Understanding the Quebec Mosque MassacreGreg Johnson
According to the mainstream press, on Sunday, January 29, 2017, a 27-year-old white man, Alexandre Bissonnette, entered the Islamic Cultural Center in Quebec City, Canada, killed six Muslims gathered for prayer, and injured eight more.
As a white person, I look down upon the criminals among us. I do not reflexively defend and glorify them. Muslims, of course, are commanded to deceive, torture, rape, enslave, and murder infidels. But such things are illegal in white societies. I hope Bissonnette receives a fair trial and just punishment, but that seems unlikely given the politically correct and racially charged atmosphere in Canada today.
We obviously don’t know all the facts yet, but apparently the killings were racially and religiously motivated. Bissonnette is said to have been a Right-wing internet troll. He is also, apparently, a “lone wolf,” unconnected to any White Nationalist or anti-Muslim groups.
Still, I can say three things with confidence.
First, the Quebec mosque massacre could not have happened if Canada had remained a European Christian society and did not import Muslims from Africa and the Middle East. I have no desire to absolve Alexandre Bissonnette, much less blame his victims. But he would not be a killer, and they would not be dead, if Muslims did not live in Canada. When different races, cultures, and religious communities are forced to live together in the same system, frictions are inevitable. These frictions give rise to misunderstandings, distrust, alienation, and long-simmering resentments, which flare up into hatred, violence, and social upheaval. Alexandre Bissonnette’s actions are predictable consequences of multiculturalism — as are the far more numerous religiously motivated hate crimes (terrorism, mass rape) committed against whites by Muslims, crimes which the establishment and media prefer to ignore. (Aedon Cassiel completely destroys the claim, echoed by fake news outlets, that Right-wing violence is a greater threat than Muslim terrorism in the United States.)
Islam has been at war with the rest of the world for more than a millennium. Allowing Muslim communities to form in white societies is like bringing the Trojan horse within our gates. It has brought religious and ethnic hated, pedophile rape epidemics, barbaric mutilations and murders, and terrorism. If Muslim migration is not halted and reversed, Western civilization will be destroyed and replaced by medieval barbarism. Thus they must all go back.
Second, we should resist dismissing Alexandre Bissonnette with the all-too-easy claim that he was “crazy.” I am not going to simply disown Alexandre Bissonnette and label him “one of them”: one of those evil, crazy white racists who are fundamentally different from the rest of us, the “good,” “sane,” “tolerant” white people. For the truth is, Alexandre Bissonnette is “one of us.”
By “one of us,” I simply mean that he is a white man, and all white people have innate ethnocentric tendencies, wired deep in our brains. We love our own and we fear strangers. As diversity increases, all of us will bear increased psychic costs, even those who pursue wealth and status by selling out their own people in favor of foreigners.
Bissonnette and people like him may be nothing more than canaries in a coal mine: the first to sense the presence of a threat to the survival of us all. Bissonnette may have just been abnormally sensitive to the terrible psychic consequences of losing control of our society to aliens: stress, alienation, anger, hatred, rage, etc. This heightened sensitivity might also go along with a whole suite of other abnormal traits. But we dismiss people like Bissonnette at our own risk. For in the end, all of us will feel the same effects — unless we heed the warning signs and turn back the rising tide of color.
Third, Bissonnette’s “solution” to his rage and alienation — killing innocent people — just makes the racial situation worse rather than better. There is no evidence so far that Bissonnette was affiliated with or influenced by any white racialist group. But his actions certainly resemble those of racially-motivated spree killers like Anders Behring Breivik, Wade Michael Page, Frazier Glenn Miller, and Dylan Storm Roof, all of whom are products of what I call “Old Right” thinking.
By the “Old Right,” I mean classical Fascism and National Socialism and their contemporary imitators who believe that White Nationalism can be advanced through such means as one-party politics, terrorism, totalitarianism, imperialism, and genocide. Today’s Old Right scene is rife with fantasies of race war, lone wolf attacks on non-whites, and heroic last stands that end in a hail of police bullets. Intelligent and honorable people have emerged from this milieu. But there have been more than a few spree-killers as well.
