Anti-immigration ally of Silvio Berlusconi says Breivik had 'some excellent ideas'

[Lars77]

Source: Daily Mail

A coalition ally of Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi has provoked outrage after he praised the rantings of Norwegian right-wing terrorist Anders Behring Breivik.

Mario Borghezio, an MEP with the anti-immigration Northern League party, who have campaigned against Muslims and the building of mosques, said Breivik had some 'excellent' ideas.

Speaking on an Italian radio show he said he agreed with the maniac's 'opposition to Islam and his explicit accusation that Europe has surrendered before putting up a fight against its Islamisation.'

Though Borghezio added that he did not however agree with the use of extreme violence, or Breivik's anti-Papal views, his comments immediately unleashed a storm of fury with his own party apologising to still grieving Norway.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2019283/Norway-Shooting-Silvio-Berlusconi-ally-Borghezio-praises-Anders-Behring-Breivik.html

[ret5hd]

1. So, if extreme violence is bad, is regular violence ok?

or was something lost in the translation?

[OHdem10]

2. Could it be that Globalization has created a resurgence in

Nationalism. People feel their sovereignty is being
lost. Losing "their culture". and with the world wide
economic crisis, yes their livelihood.

NO, I AM NOT JUSTIFYING ANYTHING. Violence is never the
answer.

For me it is important to try to understand what are the
driving forces behind human behavior good bad or indifferent.

In Europe there has never been Immigration and Assimilation
as in the USA. especially in Scandinavian Countries

[pampango]

9. I think there is a strong tension between modern globalization and nationalism

(or "sovereignty" or "traditional culture"). Those for and against globalization shouldn't be surprised that change (whether it's good or bad in the long run) is often met with resistance.

The US has had more immigration than almost any other country, but we've had anti-immigrant movements for just as long-probably peaking with Know Nothing movement of the 1850's, the (republican) Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and (the republican) Immigration Acts of 1921 and 1924.

Even the Great Migration of African Americans from the South to the North in the early 1900's caused a great deal of social instability there because Northern whites were not used to living with such large numbers of African Americans. Big change caused friction. Doesn't mean that the change wasn't good in the long run, but it did bring with it big problems.

The real question is not whether globalization causes friction and pain to some degree. Obviously it does. And obviously the history of nationalism also shows a large amount of friction and pain. (One of the reasons that Europe decided to shift the focus from nationalism to cooperation after WWII.) The real question is whether a world based on globalization or on nationalism (or some delicate balance between the two) is better for everyone.

Since WWII it has been liberals who have pushed globalization and conservatives who have fought it. This is particularly obvious in Europe today where liberal governments promote immigration and a strong, borderless EU, while conservatives oppose both.

But liberal support for globalization has been almost as strong in the US. FDR and Truman made it a point to create multilateral organizations like the UN, GATT, IMF and Brenton Woods to make sure that the world didn't go back to the high tariffs, border controls and an ineffectual League of Nations that existed in the 1930's. FDR repealed the Chinese Exclusion Act and negated the tariffs put in place by Smoot and Hawley. Kennedy started and Johnson finished the Immigration Act of 1965 which repealed the republicans' 1924 Act and greatly liberalized immigration laws.

Modern American conservatives have embraced globalization more than their European counterparts, but even their embrace only extends to trade and economics (and even that is opposed by the teabagger base of the party). When it comes to immigration and culture our conservatives go back to their roots of 1882, 1921 and 1924.

The conversation we should be having is about where the best balance is between globalization and nationalism, how do we get there and how fast should it happen.

[GliderGuider]

3. The masks are coming off now, aren't they? nt

[bemildred]

4. WOW. nt

[lapfog_1]

5. well, i know there there have been too many references to the Nazis

but the attitude being expressed toward Muslims by the European hard right is very similar to the attitude expressed by Nazis to the Jews.

All it would take now is an economic crises (like the world wide Great Depression)to propel the fascists into power...

oh wait....

Sigh.

[saras]

6. No, it's the mass slaughter of irrelevant innocents that's the "excellent idea"

It's only "extreme" when you don't have a national organization behind you.

[LeftinOH]

7. So, if Brivik's intention was to 'raise consciousness'.. It's working. n/t

[fascisthunter]

8. I think good people around the Globe need to put a lid on these psychopaths!