

Anonymous targets Norway killer’s manifesto - diggericon
http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/anonymous-targets-norway-killers-manifesto/

======
cynicalkane
I downloaded a copy of the manifesto, read through the first few dozen pages
or so, and skimmed through a few other parts.

The table of contents suggests 90-year war plan to unite Europe under the
Knights Templar and restore pan-European identity. It doesn't need to be
altered--it's already unbelievably stupid.

But he also knows a great deal about the political history of Europe and
liberal thought, seen through a twisted lens. Furthermore, he follows a sort
of Geert Wilders-like strain of Euro-nationalist ideas, dangerous ideas that
have been gaining ground in parts of Europe. To alter this manifesto to
include 'dumb things' is dangerous because first, it devalues the idiocy of
his claims; second, readers will be more tempted to read it for the "good
parts" while ignoring the "dumb parts"--who knows what parts were added,
anyway? They'll be reading about the evils of Islam and multicultralism
without understanding the fact--or dismissing it--that his ideas fit in a
bizarre megalomaniacal framework of fantasy European domination, and deserve
extreme scrutiny and mistrust.

~~~
Fjolle
Yes. It doesn't need to be altered for most people to think that it is
incredibly stupid.

People who would already tend to agree with his points might either ignore the
added "dumb" parts, or just agree with them.

------
hetman
Wait. So their great idea is to give credence to his claims?

The guy was convinced there's an organised Marxist agenda actively working in
western society to distort truth and keep its citizens in the dark. This will
just vindicate his claims in the eyes of anyone who was willing to buy it.

And lets face it, the originals are going to be around a lot longer than the
Anonymous spoofs because these kids are going to get bored and move onto
something more interesting by next week/month/whatever. They can't outlast
someone festering in hatred for years.

A concerted censorship effort by anyone is the worst thing that can happen to
the internet. No matter how righteous you feel your cause (of course everyone
feels theirs is). Simply, the only way for wayward ideas to be uprooted is to
expose them to the full light of scrutiny. Pushing them into dank corners,
veiled by mystery, away from public discourse, will always find fertile ground
in minds of individuals on the fringes searching for someone to blame for
their woes.

At the very best this is misguided cowardice.

~~~
JamesBlair
Yes. Their great idea is to give credence to his claims. And an audience.

Don't forget that an Anonymous was one of the forces behind the Streisand
effect of Tom Cruise's Scientology video. They know exactly what they're
doing.

~~~
peterwwillis
_> They know exactly what they're doing._

Oh yeah. A bunch of teens and really bored adults photoshopping pictures,
posting gay furry anthropomorph fanfic and child porn must know EXACTLY what
they're doing.

This is the fucking streisand effect! This is the definition of it! They're
trying to censor/cover up the original and make a big deal about it, so guess
what's going to happen? More people will look for the original to see what it
says. This is the worst Anon operation so far.

~~~
JamesBlair
Some Anonymous also happen to be racists, neo-nazis and fascists. Some happen
to be conspiracy nuts. Some happen to be well educated liberals. Some happen
to be Hacker News readers.

The PDF with the MD5 9e72e26916c20481a1f6e4781fd4d505 predates the
announcement. This was, also, the only copy I could find, except for a docx
version that's probably identical. It was also the copy linked to in Anders
Behring Breivik's wikipedia article.

~~~
davepm
Many Anonymous are HN readers. You cannot define Anonymous, we are all
Anonymous.

------
aw3c2
Idiots. A strong handling of this would be to collaboratively debunk his
arguments. Censorship does not help anyone.

~~~
yot
I agree, let's start here.

Facts: Current birth rate among indigenous Europeans in most if not all
European countries is and has been below replacement level for a few decades.
Most population growth in Europe in the last few decades has been from
immigration from outside Europe. The birth rate among non-indigenous Europeans
in European countries is higher than indigenous birth rate.

Projections (not fact): This trend doesn't appear to be changing and it looks
like it will continue for many more decades. If the trend continues, in a few
decades the genetic makeup of most Europeans will be more similar to that of
non-European ethnic groups than to that of people who have lived in Europe for
tens of thousands of years.

