Excerpt from the psychologist Simon Sheppard's essay SPREE KILLERS: THE FOREFRONT OF KNOWLEDGE - Heritage & Destiny January-February 2013
" ... it is clear that a significant proportion of spree killers possess
some conscious racial awareness, as demonstrated by their known
history, their comments at the time or their choice of targets. Tellingly, the victims of the few black spree killers to date have been
overwhelmingly white."
"During his trial Breivik was declared sane. What this means is that
there was an absence of psychosis; technically psychosis involves
detachment from reality. So Breivik's actions were not just carefully
and rationally planned: his scheme followed a logical, grim progression.
Britain has no equivalent of America's NRA, and what advocates of gun
freedom there are consist of a few specialist sportsmen. Notwithstanding, the point has been made that in practically every
case, the weapons for use by spree killers have been licensed or
otherwise legally in the possession of their owners. They were not
criminals; in a large number of cases they were normal law-abiding
citizens, perhaps even less criminal than average."
"It is well to recall the position in earlier, more masculine times.
Hitler was able to stand and wave to adoring crowds as his procession
passed along, this at a time when gun ownership was commonplace and
limited only by the requirement that firearms be officially registered, a
purely bureaucratic measure. Similarly, in Britain at this time guns
were widely available. It was an era of greater social cohesion, during
which spurious instincts, to the extent that they existed, were
controlled. Nowadays even the Pope rides behind bullet-proof glass.
Restricting gun ownership is no solution, because a means to kill will
always be found by the determined. Emphasising this, in October 2012,
Matthew Tvrdon went on a hit-and-run spree in Cardiff using his vehicle
and steering-wheel lock as weapons. Tvrdron deliberately aimed his van
at pedestrians, sometimes even reversing back over the mostly women and
children he had mown down.
If we are to have any hope of preventing
such killing sprees in the future, it is necessary first of all to
understand the phenomenon.
The first question we need to ask is, how closely does Breivik fit the
mould of the 'perfect' spree killer? The answer to this is - pretty
closely. Breivik's only major deviation from the substandard pattern
was to live to tell the tale, and in that at least he has done the world
a service. I have no doubt that he is aware of this aspect and that it
was intentional. Allowing his motivations to be examined subsequently
was almost certainly his preferred outcome.
A distinguishable subset of spree killers includes psychotics and social
outcasts ... However even these cases may not be completely divorced
from the general trend: psychosis is a disorder of the mind, or higher
brain, while the instincts (motivations) which impel the spree killer, I
would contend, derive from a lower level."
"Western societies have become highly feminised ... Due to female
influence, all forms of violence were strongly discouraged and thus were
generally inhibited by males. Sometimes however sudden eruptions of
disproportionate violence would occur, triggered by some relatively
trivial incident. These seemed completely unpredictable; there was no
forewarning that a 'tipping point' had been reached.
In such an intensely female-friendly environment, a number of factors
operate. First, males see females unreservedly following their
instincts and not unnaturally want to do the same. Needless to say, he
cannot. Second, expression of those female instincts was usually to
males' detriment: he could be, and was, manipulated, toyed-with and
teased practically without limit. Third, he could not avoid being
influenced by that atmosphere of disinhibition, and the burden of
restraining his own violent and other socially undesirable instincts
increased.
The confused and neurotic male is easy to manipulate. In that
super-feminine environment, and increasingly elsewhere, even innocuous
male instincts (such as to place indiscriminate markers, just being
friendly or passing the time of day) are repressed. This is because
disinhibition serves to maintain males in a state of generalised
neurosis and maximises female control. The whole environment becomes
arduous for males.
Humans are undeniably social animals, and arguably each race has a
distinct collective unconscious. Jung, who at least had the wisdom to
dissociate himself from Freud, spoke of the 'race memory' - or, to quote
Heisenberg, 'Every race has its soul and every soul its race.' The
next question we need to pose is, what is that strikes so deeply at this
collective psyche to provoke an individual in a society to such casual
atrocity? Clearly something along these lines is taking place:
spree killings are no longer isolated incidents but have become a social phenomenon by their repetition. At least 75 spree killings have taken place since 1949.
A nationalist perspective would be that three obvious new features of
Western societies are mass immigration, the promotion of miscegenation
and miscegenation itself. As always, we put our observations of
behaviour in its evolutionary context. What evolutionary scenario can
be envisaged in which a male could see members of other races moving
freely about, promoted to positions of authority over him, and occupying
other prestigious roles? Or when might he see his women parading
through thoroughfares with a male of another race, transporting children
sired by him, and obviously serving his domestic and personal needs,
while his own remain untended?
