The armed wing of identity politics

The racist massacre in El Paso was violent identitarianism.

Brendan O'Neill

Brendan O'Neill

Topics Politics USA

Following the racist massacre at a Walmart in El Paso on Saturday, in which 20 people were killed, politicians and commentators have once again wrapped themselves in the comfort blanket of Trump-bashing. It’s Trump’s fault, they say, with ridiculous simplicity. Apparently it was Trump’s heated rhetoric and warped tweets, especially in relation to Mexicans, that drove this white-nationalist maniac to take such deadly action against Hispanic people.

This cynical rush to indict Trump as the inspirer-in-chief of mass murder might provide the cultural elite with a cheap political thrill. But it ignores the broader dynamics behind today’s racially paranoid violence. And it ignores the role the cultural elite itself may have played in nurturing a climate in which such despicable violence could emerge.

The El Paso shooting – like the Christchurch mosque massacre and the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre – looks like violent identitarianism. We seem to be witnessing something horrific: the militarisation of identity politics.

The killer’s alleged manifesto is riddled with identitarian paranoia. He sees himself and his cultural heritage as being under siege, especially from Hispanics. The arrival of a new race is a threat to ‘our way of life’, he says. He explicitly talks about his sense of ‘identity problems’. He says he is against ‘race mixing’ as it destroys ‘genetic diversity’. His overarching sense is that the US is being ‘destroyed from the inside out’. Tellingly, he writes of having no future: ‘My whole life I have been preparing for a future that currently doesn’t exist.’

These disturbing images of one’s identity being under threat from other identities – ‘identity problems’, as he calls them – echo the ramblings of the anti-Muslim bigot who carried out the mosque massacres in Christchurch. He, too, saw himself entirely as a cultural entity, and one under siege from other cultural entities. Indeed, the Christchurch killer argued that ‘diverse peoples must remain diverse’, meaning identity groups should be ‘separate, unique, undiluted, unrestrained in… cultural or ethnic expression’. The El Paso killer’s alleged manifesto repeats this cry for cultural entrenchment: it calls for the creation of a ‘confederacy of territories’ in which each identity group would have its own territory in which to thrive.

Observers can insist as much as they like that these sentiments are alien, twisted, the products of febrile, fascistic minds. But in truth such views, such concerns with ‘identity problems’, even such toying with the idea of maintaining cultural separatism and purity, speak to the utterly mainstream outlook of identity politics.

They come across like violent, militarised expressions of the mainstream taboo against ‘cultural appropriation’, which likewise maintains that cultures should not mix. They echo the sense of siege that is a central feature of every identitarian group, whether it’s black or Muslim identitarians convinced they are under threat by ‘white men’, as Ilhan Omar recently put it, or trans activists who are in the grip of the paranoid belief that society is awash with transphobic hatred.

And of course the violent paranoia of the El Paso and Christchurch killers mirror the Islamist identitarian paranoia that has led to the slaughter of hundreds of people in Europe over the past five years. Those acts more neatly fall into the category of terrorism than do the El Paso or Christchurch massacres – no, not because the perpetrators had brown skin, but because they were clearly part of a politically, religiously motivated form of mass violence. But there are nonetheless identitarian commonalities between Islamist terror and white-nationalist murder.

From the slaughter at Charlie Hebdo to the Bastille Day massacre in Nice to the Manchester Arena bombing that was carried out by a young Muslim who reportedly thought British society was riddled with ‘Islamophobia’, these acts of identitarian savagery were likewise fuelled in part by an extreme sense of cultural siege, of identitarian fragility. Albeit a sense of siege inflamed far more by mainstream commentators and community groups who talk ceaselessly about the alleged victimisation of Muslims by racist, ill-educated white Europeans than by right-wing figures like Trump.

The attempt to blame Trump and his allegedly un-American, non-presidential rants about certain groups of people for what happened in El Paso, and at the Pittsburgh synagogue last year, distracts from this far larger picture of cultural division and identitarian panic. Indeed, to the extent that Trump may have contributed to today’s climate, it was not by injecting some foreign kind of ‘fascism’ into the otherwise healthy body politic of modern America; rather, it was by also buying into the mainstream politics of identity, though he prefers to tap into a sense of white victimhood rather than black victimhood, Muslim victimhood, gay victimhood, etc.