This kind of violence is worse than a crime. It is a mistake. It does nothing to advance our cause and much to set us back.
Given that reason, science, and history are all on our side, and the greatest apparatus of coercion and brainwashing in human history is on the enemy’s side, doesn’t it make sense to attack the enemy at his weakest point rather than at his strongest? This is why the North American New Right pursues White Nationalism through intellectual and cultural means: we critique the hegemony of anti-white ideas and seek to establish a counter-hegemony of pro-white ideas.
Only a fool picks a battle he cannot win, and we cannot win with violence. Fortunately, we don’t have to. The Left lost the Cold War but won the peace through the establishment of intellectual and cultural hegemony. We can beat them the same way, and we don’t have to all be rocket scientists to do it, since anyone of even moderate intelligence can make real progress by simply repeating Bob Whitaker’s talking points about white genocide.
Furthermore, the only form of violence that even has a chance to be productive in halting multiculturalism and non-white immigration would target the people responsible for these policies, not random innocents. Moreover, killing innocent people (at a place of worship!) has entirely predictable results. First, such violence creates sympathy for the victims. (Even I feel sympathy for them, and I would deport them all tomorrow if I had the power.) Second, it plays into the establishment narrative of evil, crazy, intolerant whites whose gun rights must be taken away.
So Bissonnette’s choice of targets was superficial and frankly stupid. Was he even thinking about the greater good of our people? Or was he merely indulging in blind, self-destructive spite? And how exactly does praising repugnant killers help White Nationalists establish ourselves as representatives of the long-term best interests of our people?
I wish I could erect a wall between myself and the kind of unstable, undisciplined people who go on killing sprees, but you can’t change the world from a bunker. Thus responsible white advocates need to adopt the next best course of action: (1) we must be alert to the signs of mental instability and inclinations toward violence and rigorously screen out such people, and (2) we need draw clear, unambiguous intellectual lines between New Right and Old Right approaches.
I just hope I don’t have to do this often. But apparently it will be often enough that this is the second time I have dusted off one of my previous spree-killer essays and merely change a few particulars.
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 527 Machiavellianism & More
The Machiavellian Method
Enoch Powell, poslední tory
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 526 Cyan Quinn Reports from CPAC & More
Remembering Richard M. Weaver (March 3, 1910–April 1, 1963)
La Russie et l’Ukraine, à nouveau
An Open Letter to Scott Adams
You are right about Alex Bissonnette, whatever his motives he has done us no favours. We are likely to see a lot more ‘tit-for-tat’ terrorists outrages in the future, and despite the election of Trump in the US the West is likely to react with even harsher restrictions on free speech. I agree that we should weed out the psychopaths but that’s easier said than done. I suggest that all responsible groups should require their members to work within the law, and issue directives to that end. Otherwise we could all go to prison because a tortured soul has got hold of a gun.
“First, the Quebec mosque massacre could not have happened if Canada had remained a European Christian society and did not import Muslims from Africa and the Middle East”.
Even more true so for South Africa. There is a civilization going down because of this. Please do not forget South Africa in the Alt+Right community, with all the Donald Trump good news. Something must be urgently done for those whites in that country.
See for example Oscar Pretorius (the paralympic murderer), also Barend Strydom (the White Wolf case). There are more cases of the same nature, some even resulted in pipe bombing campaigns.
The latest case happened yesterday. A community of black squaters was relocated into a white suburb. The white community protested A white lady got emotional, and spread some hate speech on this incident. She promptly was arrested by the police.
He seems more like a Beta Male who was bullied and decided to act out with violence. It’s a real shame. Just like Dylann Roof, this sets us back. Men, watch our for your younger brothers and cousins. Guide them well. Violence of this nature is not the answer.
