The White Nationalism Diversion Pt 3: The Real Story of Brenton Tarrant

Updated: Jan 21, 2021

Brenton Tarrant, The Self-Proclaimed Ethno-Nationalist Eco-Fascist Who Killed 50 Muslims in Two New Zealand Mosques from 1:40 – 2:20 PM on Friday, March 15, 2019

I reviewed the regionally-illegal video and manifesto of this terrorist. Followers of Alvarism who have met us face-to-face, or are willing to do so, can request a copy of the material. You cannot obtain the hard evidence from social media. Facebook, Twitter, and the other technocrats decided that you are too immature and stupid to have access to such knowledge. They censored the content, and they punished profiles that distributed it. Aren’t we so lucky to enjoy such benevolent technocratic nannies, as grown adults?

It is a shame, because most journalists and elected officials have butchered the story beyond redemption.

Here are the facts:

  1. In Tarrant’s own words, Muslims are not his main target. That makes his mosque shooting spree a target of opportunity.

  2. The traitors as he defines them – capitalists, wealthy westerners, and ethnic apostates – are his main enemies

  3. He says overpopulation and the destruction of the earth are being perpetrated by capitalists and ethnicities with inflated birth rates

  4. Democratic socialists, abortion advocates, Hollywood childfree and suburban dysfunction storytellers, and environmentalists share Tarrant’s views on environmentalism, except that they are unwilling to hold ethnic groups accountable for cultural trends that yield overpopulation

  5. Tarrant said that although he had bombs and other options, he chose guns because of how controversial they have become

  6. He said that he wants increased gun control to instigate great conflict between gun-grabbing government officials and gun owners

Isn’t it amazing that the democratic socialist leader of New Zealand gave Tarrant exactly what he wanted, yet she pretends to be heroic? That might be the reason why she made it a serious crime to even possess his manifesto. We certainly can’t tolerate the incontrovertible proof of reciprocity between totalitarians and democratic socialists, in a society that lives more in their imagination than the real world!

The joke is on her. Only 500 of 1,250,000 guns have been turned in, and those who refuse are boldly disavowing the sincerity of her gun grab. People are risking five years in jail by not turning in their guns.

According to some leftists in academia, the Hollywood clique, and leftwing punditry, the rhetoric of immigration control advocates, including Trump, fueled Tarrant’s slaughter.

In truth, Tarrant wrongly saw Trump as a symbol of white identity. He missed the part of Trump’s career in which minorities voted for him more than other Republicans, and the sheer number of minorities to whom Trump has contributed upward mobility. Tarrant emphatically rejected Trump’s leadership and policies…which is another thing he shares in common with Democrats, communists, and democratic socialists:

He mocked conservatives:

He spends pages rebuking conservatives. He says “Conservatism is dead. Thank God. Now let us bury it and move on to something of worth.” This is consistent with fascism.

As radical revolutionaries who wish to rapidly impose policy, and experiment with society to move it “forward” for “progress” – fascists are leftists. Hitler’s eugenics programs (race hygiene), the holocaust, the Hitler Youth, and many other programs were all left wing policies – rapid experimentation for the sake of “progress.”

Yet the fascists wrap their “progress” experiments in pageantry of tradition and visions of historical grandeur, often using the sense of origin from right wing thinking to provide a sense of unity and purpose. The synthesis of traditional invocation, and aggressive “change” for the sake of “progress” turns their leftist and rightist tendencies into enigmatic centrism.

He understood the enigmatic centrism:

That concept is more deeply described in part 2 of this series.

Tarrant is not a Christian, although some have portrayed him as a crusader and white traditional conservative. He mentions Christianity twice in his manifesto. He invokes a speech by Pope Urban II that initiated the first crusade – a retaliation against Muslims who invaded Jewish and Christian lands. He also says:

When asked about a religion, a response of “I don’t know” makes a person agnostic. Again this is a consistent position for fascists. They realize that the traditional religion of their ethnicity has cultural power, but they also realize that many of the traditions impede their policies.

This is why Hitler and the Nazis oppressed the Christian churches of Germany, splintering them into the “Confessing Church,” that refused to cooperate, and the “Positive Christianity” churches, that were not Christian in any authentic sense. The Nazis slaughtered authentic Christians of the Confessing Church alongside Jews. Tarrant’s response was perfectly coherent and consistent with fascist doctrine. I expect Tarrant to remain ambiguous about his religious affiliation, until he sees utility in being definitive.

Why Did He Attack?

Tarrant blamed Islamic population jihad, Islamist terrorism, and French voters who elected soft-on-crime politicians for the motivation of his murders. That means the people who speak truth about Islamic terrorism, those who are willing to enforce the law against Islamic riots and violence, and those willing to enforce immigration law would have prevented this massacre if they had power instead of the permissive and pandering leftists.

Tarrant is a true and pure fascist in the most academic sense. He was even knowledgeable enough to understand that modern China is fascist.

Tarrant Knows Fascism & China, Better than all but the Most Erudite at our Military Academies

It seems that Tarrant understands geopolitics better than those who whitewash modern China. No matter how propagandists try to spin China as “diverse” by pointing to varied sports, arts, foods, and labor markets – modern China is not diverse. Han Chinese comprise 92% of the population and 70% of them speak Mandarin.