These recent killings, this evolution of gun violence from random attacks to identitarian-fuelled vengeance, offers us a disturbing glimpse into the cultural fragmentation unleashed by the relentless rise of a politics based on identity above all else. What they point to is the dangers inherent in the persistent politicisation of personal identity. Indeed, this new politics, this elevation of one’s own identity to the be-all and end-all of political life, is arguably the most disturbing trend of our time. And it is now, somewhat predictably, giving rise to actual mass violence.

The problem with the politicisation of personal identity is that it can lead to psychological disorientation. It convinces people that any criticism of their political worldview is an existential assault on their own life and future, given that their political worldview is so intimately and disturbingly entwined with their own identity.

So where violent white identitarians spread the conspiracy theory about the white race being ‘replaced’ by non-white people, trans activists talk about being ‘erased’, and Muslim identitarians and their sympathisers claim Muslims face the beginnings of a ‘genocide’ in the West, and black observers claim that anyone who doesn’t accept the new identitarianism and instead insists on being ‘race-less’ is ‘erasing black people and their contributions’. As a writer for the Guardian recently argued, ‘white liberals of a certain age [are] using their political and social platforms to erase black people’. This is the same sense of cultural fear and dread that leads white identitarians to talk about the ‘cultural replacement’ of whites.

Replacement, erasure, genocide, phobia, hate speech, hate crime, microaggressions… identity politics, through making the personal political, has created a world of paranoia. A world in which anyone who questions any aspect of our politics, and therefore our own lives, must be shut down, whether by being censored, hounded out of polite society, jailed, or, yes, killed. The violence in El Paso and elsewhere is sickening and hateful. It also feels disturbingly mainstream, and horrifically predictable.

Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked and host of the spiked podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show. Subscribe to the podcast here. And find Brendan on Instagram: @burntoakboy

Picture by: Getty.

Let’s cancel cancel culture

Free speech is under attack from all sides – from illiberal laws, from a stifling climate of conformity, and from a powerful, prevailing fear of being outed as a heretic online, in the workplace, or even among friends, for uttering a dissenting thought. This is why we at spiked are stepping up our fight for speech, expanding our output and remaking the case for this most foundational liberty. But to do that we need your help. spiked – unlike so many things these days – is free. We rely on our loyal readers to fund our journalism. So if you want to support us, please do consider becoming a regular donor. Even £5 per month can be a huge help. You can find out more and sign up here. Thank you! And keep speaking freely.

Donate now

To enquire about republishing spiked’s content, a right to reply or to request a correction, please contact the managing editor, Viv Regan.


Steve Roberts

6th August 2019 at 6:35 pm

O’Neill rightly points out that the responsibility for these appalling murders is the shooter himself, that’s self evident. And yet it is important – if we are to attempt to reduce the likelihood of further atrocities like this – that we draw the correct conclusions and understanding of what is occurring in contemporary society.
Banning guns is not just simplistic it is becoming a catch all virtue signalling parody that is useless.
Recently O’Neill has written about the problem of identitarianism, here he expands into the deep misanthropy involved in contemporary discourse.
I think it is also worth noting the social and cultural setting that is deeply embedded in particular – or more accurately in a more mature form than elsewhere – in the USA. For generations now there has been an increasingly regressive social and educational norm of non judgementalism, where all is relative, everything goes, it has resulted in generalised sense of self importance, of nihilism defined in one publication as ” …often associated with extreme pessimism and a radical skepticism that condemns existence. A true nihilist would believe in nothing, have no loyalties, and no purpose other than, perhaps, an impulse to destroy ” and a narcissism described as “ which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships, and a lack of empathy for others”
Does this mean that all the population of the USA are potential mass murderers, clearly not, these occurrences are thankfully very rare, there are many powerful human acts and thoughts of decency, our humanity of living together, among most of us to overide the narcissism and nihilism . But at the extreme, unstable edges of society among a small amount of people society it is creating the conditions, the heady cocktail that are a severely explosive mix for such extremism to flourish we would do well to consider all these factors.