No more virtue-signalling, the best response is none. Like the Muslims, we should just NOT comment, besides if more whites took actions instead or pseudo-intellectual-leftest-mental-masturbation, than we wouldn’t have Rotherhams, Colognes, and this sick multiculturalism in the first place…
Nonsense. If we let Muslims or blacks set our standards, we have already lost. And no, taking action is not a good thing if it is stupid and counter-productive.
I get it but, we need to just not comment… Because if we do it serves our enemies as well, since they are then setting up the parameters for debate, morality, however fraudulent theirs is, and action…
Therefore the only way to win this game is to set a new set of rules that only WE define…
No, I disagree. Your position, to the extent that it is clear at all, smacks of moral relativism, which is not philosophically defensible.
Then you fall into the universalist-morality trap… The very presence of the non-whites is offensive. Our morality is ONLY for our Ethnic Kin. I care not for others, nor do they about us…
This is just incredibly naive and confused assertion, offered without argument.
Furthermore, I would agree moral relativism is philosophically indefensible, but remember morality is practical reason. Is it reasonable, at the cost of our ethnic kin to allow, more and more existential threats to continue to arrive and just take a high and “philosophical” approach?
But, yes this incident DID NOT serve our interests in the long term, but that is why my point is this: no comments…
None of this follows.
I’m sure that Bissonette was not accepted by anyone on the right…
Vantardism isn’t a social profile.
In Quebec City, Strategy of Tension Inverts into Next Phase: Supervised Race War
If a white nationalist now, before all the facts are clear, claims this guy is a hero, he must be regarded as an enemy plant or agent provocateur.
With the new US administration in power, the winds of change sweeping across Europe, our enemies are desperately trying to smear us. Smearing us by association will be sufficient for their purposes.
I agree. The salvation of the West is unlikely to arrive in the form of knights thundering down the way with swords brandished (or the modern-day equivalent). It’s the ethnonationalists who are the reasoned ones, and that reason is really the strongest weapon we have. If I were a forum moderator, I’d dock (for at least two months) anyone who celebrated this disaster.
Greg Johnson: ” I can say … with confidence.
“[T]he Quebec mosque massacre could not have happened if Canada had remained a European Christian society and did not import Muslims from Africa and the Middle East.”
When the political Establishment set up these multi-racial, multi-cultural societies in white countries and all against the vocal opposition of the great majority of our folk, the Establishment were clearly and deliberately following an agenda aimed at doing enormous damage to us. For example, the public authorities in England knowingly allowed Asian criminals to rape, torture, sexually abuse, sell into prostitution English children , under-age girls, for years and years and years, with complete immunity in towns and cities right across the North of England. It has now been revealed that the authorities knew at the time of the vile crimes being committed by Asian criminals against hundreds of under-age English girls, and that the authorities deliberately turned a blind eye.
I have no doubt that the political establishment calculated, anticipated that there would be blind, hate-driven attacks by the likes of an Alexandre Bissonnette arising from the white community: and I have no doubt that the destruction and the self-destruction committed by Bissonnette will be seen by the evil Establishment as part and parcel of the destruction of the white community as a whole, which for whatever reason the current regime in position so clearly and ardently desires.
Greg, You do very well to set about understanding this Quebec mosque massacre.
He also claimed to like feminism.
I suspect there are probably some uncomfortable similarities between Islamist terrorists and the types of desperate White Nationalists who commit similar mass atrocities – first and foremost depression and social isolation. Because there is no public forum for debating White Nationalist ideas or interacting with other WNs, and because White Nationalists often struggle to fit in and move forward in our dysfunctional society, it is understandable why we often read about the same demographic groups (male, twenty-something) committing such acts; this is also quite common for other groups of individuals who find themselves as outsiders in our society including multiracial young men such as Elliott Rodgers and Chris Harper-Mercer. Additionally, as our society continues to strain under the weight of an unworkable multiracialism, such incidents will only increase in frequency and intensity until a breaking point is reached, as it was in the former Yugoslavia. Greg, I understand your extreme caution regarding mentally unstable individuals, but I think it is not always clear whether the folks involved in these incidents are truly mentally unstable (ie bipolar, schizophrenic, etc) or just lonely and “at the end of their ropes”; desperation has a way of making normal people look insane. Creating a cordon sanitaire around people who are young, stressed, and alone does nothing to prevent a recurrence of these counter-productive incidents – it ensures they will recur. You are, however, correct that your book NRvOR contains some very potent ideas that can help turn young people away from a self-destructive path.
