19A033 A Murderer's Mind by Jim Davies, 8/13/2019   

On August 3rd one Patrick Crusius murdered 22 people in an El Paso Walmart; and was considerate enough to tell us why. His "manifesto" is here, and I've added comments in a version here. It's dreadfully confused, but this ZGBlog attempts to unscramble its highlights in the hope of helping prevent other such massacres. It all reminds me of a comparable outrage in Oslo eight years ago, though there, Anders Breivik made us wade through 1,500 pages.

Apparently that's Crusius, Before and After police interrogation.

He's 21 and fairly articulate, though his manifesto was very badly typed; I had to re-format a lot. Why he didn't use a proper word processor is quite a puzzle. He shapes his apologia in terms of politics, economics and some "personal reasons."

At once, he identifies himself with the killer Brenton Tarrant, who murdered 51 people in two Christchurch, NZ, mosques. By doing so, he asserts a right and/or duty to take the lives of other human beings, which it the ultimate in archism. He must therefore be a stranger to the irrefutable Self Ownership Axiom, and little wonder since he is a product of the government school monopoly. He takes as obvious that he has some right or business to decide how, where and whether other people shall live. This is his ultimate error, sufficient to account for his actions. The scary bit is that it's not at all unusual - and it's the fundamental premise on which all government operates.

His "political" argument is confused and contradictory. It does contain some truth; the Dems favor maximizing hispanic immigration so as to capture ever more voter support from them, having abandoned hope of winning enough votes from existing Americans. But Crusius assumes that even if that works short-term, it will continue indefinitely and so destroy the Texas he "loves."

That's almost certainly wrong. The incoming generation may feel grateful for Dem help but their children, when grown, will vote like anyone else - probably against further immigration and in favor of keeping more of what they have earned. So Crusius' dread of a permanent Democrat takeover of Texas and everywhere else is ill-founded. In any case, if we do our job properly, there won't be any politicians for whom to vote, by the time those children have grown.

He correctly senses that "corporations" (sizes unspecified) have a great deal of political clout, but fails to notice that no alternative exists when Pols need votes and money to buy them. Yes, ours is a system of State Capitalism and always has been, or at least since Lincoln's time, but that's bound to be so. Big firms alone have the money for bribes, and Pols greatly influence how business can operate, so the alliance is so unsurprising as to be inevitable; see this ZGBlog about "Progressivism." It will end only when government does.

His "Economics" argument is more contradictory yet. "Corporations" (again, size and nature unspecified) are said to want low-cost labor and highly-skilled labor, both; they send jobs overseas yet want more immigrants, to fill low-skill jobs on which Americans "can't survive." So how long will new US residents survive in them, we may wonder.

He fears that continuing floods of immigrants will "keep wages down" and says the same is true of "automation." (Stay tuned, but so far there's no threat to fire an AK-47 at automation. In which Walmart does automation shop?) This is Luddite economics, and Crusius can have learned it only at the feet of a teacher employed by government. Automation, or the process of mechanizing repetitive work, is the whole story of civilization; all the leisure- and pleasure-yielding products we now enjoy are the result of those thousands of years of progress.

A sense of real economics, ie of a free movement of labor to where it's needed, at a price that equally satisfies both seller and buyer, is completely missing. In part, the mourners in El Paso can therefore rightly blame Crusius' economics teachers for the loss of their loved ones. He fails even to mention that, given freedom to live and work where one wishes, people will choose to go where their labor is most valued; if he happens to be right (that waves of Hispanic immigrants will depress US wage rates) then they will go back South. A free market in labor, as in everything else, is self-correcting.

Also missing is any indication that Crusius understands why it costs so much to hire labor here today; namely the role of government in pandering to Unions and mandating ever higher minimum wages and more expensive environments. Nor yet does he explain why or how new immigrants can bypass those factors, except perhaps during his time without government "documents."

Another omission - and this time somewhat to his credit - is the view that folk migrate North in order to obtain US welfare. No doubt some do, yet Crusius does not complain of it. Many Wall builders do.

All of this will so easily be solved when government evaporates! The many existing residents here who have given up looking for work will be free to negotiate any wage they wish, so the newly-arrived Hispanic worker will face a lot more competition from natives - who already speak the language.

His action plan is plainly stated. Having said why Hispanics must go back South, he will kill some of them at random, to encourage others to do so - and to discourage yet others from heading North. Quote: "...the Hispanic population is willing to return to their home countries if given the right incentive. An incentive that myself and many other patriotic Americans will provide." Chilling, authoritative; a form of words that any politician or Mob boss would love to use.

Will other "patriots" follow his example? - none of them that I've met. But it's not impossible that some will. The archist assumption, that A can validly rule B, has been woven into everyone's mind every succeeding generation, by all the organs of government propaganda, so that it grips them like the mantra of a cult. Our task of re-education is large. Until we perform it, the killing will continue.