Hana Jinks

6th August 2019 at 7:33 pm

Very perceptive summation, and I’d just add that it’s obviously gone way too far when Congress is full of loons screaming for open borders, infanticide, the promotion and normalisation of perversion to our children, and the climate-hoax.

See how democracy goes?

Hana Jinks

6th August 2019 at 7:35 pm

See how progressive it was to let women out?

Winston Stanley

6th August 2019 at 8:36 pm

Scepticism and nihilism get a bad rap from the dogmatists and moralists. Why on earth would a radical sceptic “condemn existence”? Maybe existence is OK, who knows? Why would a “true nihilist” (whatever that is) have “an impulse to destroy”? If nothing matters, then why would anything matter enough to turn to violence?

The bad rap is dogmatist and moralist propaganda, up there with “atheists eat babies, why would they not, they have no moral constraints.” The idea is that if we do not subject our reason, and our will, to some particular dogmatic moral system of thought, as metaphysical Truth, then we are not merely “immoral” but without any constraint. It is complete nonsense.

I rather see scepticism and nihilism as an invitation to freely explore what genuinely matters to me. Not what people tell me “should” matter but what I think and feel matters. Nothing may “in itself” matter, all may be atoms stuck together in the void. But I still have instincts and intuitions and there is no reason why I should not live my life according to how I feel about things. Scepticism and nihilism do not imply passivity, let alone violence. They imply freedom from dogmatism and the occasion to live freely according to one’s own lights.

Nor would a skeptic or nihilist be any more “narcissistic” than anyone else. That is just slander. One could argue that it is pretty self-flattering and -aggrandising to go on like one has the “ultimate truth” about the “inner reality” of the world, and that everyone has to agree with one. Likely most dogmatists have never really thought long and hard about anything, they just picked up some belief system from their society, as most people do, and assumed that it is Truth. Surely the dogmatic moralists have got more than their fair share of narcissists?

Hana Jinks

6th August 2019 at 9:03 pm

No Christian would argue that God hasn’t given you the free will to pursue nihilism, and nor would they say that atheists are totally amoral, or whatever.

He has harsh words to say about the sin of unbelief, and He makes the rules.

Winston Stanley

6th August 2019 at 10:21 pm

H, Ecclesiastes is one of the famous “nihilistic” texts. All human activity is vain and pointless, it runs according to predetermined patterns, it achieves nothing and it will all be forgotten. His conclusion is simply to fear God and to obey b/c all will be judged. It is an interesting example of how resort is made to religion in the face of an otherwise pointless existence. Of course I would argue that life is its own meaning and justification, or more precisely that we create that meaning. Meaning and value are human concepts that have no reality outside of our own projection, which is OK.

1 The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem.
2 Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.
3 What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?
4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.
5 The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.
6 The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.
7 All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.
8 All things are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing.
9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
10 Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.
11 There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after.
12 I the Preacher was king over Israel in Jerusalem.
13 And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven: this sore travail hath God given to the sons of man to be exercised therewith.
14 I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit.

Winston Stanley

6th August 2019 at 10:43 pm

Another way to put it might be, that we may have no constraint, understood as authoritatively grounded prescription, but that does not mean that we have no restraint. Sceptics and nihilists are not thereby stripped of human sensibilities. Rather they choose to act, and to not act, purely as a free human choice rather than as something that they “have” to do.

“Charity” is a similar concept, we do not “have” to be charitable, or that would be “duty” and not “charity”; people do it, not b/c there is any moral prescription but b/c they judge it to be “better” and they freely choose to do so. Or they may choose not to do so, which is likely the more common, default disposition for all of us.

Most of us, dogmatic moralist, sceptic or nihilist are generally pretty lazy and selfish. Call it “narcissism” if you like but maybe that is just part of the human condition? At least nihilists cannot be called hypocrites, they are “innocent” in that sense. : ) They have no strict laws so they cannot be accused of breaking any. There is no fault where there is no law. Only believers can be “guilty”.

