Breivik saw a threat to European civilization and decided to commit a crime to call attention to the danger to Europe and thereby to avert an even greater evil. That is, he killed 80 people so that a whole civilization might be saved. He was a practical exponent of proportionalist consequentialism. He ignored the moral absolute: you shall not murder.
Similarly the Unabomber and eco-terrorists were so certain that our way of life threatens the planet that they committed crimes to call attention to the danger we are facing. It looks like Ivins saw that the U.S. could be devastated by bioterrorism, and conducted the anthrax attacks to call attention to the danger that Congress was neglecting.
We too often think we understand history, and do wrong so that good may come of it.
But is Edward Abbey responsible for ecoterrorism? Should we not talk about dangers to the environment for fear that it might inspire ecoterrorism? Should we not consider what effect the combination of the demographic winter and Moslem immigration will have on Europe for fear it might inspire people like Breivik?
Leon, we can’t fail to confront issues because of what people might or might not do. Ultimately, the Breiviks are responsible for their own behavior. If they cannot control themselves, then the judicial system controls them…but only after they have acted.
That’s why societies can legalize morality only on a reactive basis. Laws against murder, rape and theft don’t prevent those crimes; they merely punish the behavior.
Besides, one thing must be made clear: People like Breivik and the Unabomber are anomilies in the West. People like bin Laden are not in the Muslim world. In fact, many Muslim religious leaders encourage such behavior.
That’s why the ultimate fight against Islamist terrorism must be made by Muslims themselves. Otherwise, Islam will be destroyed…either from within by fellow Muslims who have allowed resentment and politicized victimization to corrode their moral sensibilities, or from w/o by nations that will not allow their citizens to become victims.
What Breivik did was an evil deed, but we should remember that in some ways his heart was in the right place (I clarify, in SOME ways. By no means all; from reading his manifesto it appears he’s rather a psychopath). We should remember, for example, that at the Labor camp where he committed his atrocity, the students made signs saying, “Boycott Israel,” among other anti-Zionist and Marxist things.
@Danny von Braun: Your last sentence only makes sense if you are implying that being an anti-Zionist and Marxist is deserving of the death penalty, without benefit of due process.