Mass Shooters & Ideologies

Anders Behring Breivik: wrote an extensive Manifesto, where he claims that European culture is about to be destroyed by Left-Wing Politicians, Philosophers and Media, the so-called „cultural Marxists“, who attack christian-european traditions and morals to replace it by a leftist global culture.  The Manifesto has also a strong focus on Islam, which is declared as a threat to europeans. The third ideological thematic in the Manifesto is Feminism, which is in Breiviks eyes one of the leftists weapons to destroy traditional moral.
You can read the Manifesto here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
And you can reads Breviks final speech in court here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Marc Lepine: Claimed in his suicide note, that feminists ruinet his life and that he was going to kill them. During the shooting he selected females out to kill them and shouted: "You're women, you're going to be engineers. You're all a bunch of feminists. I hate feminists." and „Im fighting feminism“.
Lepine was also said to be fascinated by National Socialism and gave a Hitler salute in public, at one occassion.
You can read Lepines suicide note here (french original and engllish translation): [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Nidal Malik Hassan: Grew a strong interest in extreme Islam in the years before the shooting and had contact with Imam Anwar al-Awlaki, who is a member of Al-Quaida.
At the day of the shooting, Hassan shouted „Allahu Akbar“, before he opened fire.

Mohammed Merah: Claimed to be a member of Al-Quaida an justified his attack of a jewish school with the statement, that „The Jews kill our brothers and sisters in Palestine."

Pekka-Eric Auvinen: Wrote a Manifesto, which appears as strongly influenced by Eric Harris, although Auvinen made much more detailed descriptions of his ideas towards „Natural Selection“. In the writing, Auvinen complains about „robotic“ or „less-intelligent“ people, who are dominated by more intelligent, but corrupt people. The only ones, who are wether corrupt or robotic, are driven in an outcast-like social situation.
Auvinen articulates two solutions: either a revolution of the free-mind outcasts, or the death of the entire human race.
You can read the Manifesto here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Wellington Oliveira: Turned to Islam two years before the shooting and was said to be obsessed with Islamist Terrorism. His suicide note and last will appears as a mixture of Islam traditions and christian beliefs.
You can read his suicide note here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Steven Kazmierczak: Was fascinated with National Socialism and the second world war. During his teenage years, he was said to carry a membership card of the KKK and sprayed a swastika at a house.
Before the shooting, he sended his girlfriend a package with a suicide letter and the book Antichrist by Friedrich Nietzsche.

Jeffrey Weise: Was fascinated with National Socialism. He was an active writer at the internet-forum of the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party  and described himself as an Native Indian Nazi. He also gave a public Hitler salute at one occassion- a school pep rally. Jeffrey Weise wrote at the Forum, that he was very open about his views at the school.
You can read Jeffrey Weises online posts here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Yeah, I know Im a bit of a Peter Langman-fanboy

Do you believe that in some way all mass-shooters share some sort of collective or similar ideology? They would all have to have something in common to commit the same act.

xmichaelmyersii wrote:

Do you believe that in some way all mass-shooters share some sort of collective or similar ideology?  They would all have to have something in common to commit the same act.

I know this question wasn't directed at me, but I think a mass shooting is a human act similar to throwing a punch. All people can throw a punch in anger, but it doesn't necessarily mean they have a lot in common with each other.

A mass shooting is much more extreme than throwing a punch, so they have that extremity in common, but I don't think much else. Anders Behring Breivik seems nothing like Pekka-Eric Auvinen to me.

Pekka-Eric Auvinen appears to try very hard to get on the same vibe that Eric Harris was on, but it feels forced to me. Maybe he really did feel the same way as he wrote, but it feels more like he was grasping at desperate straws and he found Eric's journal. I feel sorry for the guy. He appears to have had a very hard time at school.

xmichaelmyersii wrote:

Do you believe that in some way all mass-shooters share some sort of collective or similar ideology?  They would all have to have something in common to commit the same act.