Hana Jinks

6th August 2019 at 11:20 pm

The important part of that passage is the Preacher’s conclusion.

Winston Stanley

7th August 2019 at 7:25 am

The pointlessness of all existence is OK, I actually quite like it. After all, if existence is pointless and meaningless then in what terms could it be “condemned”? Existence is not contingent on such concept, they do not apply. After all, there is always chill out/ lounge music and loads of fun to be had.

Hana Jinks

7th August 2019 at 1:37 pm

What l was trying to say four posts up now was that we are indeed subjected to futility, But God has a way of using it. There’s a message in the shoes not wearing out for forty years. We can indeed go to the lounge, but the only thing with any lasting benefit is..

Good Gosh

5th August 2019 at 11:35 pm

Who knows, history may look back on these shooters from a different perspective. If say Europe does in fact become dominated by Islam, which seems very likely given migration numbers and birth rates, then some if not many non-Muslims might start crediting the likes of Anders Breivik for his heroic prescience. He took a stand, they may claim, hence he faced up to the threat, lashed out the only way he could, thus he cast a bright light on the issue, made it hot, so to speak, and maybe we should have listened? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying mall and mosque shooters are right, just that time may show they could be making a valid point.

pru greaves

5th August 2019 at 8:59 pm

Identity politics operates through the psychological and emotional conflation of ideas, beliefs and values with the sense of self; it is fundamentalism in action. Fundamentalism literalises ones identity when merged with a conceptual system; and it signals a lack of psychological and emotional development. Identifying with a belief system occurs when the individual has an inadequate sense of separation from their group: attack the group and its belief system and you attack them personally. That the West has broke out into tribal identity politics signifies a failure of social and political systems into which disparate groups can assemble under a common umbrella. The end of the days of institutional politics is extremely worrying because its signals the likelihood of extreme conflict in the near future. I fear that violent conflict is on the horizon.

steve moxon

5th August 2019 at 9:33 pm

Nonsense. There is no “tribalism”. There is just the backlash by the Left elite against the mass of ordinary people for not buying Marxism. Ordinary people now realise the Left elite hates them and has contempt for them back. ‘Identity politics’ is the Left’s manufacture of faux groups they imagine could act as a ‘vanguard’ in a ‘revolution’, to replace ‘the workers’, whom the Left see as failed in this ‘duty’. Women, ‘blacks’ and ‘gays’ are thus identified by the Left, NOT by women, ‘blacks’ and ‘gays’ themselves.

Christopher Tyson

5th August 2019 at 8:15 pm

In battle it is advisable to leave your opponent a way out for these reasons.
You don’t necessarily want a whole lot of prisoners to look after. You don’t particularly want to become involved in the total slaughter of your opponents, preferring the minimal force to achieve your objectives. You don’t want to put them in a position where they will fight to the death knowing that they are dead anyway and have nothing to lose. You hope that somewhere along the line they may afford you the same courtesy. Similar rules apply in debate and conflict. Identitarians however have no strategy, are convinced of their own rectitude, and hold no sympathy for their opponents. They have no vision and no view of the future, their simple aim to drive their opponents into the ground. They make no assessment of their own strength or weakness or those of their opponents, like a little dog yapping at an Alsatian, asking for trouble. Identitarians are usually reliant on the state, it is from the state that they draw their courage, they believe that if they squeal long and hard enough the state will rescue them. This leads us to a situation where the privileged classes in society are held up as the champions of anti-racism, and less privileged who actually live and work amongst immigrants and who compete with immigrants for jobs are the target of state anti-racism, and liberal left social prejudice. It is easy to be anti-racist when the only black people you meet are subservient to you and no threat to you. The Far Right do increasingly resemble a besieged minority, however this has not led to sympathise with other besieged minorities and has not led them to any greater understanding. They continue to see minorities as a threat and let the state off the hook. In this sense the far Right are reactionary and pro-state, they are protecting the status quo.

Winston Stanley

5th August 2019 at 7:31 pm

> Private school RE teacher wins £60,000 pay-out after he was forced out of his job when he told off a schoolgirl for handing in her homework late

The solution is simple, the state has got no business teaching anything about religion to children. The British State still has a state religion that it uses to embellish and to justify its own existence. And its sectarian history is clear. It is all about controlling people and it always was. It is all about power, privilege and money. Get the state out of education. If kids do not want to hand in “homework” about religion then that is their business. Who do the British state think that they are? Who gave you permission to brainwash our kids? Try to remember, this is supposed to be a democracy and the state has zero authority over the demos.

Policies for a democratic 21st century:

– disestablish the state religion

– get the schools off the churches

– end the compulsory Christian worship that there is in all state schools

– abolish the monarchy

– abolish the HOL

– reform the parliament with PR

– introduce a system where the demos can call referenda on any matters that we like

– have a referendum on neutrality in the world and end all anti-democratic militarism and geopolitical policies

Jerry Owen

5th August 2019 at 8:06 pm

Policies for a 21st century.
A referendum on neutrality in the world .
Hmm, good luck with that one whatever it means!

Ven Oods

10th August 2019 at 8:46 am

You forgot the bit about removing charitable status from churches (and private schools, come to that).

steve moxon

5th August 2019 at 6:14 pm

IT WAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ‘IDENTITY POLITICS’. ‘Identity politics’ is the exclusively political-Left backlash aaginst the masses, that began nearly a century ago, replacing the imagined ‘vanguard of the revolution’ of ‘the workers’ with first women, then ‘blacks’ (> all ethnic minorities and ‘gays’ (> all non-heterosexuals). It has nothing to do with any sense of identity according to sex, ethnicity or sexual orientation. It’s all just imposed by the Left. The Left has tried to hide all this by devising the phrase ‘politics of identity’ to misrepresent the reaction of the masses to the Left elite’s hatred towards them. There is no ‘white supremacy’ any more than there is ‘patriarchal oppression’: they are both figments of Left imagination to mask the Left’s hatred towards ‘the workers’ of old — that is, all those retrospectively stereotyped by the Left as ‘the workers’: ‘white’ men. Sure, there are a few nutters. There are always a few nutters. A few nutters a movement does not make. The mass movement is the come-uppance for the Left elite as it’s hatred starts to boomerang back on them now ordinary folk realise how deeply the Left elite indeed do hate them.

William Stuttard

7th August 2019 at 2:31 pm

Steve, there are people out there who are white supremacists. They say it themselves, they wear swasitikas etc. It is therefore logically false to state that they are a ‘fiction of the lefts imagination’. You are obviously an intelligent bloke interested in politics so why do you make comments such as that that are obviously false. People won’t take you seriously if you do so. You may well have an interesting point to make, but it is hard to understand what that point is; if you make such extreme and false statements such as ‘white supremacy is a fiction’. Just a thought 🙂

Hana Jinks

7th August 2019 at 5:59 pm


There are about a thousand serious-nutter level, white-supremacists. In the whole, wide world.

Steve Gray

5th August 2019 at 6:09 pm

Nihilist misanthropes like to think they’re an oppressed minority. But they’re nihilist misanthropes – their talk is cheap ; actions speak louder. A bit of honesty from them might help them to change their grubby little ways.

Hana Jinks

6th August 2019 at 12:41 pm

I’m a Christian-Zionist with a mixed-race daughter, and you called me reprehensible, racist, bigoted nazi.

I’d say thay you’re the grubbiest person on here, Sleeve Gay.

alan smithee

5th August 2019 at 5:06 pm

Jerry Owen

5th August 2019 at 5:14 pm

Thanks for the link.

Garreth Byrne

5th August 2019 at 4:19 pm

Individuals who are not happy with their personal lives are likely recruits of violent “ethnic defence” groups lurking on the internet. Evil lurkers need to be exposed and their vile ideas deconstructed and confronted by benevolent humanitarian ideas.

aidan maconachy

5th August 2019 at 4:17 pm

Obviously there are limits to where a publication of this sort can go if it wants to make inroads in a media field dominated by a ton of fake bs. Catering to a false narrative isn’t ideal, but not doing so to some degree may mean being cut loose, getting stigmatized etc. In these troubled times though truth is desperately needed… if you can manage it.

