,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
A short thread: Back in 2011, after Anders Breivik's terror attacks in Norway, it was clear immediately that things were going to be different.
The ambitious nature of the attack really redefined what lone actor terrorists could aspire to accomplish. Additionally, he left a 1500-page explanation of what he had done and why, which everyone devoured searching for answers.
Today, Breivik is increasingly iconic in right-wing extremism. He has more and more fans, and many of those fans are going operational. In significant part, this is because of the way he assigned meaning to his violence in his manifesto.
The Christopher Hasson indictment reported last week by @SeamusHughes showed a suspect directly and deeply influenced toward violence by Brievik and explicitly following the plan in his manifesto.
But it's not just Hassson. And it's not just Breivik.
But it's not just Hassson. And it's not just Breivik.
Other murder manifestos are also inspiring violent plots and acts, most notably Dylann Roof for white supremacists and Elliot Rodger whose tract created the incel movement.
Thus, for @TheAtlantic I take a deep dive into why these works resonate and whether we should read them as confessional or propagandistic. Check it out theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