By contrast, the USA has only 57% white non-Hispanic, non-Arab, non-Jewish citizens. There are one-billion more Han Chinese in China than there are ethnically white people in the USA!

A similar distortion would exist if in some alternate universe, the USA was comprised of 92% white people. Then they would say that the USA is incredibly diverse because those white people in the south cook grits, play football, and choose French architecture, while those in the Northeast have hot dog chains, play hockey, and choose Germanic and British architecture.

With China’s utter racial, social, and political homogeneity in mind, it is an ethnonationalist state, controlling its workers for the Chinese government’s interests, and employing “State Capitalism” (zwangswirtschaft) for its own productivity and long-term civilization goals. It declares autonomous regions to manage what divergent cultures exist under its sovereignty.

Opting for ethnonationalist socialism, China gave up the communist international socialist “workers of the world unite” theme decades ago. They allow Christianity, only in a form that is perverted by their state bureaucrats, and monitored publicly. Imagine if the USA had a Christian authority that dictated the legal philosophical doctrines of atheists, secular humanists, and agnostics. China imposes that ethnic conformity as Tarrant desires.

If a journalist wondered how Tarrant’s idealization of China is consistent with ethnonationalist fascism, they should be humbled that he understands that aspect of the world more accurately than they do.

In his own words:

Regrettably, many educators have failed to convey accurate understanding of fascism prior to Tarrant’s horrific act, which was elaborated in part two of this series. Many journalists called his manifesto a confused and rambling pile of nonsense.

It’s a terrible mischaracterization. He explicitly mentioned his fascist influencers. His manifesto outlined every single tenet of ethno-nationalism. He knew exactly what he wanted politically. He described it articulately. He even made a graphic that highlighted the features of ethnonationalism:

Obama’s anti-colonialism was well documented in Dinesh D’Souza’s Obama’s America 2016. Tarrant shared these anti-colonial views with Obama. He shares them with democratic socialists and progressives. The colonists are imperial oppressors, and the indigenous people are poor victims, so their narrative goes.

Additionally, lebensreform, wandervogel, and other naturalistic and environmental ideology are shared between ethno-nationalists and democratic socialists. Blut und boden is exclusive to ethnonationalists, but democrats in America who support Native American "blood and soil" autonomy have that in common with fascists.

Responsible marketplace,” also known as zwangswirtschaft is shared between ethnonationalists and democratic socialists. They also call it “compassionate economy,” indicative planning, the welfare state, and dirigisme. It’s expressed through regulatory monstrosities, trade unions, “workers’ rights,” industrial boards, and erosion of economic freedom in the name of “the greater good.”

Tarrant understood fascism’s socialist origins very well:

I wonder why the politicians, professors, and journalists kept this information from us, don’t you?

Moreover, Tarrant speaks of the protection of heritage, culture, and social engineering. That is shared between ethnonationalists and democratic socialists. The democratic socialists dominate academia, journalism, and entertainment as they actively destroy, ostracize, bury, whitewash, and supplant culture they deem inferior with their “progress,” and “change.” Their sophistication in forging the visions, values, attitudes, and stories of the population is a level of social engineering that dwarfs anything totalitarians have been able to achieve, save Russia, some nations in Dar al Islam, and China at the cost of over 100 million slaughtered citizens.

Ethnic autonomy is something exclusive to ethnonationalists. The democratic socialists also exploit divisions of class (economics), race, gender, sexuality, religion, and ideology, but they advocate syncretic multiculturalism, using the identity pride of minorities as a Trojan horse for their platform.

A person who votes based on their identity, and resultant fear and pride, is not primarily critical of the actual policies they advocate. In that way, the democratic socialists and ethnonationalists exploit fear and identity pride, but from different narratives. The number of advocates of white ethnic autonomy in the world are infinitesimal compared to Latino, Islamic, Russian, and Chinese proponents of ethnic autonomy.

Totalitarian vs. Progressive Drug Intervention

Substance abuse policy is a complex topic. A person would need to review the history of eugenics, fascism, communism, the Opium Wars, the US War on Drugs, Prohibition, and the teetotalers. Suffice it to say, the ethnonationalists confront addiction with prison and execution. But so do international socialist totalitarians (communists).

The democratic socialists prefer to treat substance abuse as a disease and approach the addicts with medical treatment. The democratic socialist (progressive) paradigm for addiction and mental defectives has led to mass killings. Their policy was deinstitutionalization – reduction of long-term psychiatric stay in favor of sending the patients to local clinics and residential neighborhoods with a pile of pills in their hand.

Indeed, guns are not responsible for the killing, but the leftist psychiatric experiment is responsible for half of all mass killings, and ten percent of homicides. The deinstitutionalization policies of leftists enabled one-percent of the population (psychiatric wards), to contribute ten-times its share to murder, and fifty-times its share to mass killings.

Also, half of all suspects killed by police result from deinstitutionalization – because when the patient becomes violent they do not respond to police commands. The idiotic rehabilitative and laissez faire approach to substance abuse has destroyed cities run by the US Democratic Party: