Metapolitics and Pekka Eric Auvinen

is clear that Pekka was not a person of civilizing ideas.  Pekka is the perfect manifestation of the spirit of marauding peoples commanded over time by countless men free from the civilizing conceptions of the Latin and Anglo Saxon axes.  also born of Indo-European man, the "barbarian" peoples as they were nicknamed by the Romans due to the acts committed during their invasions that terrorized the empire, had a more realistic and humane perspective of existence.  and yes, humanity is sadistic, bloodthirsty, hierarchical, supremacist among itself, tribal and violent.  Pekka followed the memory of her ancestors by committing the acts against civilization.  it doesn't matter if it was an attack on a school, or if it was an attack on parliament or a building or whatever.  during the invasions of these peoples, they used to loot and completely destroy the looted villages, setting fire or destroying everything by force.  civilized man was simply their hostage for a long time and even if civilization has momentarily become the majority, the anti-civilization blood still runs in the veins of a minority that produces chaos.  the moral point is not in question, because people establish it over time.  the greatest murderer can be considered a civilizing father as was Genghis Khan or a terrorist can be considered a hero.  everything will depend on the state of humanity as a whole.  Pekka is a modern day barbarian, a person who did not fear death like his Norse ancestors who plundered the cities of Gaul, the British Isles and beyond.  there is no denying this, and its importance to the story as a whole is slowly revealing itself.  just as Attila was remembered for sacking Rome, Pekka will be remembered in the future for being the only one of this century to form a radical barbarian mindset that consisted of intellect and violence.