Why do the blue arrows all point toward "tyranny"?

Good question.

While I didn't craft the chart, I'd suggest that the author observed that most governments have progressed to tyranny and thus saw tyranny as the normal progression of society unless a somewhat concerted effort is made to limit the size and scope of government.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

It is amazing that some here seem to feel there are only TWO sides to the political spectrum ... as if one side unerringly encompasses all that is good and just, while the other side must encompass all that is bad and unjust.

Such a stance makes rational discourse ... all but impossible.

Gee, I wonder where that started? Oh, right...

Aren't they all?

Still, it's more than a little fascinating the number of times the media attempts to portray one after another as someone holding extreme right-wing ideology ... only for us to soon discover a poisoning left-wing ideological basis instead.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Gee, I wonder where that started? Oh, right...

You take issue with characterizing communism as a poisonous left-wing ideology?

 

[TLK Valentine]

What difference does it make?

A post-incident analysis is usually said to be done in order to allow actions to be taken which could prevent future such incidents. (At least that's what those calling for changes say.) The initial claims made by the AP for instance were that the shooter was radicalized by Tucker Carlson and Fox News. The implication, of course, is that Tucker Carlson should be silenced and Fox News should fall in line with the old guard mainline media.

Now, however, we know the truth. The shooter had been a radicalized communist for many years but he had recently moderated to national socialism. Both ideologies are ensconced in hatred ... and minimizing the influence of both in modern society would be a noble goal.

Unless, of course, the mass murder is lying...

Nah, that would be wrong.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

You take issue with characterizing communism as a poisonous left-wing ideology?

I'm taking issue with you moaning about how people are acting as though there "are only TWO sides to the political spectrum as if one side unerringly encompasses all that is good and just, while the other side must encompass all that is bad and unjust" while simultaneously trying to frame the shooter as a left-wing terrorist whose ideas actually aren't part of the right at all. The lack of self-awareness is staggering - if not exactly surprising.

 

[NightHawkeye]

I'm taking issue with you moaning about how people are acting as though there "are only TWO sides to the political spectrum as if one side unerringly encompasses all that is good and just, while the other side must encompass all that is bad and unjust" while simultaneously trying to frame the shooter as a left-wing terrorist whose ideas actually aren't part of the right at all. The lack of self-awareness is staggering - if not exactly surprising.

You misunderstand.

I simply offered the words of the shooter ... as he described his own ideology. I'm not sure why you're trying to argue with me about his self-description.