The Washington Examiner makes a very important point. They say that much of the discussion about the El Paso killer’s motives emanated from an article in the New York Times with the headline, “El Paso Shooting Suspect’s Manifesto Echoes Trump’s Language.” The story quoted just 28 words of the nearly 2,400-word manifesto. It noted that Crusius specifically wrote that his views “predate Trump.”
And it warned that “linking political speech, however heated, to the specific acts of ruthless mass killers is a fraught exercise.”
Then the Times did exactly what they said shouldn’t be done, writing, “if Mr. Trump did not originally inspire the gunman, he has brought into the mainstream polarizing ideas and people once consigned to the fringes of American society.”
The killer clearly stated he was inspired by the New Zealand killer, not Trump.
He was worried about immigration, overpopulating the earth, automation, jobs, universal basic income, oil drilling, watersheds, waste, plastic waste, paper waste, corporations, sustainability, college debt, healthcare, as Byron York also points out.
That is not Trumpian.
The left is trying to say the fact that he wanted to kill Mexicans makes him Trumpian. No one who is sane wants to hurt any Mexicans. It couldn’t be any further from the goals of the President. He wants borders.
The entire manifesto does not reflect Trump at all. It’s nuts, but it is debatably closer to the left.
THE EL PASO KILLER IS A CLIMATE EXTREMIST, HATED CORPORATIONS
The motive of the El Paso killer is still muddled. He definitely wanted to kill Mexican people and resented immigrants, but he was also far-left in much of his ideology based on his manifesto — if the manifesto is his. In addition, Mexican is not a race.
In the case of the El Paso killer, there is no question he wanted to kill Hispanic ‘invaders,’ he said so in the manifesto and he did it. But everyone is assuming that is right-wing. Why? Since when is it right or left to want to kill people of a particular group? It’s extreme and it’s evil. The border issue is not racist and should be non-partisan. It’s not about race.
The killer disavowed both parties.
He labeled the insane manifesto, The Inconvenient Truth, reminiscent of Al Gore’s famous title. The killer appeared to be based in a lot of cultural Marxist ideology. What he likes about Republicans is “at least…the process of mass immigration and citizenship can be greatly reduced.”
He hates race mixers and polluters, complaining “our lifestyle is destroying the environment of our country.”
Killer Patrick Crusius railed against the “takeover by unchecked corporations” and complained about “the increasingly anti-immigrant rhetoric of the right.” The killer complained, “The decimation of our environment is creating a massive burden for future generations. Corporations are heading the destruction of our environment by shamelessly overharvesting resources.”
He continued to rant about the destruction of the environment and concluded if Americans won’t change their lifestyle, “…the next logical step is to decrease the number of people in America using resources. If we can get rid of enough people, then our way of life can become sustainable.”
That’s not Trumpian!
A case can be made that he was killing people to save the planet. He is a climate extremist, a very left-wing thing to be.
He is angry about imperialism which is also left-wing.
Universal Basic Income is very far-left but that is what the killer put in the manifesto.
“In the near future, America will have to initiate a basic universal income to prevent widespread poverty and civil unrest as people lose their jobs (to automation). Joblessness is in itself a source of civil unrest. The less dependents on a government welfare system, the lower the unemployment rate, the better. Achieving ambitious social projects like universal healthcare and UBI would become far more likely to succeed if tens of millions of defendants are removed.”
None of that is right-wing.
At one point, he said he was upset about giving free healthcare to illegals. That is non-partisan because it is illogical and a basically moronic idea. Many Democrats know it’s nuts.
We don’t agree with papa frita but it’s a readable copy.
I came to the conclusion those in the press had only read a portion of the first part and nothing more. It’s indicative of their laziness in most of what they produce. It’s what he “complains” about that defines it as a manifesto. “Who” he attacks is the physical manifestation to ‘correct’ the situation. He chose ‘immigrants’ as they were the group most removed from himself and the easiest target. The actual “targets” of the manifesto would yield nothing since little could be accomplished against them. He would want his actions to highlight the complaints of all that is wrong with the American system. His personality is one of self-defeatism such that he will point to everything around him that “prevents” a useful existence. I doubt he was ever given the life-skills it takes to adapt to changing circumstances. I also doubt he understood the vast amount of people who have struggled throughout their lives to succeed. He “may” have thought it “should” be easy, as his manifesto, or maybe his LinkedIn showed, that he was despondent on his future prospects.
It’s a symptom of far too many younger people that are unable to “cope” with life’s problems. A person Does need self-confidence and the education system has, and is, destroying that characteristic with creating a “protective shell” around the student. It has reached such an extreme and the evidence is in the video of the DSA convention and the complaints of their inability to cope with others around them. It is funny, but also tragic in the extreme. Is it any wonder there are so many suicides. Everyone is failing the next generations, the parents, the schools, the media, all are perpetuating this crisis. Jack Dorsey of Twitter on the Rogan show even said as much. He has to “protect” those who are unable to cope. Rather than “teaching” skills we have allowed children to basically fend for themselves and aren’t equipped to become mature on their own. The result takes many forms, the DSA on one extreme and this shooter on the other.
This has been a gradual development that has been going on for about 30 years with no end in sight. But, today, we can have a focus of one person who is the cause, Trump. No need to understand the underlying causes and effects, we have our root cause. We are in an era of freedom of responsibility. That had its beginnings in the 60’s and has now reached all levels of society. Only after an external threat of such magnitude, or large scale natural disaster, will it ever begin to change. Until such time we are on the eve of destruction.