You only have to visit parts of the US to understand that race/identity is a massive problem and that some minority communities have for years been practicing a form of hardcore identitarianism (without using the actual term) and getting rewarded for it. When whites try anything similar they get crucified by the resident cut-outs on CNN, MSNBC, BBC who cry “alt”… “KKK”… “Nazis” like trained parrots. On the other hand the lead actors in toxic minority settings are cast as organizers, activists.

Young – mainly white dudes – are being driven to the outside extremes because of this crap… the misinformation and lies, the institutionalized denial that drives this sick narrative casting whitie as “the problem” and others as oppressed, victimized, misunderstood… in constant need of compassion intervention.

But take a gander at a broad cross-section of citizen-shot video in the US and see who is doing the race baiting, robbing and hating. Check out who makes neighborhood rumbles a virtual lifestyle, who trashes the restaurants, who leads the pack in grab-and-run invasions… in home invasions. Who plays knockout down the street. You will be hard pushed to find a white face in the line up. So of course only a tiny percentage of this mountain of raw video ever makes it onto fake version reality.

You can extrapolate from this example to many other scenarios that get underreported, spun or buried, driving some young and troubled dudes quite literally to AK47’s.

Truth is the real victim in America the not-so-great.

Winston Stanley

5th August 2019 at 2:31 pm

“the Islamist identitarian paranoia that has led to the slaughter of hundreds of people in Europe over the past five years”

B is overegging the pudding there. IS/ AQ actions have been a response to the interference of Western states in Muslims countries, and of late especially to the interventions in Iraq and Syria but also in Africa. The Western media uses the euphemism that the Caliphate “collapsed” when they know full well that the Western coalition reduced the cities held by IS to utter rubble. The phrase is “was destroyed”.

It dates back to the division of Muslim lands after WWI by France and Britain and to the installation of proxy states. That is not identity politics, it is geopolitics.

If B means that many people have an identity beyond that of being a subject of the British State then of course they do. B has his own identity politics, one where everyone has the same identity. As he said, he does not want to be in any way Irish but just British. The real world is not like that. Britain is headed for a post-British future and it is extremely unlikely that the British State will command the old unthinking loyalty that it would like to flatter itself with. The Union will be dismantled in any case. Soon enough there will no longer be any such thing as a “British” civic identity.

Winston Stanley

5th August 2019 at 2:44 pm

Just in the news today. B will have to think of a different identity for us all than “British”. Maybe “rUKish”?

> Nicola Sturgeon gloats over shock poll claiming Scots WOULD vote for independence: Survey finds 52 per cent back breaking up UK after Boris Johnson vowed hard line on Brexit

Jerry Owen

5th August 2019 at 8:50 pm

Winston Stanley
Let me make it absolutely clear to you again. I will respond to any post from you should I choose to do so.
And the insult ! … You yourself published the fact that you were pi**ed, hence my comment.

Hana Jinks

5th August 2019 at 3:56 pm

Around an hour ago, l posted that l agree 100% with you on your post, and how much truth it contained, but it disappeared.

Jerry Owen

5th August 2019 at 6:14 pm

Yes Winston , the huge ongoing French intervention in Muslim countries explains all the dreadful Islamic attacks by Jihadis in France.
Quite what ‘Charlie Hebdo’ were doing in these Muslim countries I’m not sure.
I understood they were butchered because they insulted the prophet Mo but maybe you know better !

Winston Stanley

5th August 2019 at 6:43 pm

I previously asked you not to address me and I meant it. You are a sectarian. I am objective and refuse to get dragged into the petty sectarian squabbles of British State loyalists. I mentioned Africa and, it is fair enough if you are not aware of what the France State has done in Africa in recent years. Why would you follow it? But stay away from me, I want nothing to do with you.

Jerry Owen

5th August 2019 at 7:29 pm

Winston Stanley
This is a public site. If you comment and I disagree I will respond . You have no choice in the matter.
You can of course stop posting.. mostly ‘cut and paste’, and in some instances just plain ‘pi**ed’ !