No, I dont think they share a similar ideology, but they probably share a similar mindset, in the way they are interested in ideologies and use them as justification for their attack.
I think one of the most important parts, if not the most important part of a mass-shooter mindset is the metamorphosis into a second identity, a new, powerful and strong identity. I think mass shooters create an image of a person, they want to be (maybe because they feel, that all of their other identities have failed) and than they modeling themselves after that image. They turn themselves into a warrior, a soldier with a mission. There is no guilt, there is no remorse, the only thing, that is important is to succeed at the mission.
Ideologies can be an important part of that process, because they give a role-model and a justification for the attack.

Martin Peyerl: Was fascinated with National Socialism and drew Swastikas at his pencil case. He also had a picture of Adolf Hitler above his bed.

Eric Borel: Was said to have a fascination with National-Socialism, but no clear evidence about that was found, except a small picture of Adolf Hitler in his rooms, which he seemed to had cut out of a newspaper. Police also found a news-footage about the Waco Siege in his room.

Update for Pekka-Eric Auvinen: The day of the shooting was the 90. anniversary of the October Revolution in Russia. Given Pekkas ideas towards his rampage as an act of revolution, it seems unlikely, that the date was not chosen for this reason.

Hale-Bopp wrote:

Martin Peyerl: Was fascinated with National Socialism and drew Swastikas at his pencil case. He also had an picture of Adolf Hitler above his bed.

Which parents would allow this? Especially in Germany, I don´t understand. Sorry for offtopic ;) 

em81 wrote:

Hale-Bopp wrote:

Martin Peyerl: Was fascinated with National Socialism and drew Swastikas at his pencil case. He also had an picture of Adolf Hitler above his bed.

Which parents would allow this? Especially in Germany, I don´t understand. Sorry for offtopic ;) 

So far I know, his parents had a lot of marital difficulties and Martins father had a problem with alcohol. So the parents probably were distracted about their sons concerning developtment.

Cho never seemed to have any ideology other than sharing the views of other shooters as being an outsider of the apparent decadent culture of the other students at Virginia Tech.

Mr_Chagrin wrote:

Cho never seemed to have any ideology other than sharing the views of other shooters as being an outsider of the apparent decadent culture of the other students at Virginia Tech.

Yes and you're right about the fact that this also is some kind of Ideology. Interesting Thought.

Michael Carneal: After the shooting, the police found "Industrial Society And Its Future", the so-called Unabomber Manifesto at Michaels PC.

I know Timothy McVeigh wasn't a shooter but a bomber, but he did it because of his political ideologie. The bombing was a revenge act for what happened at Waco.
So does he count? ;) 

tragedy79 wrote:

I know Timothy McVeigh wasn't a shooter but a bomber, but he did it because of his political ideologie. The bombing was a revenge act for what happened at Waco.
So does he count? ;) 

Yeah, why not. I thought about adding people like McVeigh, Kaczynski, Franz Fuchs etc. to my lists, but didnt because I thought it might break the mold. But I think, the psychic condition of terrorists and mass-shooters appears as very similar, so it basically would make sense to include them in the lists.

Seung Hui Cho:
Seung did send a Manifesto to MSNBC at the day of his attack. Only parts of it were released to the public.
Some news reports described the Manifesto as mocking Christianity. I am not sure, if this is an accurate description of the idea, Seung is expressing in his writing:

Seung Hui Cho wrote:

Do they wanna fuck us and pretend to be devout Christians? Do they wanna smear dog shit
on our face then give us a dirty towel to wipe away? Do they wanna rape us then give us
stained toilet paper to clean up? Do they wanna cut our throat then give us a used band aid
to patch up? Do they wanna perpetrate endless sessions of crucifixions and holocausts on our
innocent life then go to church and praise the Lord and Jesus? Do they wanna fuck us and
pretend to be Jesus Christ? I say we’re the Jesus Christs, my Brothers, Sisters, and Children.
Jesus Christ exists in us all: Ax Jesus Christ, John Jesus Christ, Jane Jesus Christ, Seung Jesus
Christ, Carlos Jesus Christ, Hakeem Jesus Christ, Mohammad Jesus Christ, Zhang Jesus
Christ, Oliver Jesus Christ, Elizabeth Jesus Christ, Vladimir Jesus Christ. ___________ Jesus
Christ.

