Like many folk this morning I have been trying to work out why Anders Behring Breivik murdered around one hundred people in cold blood in what he admits was an atrocity.

How could an educated, successful man from a settled culture, aware of the moral dimension, carry out such a despicable attack on innocent young people?

Events like this go beyond conventional decision-making and suggest the involvement of a deeper influence. My first thought was that a powerful archetype of the collective unconscious had been triggered by recent events.

It was hardly a coincidence that just four days ago the European Union agreed that northern states of the Eurozone should transfer massive sums of money to profligate countries in the south — in the middle of an ongoing recession. Many of the people who are paying for this largesse didn’t have a voice in the decision. It was a German-French stitch-up at the highest level cobbled together by Brussels. While Norway is not a member of the EU, the close affinities of the Nordic countries means it is affected by decisions in Brussels, especially by the free movement of people across Europe.

But, even so, the killing spree was beyond excessive. We need to look deeper for the motivation behind this inexplicable crime, for something that has been stewing for decades. The Nordic mentality is generally disciplined. It takes a great deal of pain to trigger an event of such horror and devastation.

What we know is that the brooding Scandinavian temperament has been awash with unease for years about the state of their countries and their ability to govern themselves.

It is closely connected with the continuing loss of national culture, sovereignty and a largely peaceful way of life. Oslo’s population is now twenty-five percent Muslim, thanks to the open borders created by the Schengen Treaty and a very generous welfare state.

The two policies are clearly incompatible. For the Norwegians, the end of the free movement of people around Europe is becoming the only option. Significantly, Denmark has recently reimposed border controls in defiance of Brussels.

The archetype finally made its appearance on Breivik’s social media websites: that old favourite, the Knights Templar.

The Templars were set up by crusading knights in the 12th century to protect the Holy Land, especially Jerusalem, from Islamic invaders. It grew into a mass movement throughout Europe, even reaching as far north as England and Scotland, then died out before being replaced by the Scottish Freemasons.

Events like yesterday’s can only be explained by the influence of apparently heroic causes and a sense of divine mission. All the elements were in place, it only needed a psychological mechanism for action.

Modern computers have a facility called Snap to Grid. It is the technology behind spreadsheets and CadCam design software.

A blank screen hides an invisible grid of small rectangles. As worksheets or technical drawings are prepared, new inputted data automatically “snaps” into the boundaries set by the hidden grid. The grid can be revealed by a keystroke. The facility can also be turned off completely. However, if you are not an expert, your work can appear rather messy.

The analogy in ordinary life is this: when we act with apparent freedom, our actions automatically, and without our being aware of it, snap to a grid. As we grow in awareness, we begin to discern the grid. A person with a high degree of inner awareness can turn off the grid and assume complete spiritual freedom. These are the three stages of psychological free will.

The “snap” stage is when we are ignorant of any predetermining factors on our actions. A powerful archetype can easily take over a person on this level of development, conferring an inflated sense of divine mission and absolute confidence. Adolf Hitler is the perfect example. It seems that Anders Behring Breivik was under similar “magnetic” influences during yesterday’s massacre of the innocents.

The second stage, the beginning of awareness (illumination), is when we can see the grid and, within limits, adjust its purpose. The third level (called unitive contemplation in the Christian tradition) is when we become one with the grid itself and are able to control it at will.

Real freedom is quite rare, which is why there are so many senseless atrocities in history. It is predicated on an ability to rise above internal and external impulses, which rests on the level of awareness attained by any individual.

Breivik thought he was fighting back against a culture of national decline, but he was just snapping to the grid of an ancient, tired mythology.

The only partial protection against such random outbursts is for a society to have a strong code of behaviour inculcated very young.

Norway has just such an unspoken culture of civility and good manners. That yesterday’s killing spree happened anyway shows just how far some individuals have been pushed.

I suspect this could be the start of many more incidents like this across Europe unless our feeble political class takes back democratic control of our nation states.

John Evans

… who is the author of The Eternal Quest for Immortality: Is it staring you in the face? Available from Amazon and all good booksellers. Muscular Mysticism is coming soon.

Recent Related Commentary
Midweek Mysticism: The march of the clever clogs
Midweek Mysticism: Who breaks a butterfly upon a wheel?
Midweek Mysticism: One simple thing
Saturday Ramble: The magic of mushrooms
Saturday Ramble: Do the Illuminati really exist?
Saturday Ramble: Rutherford, Quantum physics and Buddhist emptiness
Saturday Ramble: The Green Man
Saturday Ramble: Peak experience is losing your mind
Saturday Ramble: The Big Bang is a limp whimper

I have to admit I’m baffled by Conservative leader, David Cameron’s triangulatory campaign to become Prime Minister.

He’s beginning to fade in the memory as a vivid political force. Gordon Brown occasionally appears the stronger of the two men, despite being hopelessly barren of new ideas.

Cameron’s topics tend to be technical, small in stature, and rather nit-picking. Even when on the side of the angels, as over Labour’s death tax, his alternative doesn’t resonate, despite being sensible and reasonable.

With a possible surprise April election tantalizingly hovering into view, Labour’s back-offices are buzzing and Tory CCHQ is launching publicity initiatives by the skip-load.

But where’s the beef? Labour and Lib-Dem campaign slogans are trite, limp and predictable. One big Tory push would topple them into oblivion.

The Conservative counter attacks remain uninspiring, like the products of novel-writing software that churn out derivative prose, dreary plots and unreadable tosh.

Safety first is not the way to go when you need 117 seats just to gain Parliamentary parity. The American technique of going for the centre ground early, but moving in hard on the core vote at the end, is sorely needed now.