Winston Stanley

5th August 2019 at 8:12 pm

You can say anything that you like but just say it in your own comments, do not address it to me or involve me in any way. Is that so hard for you to cope with? No one has to agree with you and the comments of no one are subject to your approval. Go to Breitbart, you would likely feel more at home. This is a comment site, not a bully boy site where everyone gets vetted by you. So stay away from me like I have asked you. Have some dignity. And btw. keep your personal insults and accusations to yourself. I want nothing to do with you, can I be any more clear?

John Millson

5th August 2019 at 1:33 pm

So non-white minorities should not stick up for themselves, using positive affirmations about themselves, which may offend the majority, because they may get shot by a deranged, usually, white person if they do. (64% of mass shooters between 1982-2019, were white
Yes, the output and actions of extreme identitarianism can be a problem, but surely they are rarely murderous in intent?
There can’t be some sort of continuum from crass, offensive, prejudiced remarks in the media and mass murder with an assault rifle. They are separate.
Truism: it seems the direct cause of mass murder in shopping malls, schools etc. in the US is the peculiar relationship with firearms in that country.

Danny Rees

5th August 2019 at 3:10 pm

No they should not because if they do they are mean and nasty bullies who are censoring rich white men.

Winston Stanley

5th August 2019 at 5:10 pm

Exactly, what do they expect when half the population is armed with a gun? And any who wants one can get an automatic rifle? Of course people are going to unload by the cartridge. It would be the same in this country, someone gets p/ssed off and out comes the assault rifle. The vast majority of the deaths in USA from guns are local disputes and gang warfare. It would be the same here. Can you imagine? Some young yobbos damage the cars or mouth off, as the British tend to get away with, and out it comes. That is how it would be. On the one hand, it could establish a bit more consideration but I would not bank on it. I am not making an argument for gun controls, just observing the situation. Would I want to disarm the population and to leave all weapons in the hands of the state? Situations are rarely “ideal” and I am not going to pontificate idealistically. Modern societies are complicated.

James Chilton

5th August 2019 at 12:34 pm

The El Paso killer says he is against ‘race mixing’ as it destroys ‘genetic diversity’.

This doesn’t make sense, yet Brendan O’Neill doesn’t seem to notice.

gershwin gentile

5th August 2019 at 12:02 pm

A week ago in Brooklyn there was a shooting at an Old Timer’s Day celebration. Do you know how much coverage it got? Not a lot (in fact zero in Britain). Why was that? Because it was black on black.

Look forward to your article on this Brendz

alan smithee

5th August 2019 at 11:56 am

Silence from the woke crowd concerning the Ohio massacre (on the same day). Who do we blame for that? Here’s a clue, it’s not Trump.

Jonnie Henly

5th August 2019 at 1:58 pm

That’s not true though is it?

Or are the “woke crowd” an imaginary group living in your head?

alan smithee

5th August 2019 at 3:17 pm

Prove me wrong ‘Jonnie’

Jonnie Henly

5th August 2019 at 9:06 pm

I don’t need to prove an negative.

Prove what you said is correct.

Winston Stanley

5th August 2019 at 6:16 pm

The British State has got a pause in IS atrocities, so it is wondering, in a testing the water manner, whether it can get the state controlled media narrative back on track. It is all about money in the end. In fact IS has spread around the world and there are actions everyday. And USA is losing the attempt to hegemonize Afghanistan. The Taliban controls 60–70% of the territory. The British State military is active in many parts of the world. Things have changed, hegemony now means daily and constant warfare all over the world. But the BS media have thought better of reporting what is going on. It is all state propaganda, after all. And money.