Arguments (assuming projections are true):

a) the projections above are a bad thing if you are an ethnic European and you
predominantly carry genes that split from the ethnic groups of immigrants tens
of thousands of years ago.

b) the projections above don't matter

c) the projections above are a good thing

State why the projections are likely to be wrong, debunk argument a) or
justify why arguments b/c are correct. Proceed.

~~~
seabee
I believe your starting point is largely irrelevant, but first...

A good justification for (b) can be found by determining the genetic diversity
of indigenous populations from thousands of years ago and comparing to the
present day. As an example the UK has had many 'immigrants' in just the past
two thousand years alone, with the Romans, Saxons, Vikings and Normans being
notable topics on a good school's History lessons.

Nevertheless, I believe your arguments aren't particularly relevant to the
issues held by these extremists, who fear Islamic culture more than they fear
Muslims themselves. They view 'multiculturalism' as the replacement of
indigenous culture. If you want to go anywhere with this, you have to debate
this more nuanced (and less scientific) viewpoint.

~~~
yot
Playing devil's advocate.

You used the UK as an example, however, Romans, Saxons, Vikings and Normans
were ethnic Europeans and these genetic groups didn't split from indigenous
people in the British isles tens of thousands of years ago but more recently.
The projection (not fact) above mentions that: "in a few decades the genetic
makeup of most Europeans will be more similar to that of NON-European ethnic
groups than to that of people who have lived in Europe for TENS OF THOUSANDS
of years".

In any case if you were any of those groups, you would have opposed an
invasion from a later group. Picts fought Roman "immigration". One might
interpret this as Picts wanting their genetic makeup to be more representative
in the overall population of the British isles.

I don't see how this justification might convince someone who is "an ethnic
European and predominantly carries genes that split from the ethnic groups of
immigrants tens of thousands of years ago" that the projection doesn't matter
if they don't already believe so.

I wasn't aware that these extremists aren't concerned about genes. I haven't
read the manifesto nor am I planning to. However, people can still have a go
at debunking the genetic argument above if they wish.

~~~
scarmig
The issue with the devil's advocate position is this. There's no such thing as
an "ethnic" European. Race is a very recent sociopolitical construct, born in
the 16th/17th centuries and initially used to justify English supremacy over
the Irish and only later picking up connotations of skin color. The genetic
differences between a Scotsman and a Spaniard are far larger than those
separating a Greek and a Turk.

Pre-modern European tribes did not place an emphasis on race; it didn't exist
yet. Nor did they care about protecting the nation or their national heritage,
as the concept of nation itself took centuries to form millenia later and only
started playing a major geopolitical role with the French revolution. This
isn't to say the tribesmen were multiculturalists; they had their own cultures
and were often wary of outsiders, but mostly for reasons of self defense. But
the supposed desire for genetic homogeneity didn't prevent Scandinavians from
raiding the French and British coasts, abducting women, and forcibly mating
with them, despite their cultural and genetic differences.

~~~
rubashov
> There's no such thing as an "ethnic" European. Race is a very recent
> sociopolitical construct

It's funny how a tiny fraction of college educated white people in the West
are the only people in the whole world to believe this. Everybody else knows
what race and what white people are.

~~~
scarmig
It's pretty funny to be told you're white.

It is fair to point out that it's wrong to claim race doesn't exist. It does.
But it's just as wrong to say that it's somehow immutable or a scientific
concept (though, as pointed out above, human genetic clustering is a real
phenomenon).

~~~
rubashov
How would you know what you are? Race doesn't exist...

------
cschreiner
Bad idea. The world needs to see what kind of a lunatic he is. The world needs
to know his arguments in order to repeal.

~~~
yummyfajitas
The world needs to know his arguments in order to repeal _or accept them_.

He seems to be a nut, but that doesn't mean his ideas are wrong.

~~~
rbanffy
> but that doesn't mean his ideas are wrong.

Agreed, but after reading a bit of it (I downloaded a file with MD5 of
9e72e26916c20481a1f6e4781fd4d505) I can spare you the pain. It's crap.

Still, his actions make it necessary to repeal all of his arguments and
assumptions.

~~~
diolpah
"Still, his actions make it necessary to repeal all of his arguments and
assumptions."

Really? James Watson and William Shockley both said very unpopular things
about race. Shockley advocated a policy of sterilizing lower class black
people. Should we repeal all use and knowledge of DNA and semiconductors?

Even if Shockley started killing black people as stage one eugenics, his
actions would have absolutely no impact on his ideas. None.

~~~
j_r_
Yes, but there is no train of thought from semiconductors to stupid ideas
about eugenics. There _is_ one from anti-socialist rhetoric to killing members
of a left party.

~~~
jerf
"Yes, but there is no train of thought from semiconductors to stupid ideas
about eugenics."

You badly underestimate the perverse creativity of a paranoid schizophrenic.
I've never seen that one but I've certainly seen things every bit as crazy.

(I have a bit of a soft spot for paranoid schizophrenic rantings; it's like
outsider art for philosophy. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsider_art>)

~~~
rbanffy
Maybe we miss the point here. You can't argue the science behind transistors
is correct (or, at least, the engineering) but you can show how bad things end
up when we start recommending eugenics.