I look at this from two angles. First, and most important: what effect does it have on White racial interests? Here, I agree with Greg totally, the action was stupid, counter-productive, aimed at secondary rather than primary targets, and a waste – most of all a waste of Bissonnette himself, who could have served racial nationalism better by leveraging his education and exerting influence on society.
The second angle is how I think about it from a moral, ethical, and aesthetic standpoint – frankly, I have no sympathy whatsoever for the victims who themselves viciously victimized White Canadians by their presence, I have no moral, ethical, or aesthetic objections to Bissonnette’s actions. That may be harsh, but I have Diversity Fatigue, SJW Fatigue, Leftist Fatigue, and the continuous in-your-face attacks on Whites and on the Right (some literal, ask Richard Spencer) have hardened many a heart, including my own. So, I could care less about the “victims.” I do care about the negative impact and the waste of Bissonnette’s life going forward. The fault I think is on both sides of the rightist equation: Bissonnette himself has some flaws that led to this, but, at the same time, if there was a productive outlet for his energies, he could have been of use. Feeling hopeless and despairing (which I assume is the case) was no excuse for Bissonnette to act out in a way that is not politically prudent. On the other hand, what has led right-thinking (usually young) White men to despairing hopelessness?
I agree that his choice of target was pointless which makes me think he wasn’t so much as crazy as he was dumb. Violent people often lack brains and people with brains often lack the courage for violence. So we have a bunch of morons who will kill random people who are nobodies meanwhile people like Merkel, Trudeau and Soros remain alive and well. It’s easy to go into some random building like a mosque and gun down a bunch of people but it takes scheming and sophistication to take down a real deserving target.
What no one has said it that Canada is completely owned by the Jews. They own all the newspapers and I suspect run all the TV channels. They even run the alternative news.
This is the left wing progressive site started by Judy Rebick: http://rabble.ca/
and this is the right wing site run by Ezra Levant: http://www.therebel.media/
No wonder that kid was confused, especially in Quebec where the French/English animosity is also constantly triggered deliberately by both sides. Canada is the virtue signaller capital of the world. When I was growing up, I was taught how wonderful we were because we helped the Blacks with the underground railway. La de da. The French Canadians were bad because they did not want to fight Hitler. No I do not approve of what he did, but I really would like to know why it took so long to get the narrative in the correct politically correct frame, especially since apparently the one who ran away was the Muslim. Why would the witness run away? Oh sorry, don’t ask questions. My bad.
Don’t rule out – just yet – the possibility that Bissonnette did not do this. From what I’ve read, he was contacted by police before turning himself in and he has not confessed. Alternative narrative is that the police have been tracking him due to his online behavior and chose to pin the crime on him.
Rebel Media may be onto something here – I thought as well that was somewhat fishy how quickly the narratives changed during the early stage of reporting. First Coulter’s law, then Muslim immigrants were named and even photos shown, then they settled for Bissonette…
As long as invaders are welcomed in, they will continue to invade. Traitors and invaders alike must be made to feel unwelcome. If the state does not do it, individuals will – at first, individuals with less to lose and therefore usually less able in execution.
America has been shown what happens when a group is known as violent and murderous. On September 11th, 2001, as far as 90% of Americans are concerned, Muslims murdered 3,000 Americans. In the 15 years since that act, Muslims have only received more sympathy from, more assistance from, and more power over, Americans.
There is no such thing as looking bad – if you want to stop Muslim men from sexually enslaving women in the West you are Literally Hitler. There is only looking strong or looking weak.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Edit your comment