To me, it sounds like he is trying to say, that he and his "Brothers, Sisters and Children" (I guess he is talking about other Mass Shooters, but I'm not sure about that) are real Christians, while the people who usually consider themselves Christians, are not.
I wonder, who are the people he is naming in his list of Brothers, Sisters and Children. Ax and Seung Jesus Christ are obviously two parts of Seung himself (Ax Ishmael was written on his arm during the massacre, A. Ismael was given as the sender of the Manifesto). I wonder if the other names belong to people he did really know (probably not) or if he just made them up. The certainly used names with different cultural backgrounds (American, Mexican/Spanish, Arabic, Asian and Russian). Maybe this was his way of saying, that his folk exists in every culture?

The main part of the Manifesto, however, focuses on the great amount of victimization, the Brothers and Sisters suffered in Seung mind, from all other people. I just choosed a random quote as example, but could have using many more:

Seung Hui Cho wrote:

You love to pretend to, but you Hedonists, Charlatans, Sadists, Rapists, Terrorists will never
know the feelings of giving up your lives for a cause. You have never felt a single ounce of
pain in your hedonistic lives. You will never give up a single can of your Bud Light, a shot
of your cognac, or a half-drop of your own precious blood for another human being, only
fuck the shit out of him and lie afterwards. You fucked us, now we fuck you, now we kill
you. There can be no lighter penalty for Masqueraded Democratic Terrorists who commit
unforgivable acts of treason against mankind.

Finally, Seung conceptualizes an apocalyptic judgment (in a long and rambling way) to people, who have done his folk wrong. There are so much parts, I could quote now, so I just chose the one, where the subject of Christianity gets linked with the ideas of revenge, in the most obvious way:

Seung Hui Cho wrote:

I say there is no pain they can inflict on us that they haven’t already inflicted. I say
they can’t fuck us any more than they have already done. I say there are no lies they can say
about us that they haven’t already said. I say fuck you, you Descendants of Satan Disguised
as Devout Christians. I say we take up the cross, take up our guns and knives and hammers,
and take no prisoners and spare no lives until our last breath and last ounce of energy.
Seer of Veracity. Seal of the Anti-Terrorist.

Cho frequently used speech like "they raped us" or "they fucked us" in his manifesto. Honestly, my first thought upon reading it (some years ago) was that he had been sexually abused in some way. I don't know if that's accurate, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that it was.

Wideawake wrote:

Cho frequently used speech like "they raped us" or "they fucked us" in his manifesto. Honestly, my first thought upon reading it (some years ago) was that he had been sexually abused in some way. I don't know if that's accurate, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that it was.

I thought about that, too. In his plays there are also references to sexual abuse. Additional in his Manifesto Cho mentions John Mark Karrs and Debra LaFaves, who had sexual contact with children.

At the other hand, if Cho had paranoid delusions- and his Manifesto make it seem likely that he had- it may simply be that: a delusion. But of course he could also have been delusional and had a history of sexual abuse.

Wellington Oliveira: Since he made his videos in Portuguese, Im not able to understand what he is talking about (if there ever will be a user on this board, who speaks this language, I would be glad, if he can tell me some things about the content).
However, it was reported that among the the many subjects he is rambling about, he seemed to be preoccupied with sexual purity. This becomes obvious in his suicide letter:

Wellington de Oliveira wrote:

You should first know that the impure cannot touch me without gloves, only the chaste or
those who lost their chastity after marriage and were not involved in adultery can touch
me without gloves, or, in other words, no fornicator or adulterer can have direct contact
with me, nor anything that is impure can touch my blood, nothing impure can have direct
contact with a virgin without his permission(...)

(You can read the full suicide note here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It may be interesting, that Mohamed Atta wrote similar things in his testament. Given the fact, that Wellington had a deep fascination with extremist Islam, it seems likely, that his suicide letter was to some extent inspired by Atta.
(You can read Mohamed Attas testament here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

During the shooting (which happened in the perpetrators former elementary school), Wellington Oliveira separated the girls from the boys and did target the first ones. According to survivors, he shot boys only to immobilize them. In fact, 10 of the 12 children who died were female. It is possible that his targeting of girls was the result of his ideas of sexual purity.

Walter Seifert: During his attack at the elementary school, Walter was said to have yelled: "Hitler II. is coming!"

