Guest post by Bonojit Hussain
Norwegian mass killer Anders Behring Breivik, in his manifesto, hailed Hindutva forces in India as an important ally in his envisaged fight against what he calls the “cultural Marxist/social humanist” world order. But he seems to be far more impressed by the conservative cultural milieu of South Korea as far as migrants are concerned; so much so that his manifesto is not only replete with praises for South Korean society and State but also his stated goal for Europe is to achieve a “mono-cultural” ethos, modeled on South Korea. Breivik believes that South Korea being a “scientifically advanced, economically progressive” society “out rightly rejects multiculturalism and Marxist cultural principles”.
Breivik’s manifesto might appear to be full of rambling political rants; but it seems he is not radically off the mark in understanding Korea’s hatred for migrants. So much so that right wing groups in Korea must have smiled and said in Unison “At last! Somebody recognizes our real value”.
Continue reading Breivik’s model nation and migrants in South Korea: Bonojit Hussain
Guest post by Nandagopal R. Menon
Scepticism is warranted only when patterns are broken. Normally, prejudice alone will suffice. So if there is a bomb blast in a Western capital, it can only be an Islamist “terror plot”. The motivations could be chosen from a short list of grievances of a peculiarly “Islamic” nature – anger against illegal occupation of “Muslim lands” being the most favourite among them.
In the immediate aftermath of the July 22 terrorist attacks in the government quarters of Oslo, there was no room for doubt. All that was left to be done was to identify the exact name of the “jihadi” group involved (Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, The New York Times concluded after a swift investigation); and the specific motive that propelled the attack (first choice: presence of Norwegian troops in Afghanistan; second: publication of the infamous Danish cartoons in the Norwegian press; and a distant third: Colonel Gaddafi’s retaliatory attack for Norway’s participation in bombing Libya). Whatever the motive or the group, it was indisputable that it was a “terrorist” attack.
Continue reading The terrorist and the madman: Nandagopal R. Menon