The central idea of eugenics - that we can control our evolution the way we
did with dogs or cattle - is not inherently flawed, but I wouldn't trust the
evolution of our species to its current members. Before we think about
building a better mankind, we need a better mankind.

~~~
yummyfajitas
_...but you can show how bad things end up when we start recommending
eugenics._

This is a perfect example of why it's bad to reject an idea simply because it
has unpleasant proponents. If we rejected eugenics based on unpleasant
associations, thousands of Ashkenazi Jewish children would have died a
horrible death.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay%E2%80%93Sachs_disease#Scree...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay%E2%80%93Sachs_disease#Screening_success_with_Ashkenazi_Jews)

------
rbanffy
No.

His ideas should be repealed and refuted by reason and with an open debate.
Anything other than that will make them stronger. There are many people who
already believe them and, thanks to his actions, countless more will. They
must be proved wrong _and_ convinced they are wrong.

~~~
krongoth
What makes you think anything like a majority of people care enough to get
into a reasonable, open debate about what he said?

~~~
rbanffy
Hope.

------
adrianwaj
Anders Behring Breivik plagiarised 'Unabomber'

[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/norway/8658...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/norway/8658269/Norway-
shooting-Anders-Behring-Breivik-plagiarised-Unabomber.html)

~~~
jvdh
He "plagiarised" many others as well. You have to wonder though whether
plagiarism even applies to the ravings of a mad man.

------
rdouble
This is clever. However, I read the manifesto over the weekend and am not sure
what could be added or changed to make it seem more ridiculous.

~~~
vixen99
Ridiculous, stupid, idiotic: these words cut communication with people who
have differing views. Difficult to believe you sat through 1500 pages (why?)
and have only that comment to make. On the positive side, you've more
dedication or is it stamina (?) than me.

------
brown9-2
I thought these guys were anti-censorship?

------
wisty
A contrasting opinion: no sane person would really be moved by his ideas. But
no-one wants to be a joke. Humiliating him, and his manifesto is an effective
punishment, and maybe even a deterrent.

------
pedram
"add stupid stuff"?

Doing that might make people suspect that the original document is well-
written and that the "stupid stuff" was added later.

~~~
rbanffy
I'd like to point out it would be hard to add stuff that's more stupid than
what he already wrote.

~~~
vixen99
One of the delights of HN is that the comments rarely include pointless
epithets. So how about replacing 'stupid' with a sentence or two from his
'manifesto' and then telling us what you think is irrational or wrong with it?

~~~
pedram
The whole idea of national and ethnic pride is silly, I think George Carlin
nails it in this clip: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDgmjL6z2jY>

Regarding the supposed islamization of Europe, I think a large portion of the
immigrants from muslim countries who moved to Europe belong to at least one of
these groups: a)not muslim b)not interested in promoting islam c)looking to
live in a more secular or free country d)like cold weather :)

Could Europe do anything to stop the muslim immigrants from wanting to move to
Europe instead of deporting them when they are already living in Europe as
Breivik suggests? Maybe stop selling weapons to the leaders of countries who
kill their own people for holding peaceful demonstrations? Or stop the wars
for cheap oil? Too bad there's no way to undo the European colonization of
muslim countries, cause that would definitely have helped.

------
ForrestN
I don't know if this is actually a helpful action or not, and what, if any,
consequences will arise, but it's certainly good marketing for Anonymous. Much
of the public don't understand their more nuanced reasons for attacking
companies like Sony. For many, Anonymous are those people who took out
Playstation. Attempting to thwart the desires of someone who's universally
accepted as a villain at least starts to complicate their image as villains
themselves.

------
Shenglong
Why would anyone read a 1516 page document written by a maniac? Even sane
pieces tend to be TL;DR these days.

~~~
vixen99
Would anyone spend hours and hours listening to an opera by a (by universal-
agreement) disgusting anti-Semite like Wagner?

------
xefer
I don't care what Anonymous "targets". Frankly, I don't care about Anonymous
at all.

------
rl1987
Yeah right... <http://boards.4chan.org/b/res/343348504>

------
edw
So Anonymous wants the power to fabricate — or destroy — history, facts,
ideas, and so forth? Welcome to the dystopia!

------
hackermom
My first thought when seeing this was that it's not a very democratic thing to
do. Ironic.