It is that the tribe has been defeated and cast into servitude. In this
case, throughout history, the indigenous males would have been rapidly
dispatched (put to the sword, or machete, or whatever) or quickly
transported away to be sold as slaves. In any event the vanquished
males would be hastily got out of the way, for obvious reasons. Their
reaction at seeing their women expropriated, their families destroyed
and their settlement exploited makes them dangerous to keep around.
With
nothing left to lose a humiliated male would, given any opportunity at
all, strike back with maximum force. This would be without regard for
his own future, for the simple reason that he has none.
In leading these social changes the media are probably the main
offenders, so we would be naive to expect them to point the finger at
themselves. Not only do they encourage and mendaciously portray as
normal the mass immigration and miscegenation which strikes deeply at
the core of the male psyche, but non-whites are elevated to the
positions of newsreaders and presenters. This can only be a deliberate,
finely calculated insult. It is surely stretching credulity to believe
otherwise - think of the millions of native British men who would
eagerly take such a well-paid and prestigious job!"
" ... Putatively the defining characteristic of the serial killer is
control, because ultimate control is power over the life of another
person. If he leaves some form of signature, this is an expression of
his ego. The male desires control; this is how his ego is expressed. If powerful he issues orders and affects destinies. A craving for
control seems to be the essential characteristic of the serial killer.
In contrast, the essence of the spree killer is rebellion against his
devaluation. His protest at his derogation is expressed by the number
of victims; his tally is a demonstration of his worth. In most cases
the spree killer has already decided to end his life, either because of
events immediately beforehand or as part of a long-standing plan.
Circumstances have ceased to make his life worthwhile, and he raises
the cost of his demise with a final statement of his value.
We can now consider his choice of targets in light of this, particularly
his emergence in modern, feminised, Western societies. In the
male-female 'game of opposites' I have referred to before, males value
the old while females value the young. Thus in the feminine mindset,
children are valued more than men. This has become especially manifest
since
the State has supplanted the husband as the female's protector and ultimate provider.
Female largesse extends to the many groups with which she feels affinity
or sympathy. Yet practically everything that has ever been discovered
or invented has arisen from white male ingenuity. Although virtually
all our modern amenities derive from the efforts of exceptional males,
our society could not function without ordinary men performing mundane
jobs. Nevertheless in contemporary society he is constantly devalued
and insulted; his concerns routinely dismissed. What more profound
insult can be delivered to a man than for a woman to advertise that she
prefers a male of an alien race, even who a century or so ago was called
a savage, to seed future generations of her line? These are the
provocations which can transform a normal, law-abiding and otherwise
unexceptional man into a kind of Vulcan murder machine.
Thus in raising the cost of his demise, the spree killer can target the
young, raising the cost according to the values of his opponent. Breivik's choice of target was coldly logical - since the State, as in
this country has defined 'the invaders' as a protected group, any action
against them will only increase their guardianship and exacerbate the
situation he is rebelling against. Plus of course, information about
where the blame really belongs is hard to come by. Pointing the finger
can land you a jail sentence.
Even moderate critics of the Establishment's suicidal immigration
policies are marginalised and vehemently traduced as 'racists',
'xenophobes' and the like .... Nationalists' concerns are ignored, or
they are the theme of phony, stage-managed debate by a closed group of
'media darlings' who only repeat their stock agenda. The spree killer
arises out of repressed fury at the despoilation of everything he is,
has or holds dear; indeed spree killing might be regarded as the
ultimate displacement activity.
Under this analysis it becomes apparent that fathers who destroy their
children and then themselves, usually after the mother has spurned the
marriage, are another form of spree killing. Including these personal
tragedies adds significantly to the total number of spree killings
already recorded."
" ... evolutionary psychology provides us with a reliable guide, and the
tribal scenario above is consistent with phylogenetic (ie natural)
principles and the gut instinct of many individual males. It has
always been, and will ever be, the male who fights to preserve the
integrity of the tribe.
The spree killer may be at the outer boundary of the range of normal
human behaviour, but nonetheless his is the natural response of the
social animal provoked beyond endurance. He is merely the forerunner,
and until he is given legitimate expression of his valid and justified
anger, and allowed to respond to the daily injustices and affronts he
must presently endure, each new atrocity will only herald more to come."
Source:
The Battlefield of Love blog