Hale-Bopp wrote:

During the shooting (which happened in the perpetrators former elementary school), Wellington Oliveira separated the girls from the boys and did target the first ones. According to survivors, he shot boys only to immobilize them. In fact, 10 of the 12 children who died were female. It is possible that his targeting of girls was the result of his ideas of sexual purity.

 
This always reminds the Marc Lépine case where he did the same with the guys and girls and killed the girls for a similar reason (feminism), with the difference that Wellington shot the boys while Marc allowed them to left the place.

Mj2beat wrote:

Hale-Bopp wrote:

During the shooting (which happened in the perpetrators former elementary school), Wellington Oliveira separated the girls from the boys and did target the first ones. According to survivors, he shot boys only to immobilize them. In fact, 10 of the 12 children who died were female. It is possible that his targeting of girls was the result of his ideas of sexual purity.

 
This always reminds the Marc Lépine case where he did the same with the guys and girls and killed the girls for a similar reason (feminism), with the difference that Wellington shot the boys while Marc allowed them to left the place.

Yes, this reminded me of Lépine, too

Personally, I agree it is interesting how there can be some 'similarities' in terms of ideologies or "view of the world/perceived injustice" and so on, as others have already mentioned here in posts above and in other threads here.

Some like Breivik with his anti-Islamist views or Marc Lepine with his anti-feminist views, these in my mind are examples of a manifesto taking on a more 'political position' or some sort of quasi-social political stance.

I don't know if that makes sense, but overall I do agree to some extent ideologies or 'grievances' do play a role and there are similarities with some of these events.

What does anyone else here think about political views or political affiliation being a theme perhaps?

I'm no expert and this is only my second post, so go easy on my views everyone

Just my musings.

Every reason is good to unleash a murder instinct and to justify that. Everyone has some political views sometimes more far-right or far-left but this don't make us mass shooters. Some kind of political and religious violent is attractive to people whom have 'unstable' mental condition and that draws them in but this is not a main reason why shooters do what they do. I think that the answer lays only in their heads. Ideas don't shoot.

I think that many mass murderers turn to these political or religious ideologies because it helps justify their feelings and/or make them feel like they are a part of something. Or maybe not a part of something so much as superior. They KNOW something the rest of the world doesn't seem to know or understand and it makes them important as well as giving them an imagined reason to carry forward with their violent urges.

I agree with user Wideawake.

The common theme: Something in society is fucked, and it can't be escaped or fixed through peaceful conventional measures. The political affiliations are attempts to explain to themselves and others what it is they are experiencing and observing. Nazism attributes the problem to nonwhites. Radical Islam attributes the problem to the nonbelievers. Anti-feminism attributes the problem to feminists. The shooters know something is amiss, and these political movements offer definitive answers, and the company of others who validate their experiences--and these paradigms are the ones that appear to take the hardest line against societal dysfunction, to the point of advocating violent intervention.

Wideawake wrote:

I think that many mass murderers turn to these political or religious ideologies because it helps justify their feelings and/or make them feel like they are a part of something. Or maybe not a part of something so much as superior. They KNOW something the rest of the world doesn't seem to know or understand and it makes them important as well as giving them an imagined reason to carry forward with their violent urges.

Yes. Except maybe they do know something others don't, or don't want to. Maybe some of their reasons aren't imagined.

You use the term "violent urges." Urges? As in, completely reasonless impulses that appear ex nihilo? I doubt that. Not every shooter is mentally ill.

And even if they were--that's not how mental illness symptoms work. Delusions, maladaptive coping mechanisms, etc. They all have their origins in environmental factors, or reactions to outside influences. Every single one of them. This is not fringe theory--this is the basis of psychodynamic therapy, Freudian analysis (misguided as he was about the particulars,) Jungian, gestalt...all of the foundations of the study of mental illness. They don't come from nowhere.

good points gasolinechild


The diathesis stress model is a good theory too

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Jeff Weise's ideologies interest me. I agree that all races should preserve their culture.

AmyistWarrior wrote:

Jeff Weise's ideologies interest me. I agree that all races should preserve their culture.

Well most Nazis apparently did in fact have a level of respect for Native American Culture. Hitler was a big fan of Karl May's writing