Jerry Owen

5th August 2019 at 11:53 am

Bang on the money, this was always going to happen, possibly Brevik was the first glimpse of this pattern which will be repeated. The identity politics brigades of the liberal left have unleashed a genie and all hell is going to break loose ( breaking loose if you will ) , I don’t see the genie going back in it’s bottle anytime soon. Tit for tat is what I predict but only one skin colour will be to blame and that is if the perpetrator is white. Let’s not forget a Hispanic was counted as a white man not so long ago to make the white racist killer fit the MSM leftist narrative.
It’s Trump’s fault that a white man has killed brown men.. If it isn’t white on brown gun killing but black on black then it’s Trump’s fault that guns are in public circulation. Trump loses all the time. I understand that this killer had these views before the election of Trump..perhaps he followed Trump when Trump was a reality star, if he did then he is clearly deranged but if he didn’t follow Trump when a tv star then Trump by default isn’t to blame.
We are told :-
Black knife crime is the fault of austerity and lack of policing.
Islamic terrorist murders the fault of mentally disturbed lone wolves.
White gun massacres in contrast though are the fault of white skinned racists… look no deeper, that is the message we are given constantly.
The only thing that surprises me is that it’s taken so long for ‘white racist extremism’ to surface, bearing in mind it’s been written about and wished for by the MSM for so many years. I don’t use the word ‘nationalist’ because I suspect these murderous people like most people don’t know what it actually means, it means different things to different people just like the word racist does.
‘Nationalist’ like ‘racist’ is a word very much overused and little understood, lazy words.
Bannon is probably the most written about ‘nationalist’ but there is no hint of racism about him.
As tragic as this is , there will be elements within the liberal / left establishment that relish this barbaric behavior as a means to take more of our rights to freedom of speech and expression away. On a par with ER extremists who we know are gutted when the sky is cloudy and temperatures are low as they want a boiling planet to impose their ideologies for deconstructing the civilized world.
The left love a ( promoted ) tragedy to push the totalitarian agenda.

Hana Jinks

5th August 2019 at 12:09 pm

I’ve been extremely loathe to describe what is happening as racism against whites. This maybe just me, or it could be my conditioning.

Last week, an islander cop picked on the last person that he should’ve, and you’re about to learn my true identity, most probably within a month or two.

Hana Jinks

5th August 2019 at 12:16 pm

And surely you must be able to understand how gay/lame it is to be modding people on a site with a free-speech banner.

Astonishing, really.

Hana Jinks

5th August 2019 at 12:17 pm

That last post isn’t supposed to be here.

Jonnie Henly

5th August 2019 at 1:57 pm

As much as you’re desperate for it to be true, it wasn’t the ‘liberal left’ that unleashed this genie.

Hana Jinks

5th August 2019 at 11:36 am

Beta No’Zeal.

You really aren’t qualified to be talking about politics. This is because you have zero grasp of Truth. You lot prattle on and on with barely even a superficial understanding of anything that’s happening.

Brendon Tarrant is not racist.

Hana Jinks

5th August 2019 at 12:18 pm

The gay/lame comment should be here.

Michael Lynch

5th August 2019 at 11:26 am

The Democrats are getting ready for their campaign. It will follow the same dreary strategy as the last one. This shooting has been carried out by a mad man and nothing more – it should not be weaponized for political purposes. Alas, they can’t help themselves. I’d bet that the race will come down to Biden v Trump in the end and it’ll be fought on whose sexual misdemeanors are judged to be worse. Lusty Trump versus Creepy Joe! How dreary and off putting it’ll all be. Don’t you just wish these people would just get on and sort out the problems that they ought to be sorting out?

Amelia Cantor

5th August 2019 at 11:03 am

No, the armed wing of hate speech. Which O’Neill wants to enable. Shame on him.

John Reic

5th August 2019 at 11:22 am

Do you just say that’s you that is to on anything and convince yourself that liberals can’t be bad people and only white right wingers (as you classify them are bigots or rqcist as you decide to call anyone you disagree with?

Jerry Owen

5th August 2019 at 12:32 pm

Amelia Cantor
‘The armed wing of hate speech’ Surely ‘armed speech’ would be a ‘tongue lashing’ !

James Knight

5th August 2019 at 5:39 pm

Identity politics and hate speech are not mutually exclusive. They feed each other. The problem is when the sense of grievance and victimhood is distorted to a grotesque level.

This guy seems to have co-opted the language of left wing identitarians. He seems to be an advocate of diversity and an opponent of cultural appropriation.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register now.