Adolf Hitler and Anders Behring Breivik - misleading comparison?
Hey ho, as some of you may or may not know, I am from Norway, so the 22/7 attacks still gets most of the media's attention over here thus there is no way of neglecting it. So far everything is fine and dandy bla bla bla, then I come across an article written by a psychologist of Cambridge University, in which he compares Breivik's actions with Adolf's 1923 beer hall putsch, playing the 'revolutionary' card. He also points out rhetorical similarities. Does anyone else concur or disagree with this comparison? Personally, I could not disagree more. I think it is highly inaccurate and misguiding in the sense that the two men are not compatable at all, for several reasons. Number one: Society. German society at the time allowed for such behaviour to unfold as the country was falling apart, meaning, the settings are entirely different. Without trying to portray Norway as utopia or anything, I would say that we have a relatively stable society, even though it is highly multicultural and there are indeed problems in Oslo connected to immigration. But my point is that society in some form, will have an impact on the individual. All in all, no political, social or economical crisis threatening to eradicate the country completely. So Breivik had to find 'problems' elsewhere. Number two: One cannot dismiss the claim that Adolf probably suffered from intense psychological issues after returning from the battlefield plus everything else (don't have the time to write everything that was wrong with him), meaning, this is not compatible with Breivik's character. Note, I am no psychologist so please do correct me if am entirely wrong. Basically, I do not think that their psychological profiles match. Number three: Ambitions. Adolf wanted world power, I do not agree of the claim that he was a soldier of any kind. I do have a couple of theories regarding this, but as I am banned from further investigation into WW2 and Adolf, I do apologise for lack of supporting facts to this claim. But ok anyway, wanting world power for whatever reason, is not the same as wanting to drive Islam out of Europe, and being a Knights Templar. He strived for a so called civil war, but that seems to be it. Very different from Adolf's concept of Lebensraum for example. Although this is a discussion of motives, of course. aye aye. Number four: Anti - semitism and the myth of Eurabia are extremely similar, so I have included a comparison in my own article on the subject, but in a different concept, a concept which lacks Hitler. Both concepts are being driven by ignorance and fear. Ignorance meaning the neglect of other's perspective and uncritically viewing so called 'facts'. Breivik's fear of a Muslim take over is driven by other factors, and is a relatively new phenomenon compared to Anti - Semitism in the 1930's. Number five: Indirect and direct involvment of atrocities. It is correct that Adolf himself participated in the beer hall putsch, but I personally believe that was due to the state of the party at the time. Later on, Adolf never witnessed or participated in such violence. So I think it is inaccurate to base so much of the comparison to this event as it fails to This is very different from Breivik being the main executioner of the bombing of downtown Oslo and the massacre at Utøya. His manifesto indicates that he was ready to further participate in the "civil war" in which he had embarked on. For those of you who cannot be arsed with reading all that.. To sum it up: *Two extremely different psychological profiles *Product of society theory - Fundamentally different societies *Ambitions differs too much *Anti - Semitism and Eurabia should be compared in order to prevent the Eurabia myth to expand, but is not as popular as anti - semitism in the 1930's, and should thus be seen in a different light as far as motives goes. I could go on for hours and hours, but I am visiting daddy in Oslo and he will get offended if I don't spend some time with him :p Any feedback will be appreciated. Also, I do apologise for being brief on certain points in this rather narrow analysis. Cheers.