It’s so late coming, though, I’m starting to think David Cameron really is the mumsy house-husband he gives the appearance of being. A Tory form of Blairism is perhaps all we’ve got ahead of us for the next five years, followed by either more of the same or a return to Labour. The prospect is unthinkable.

David Cameron’s shoulders now bear the weight of Britain’s future. Will he be up to it?

Some Prime Ministers seem feeble at first, then grow into the job. Margaret Thatcher did. Ted Heath collapsed into petulant incoherence after a year or two. Tony Blair was a plausible fraud who took a long time to show his true, empty nature. Gordon Brown is predictably dire and operating way beyond the capabilities of his character and abilities.

The country now needs a great Prime Minister to reshape its future while enhancing its essential character. It’s a huge task that will take a lot of personal sacrifice and effort. Only the bravest and the best need apply.

Let’s sketch out a plan of action for the next PM to maximize British recovery and influence in the world. The following are my own views and don’t come with a guarantee, but by golly, they would shake up this battered and intimidated nation:

1. Ruthlessly drive decision-making, plus the attached money, away from Whitehall, down to local areas and businesses.
2. Ensure British decisions are taken in the UK, not by crackpot international agencies like the EU Commission or the UN.
3. Relentlessly improve education standards by dissolving most government interference and allowing parents and teachers to make the running.
4. Slice away government spending by the proportion Gordon Brown has added in the past 13 years … and then some.
5. Repeal all the green legislation that would beggar the country over the next 40 years.
6. Exploit as many home-grown resources and talents as possible before turning to so-called global markets, which are flaky in the extreme. Oil-shale gas is a good example.
7. Remodel Parliament into a slick machine for optimizing every aspect of the nation’s business, while minimizing legislation.
8. Finally, launch a Rebuild Britain programme that would address the main problems in simple terms that could be understood by everyone and taken up locally by businesses and communities.

I could go on, but you get the drift. We need to hear more BIG politics from the Tories if we are to believe they are up to the job.

Forget the past. The people want to hear about the future.

PS: New polling illustrates my point: Link HERE.

John Evans

Recent Related Commentary
Saturday Ramble: Politics and the land of Cockaigne
Saturday Ramble: Bubbles — how they destroy us and how we can fight back
Saturday Ramble: Gordon Brown’s Invictus rictus
Saturday Ramble: Pre-Budget frog spawn
Saturday Ramble: My word, you do look queer!

We can see clearly now that the UK is totally out of touch with what is going on in Brussels. New developments today point to a widening gap between EU policy and British aspirations. These will become critical when a Conservative Government takes power within three months.

It’s only a month since the European Constitution, known colloquially as the Lisbon Treaty, came into force across Europe.

Despite the assurances and soothing voices from all sides, it is now starting to bite, with the Commission demanding a full-scale “economic government” for Europe.

Using the problems of Greece as an excuse, the federalists are in full pursuit of their quarry. The apparent backing down of Germany yesterday makes the outcome more likely, even inevitable in the short term.

Jose-Manuel Barroso, the Commission president, said that “Brussels has treaty powers allowing it to take the reins of economic management.
This is a time for boldness. I believe that our economic and social situation demands a radical shift from the status quo. And the new Lisbon Treaty allows this.”

Brown’s “red lines” are melting like icicles in the Athens sun.

Tomorrow, Thursday, Gordon Brown goes to Brussels for an EU summit which will be dominated by the Club Med crisis and the immediate future of Greece. Once again, a British Prime Minister will be up against the full force of European hegemonic zeal. Given Brown’s character and inability to face up to those stronger than himself, the outlook is not good.

Both Douglas Carswell (Conservative) and Gisela Stuart (Labour) today demanded assurances from Brown at PMQs that Britain would not get involved in eurozone matters, nor extend taxpayers money to Greece.

Brown’s reply was meticulously prepared, pointing to the new IMF facility which he knows Brussels is determined not to access. A typical EU stitchup is on the cards.

Surely now the Conservatives must make their case clear. They need to step back from this wretched powerplay.

John Evans

John Evans, Headbanger — not me.

Gordon Brown’s speech at the Mansion House last night had an air of the valedictory: a last throw of a man utterly out of his depth, despised and ridiculed by everyone in sight, including his closest colleagues.

The more he bellowed about a “global society” and “global institutions”, the more he resembled some ten-a-penny dictator stamping out democracy at home while deflecting attention abroad.

His “global vision” is nothing other than the defeated international Marxism of his youth, in which a cross-borders’ working class was urged to band together to overthrow greedy capitalists. The only difference is, the workers are replaced by a political elite.

There was something almost deranged about his obtuseness and desperate attempts to cling on to a failing dream. It was “global solutions”, with no bulkheads in between, that brought the world crashing down in 2007. More of the same will not do any better.

Now he has in mind to allow the UN to tax us and impose controls on our energy usage. Thank God for the US Senate which would rather blow itself up than pass anything of the sort.

Conservatives should beware of getting caught up in this contagion. It was their own Virginia Bottomley, in 1989, who signed us up to the UN’s Convention on the Child, which led to her unworkable Children’s Act and allowed the representatives of grizzly dictatorships to criticize how we bring up British children.

The Tories should seek to emulate the US Upper House in its intransigence to global solutions. Only failed and fading politicians grasp at such straws.

Following on from my Saturday piece on, among other things, climate change, today’s Times carries an article by Dr Stuart Clark of Princeton, which brings fresh information to the argument. Writing about the continuing “sunspot crash” he makes some interesting points:

“… if the trend continues at its current rate, the Sun will lose its ability to produce sunspots by 2015. That would take it back to its condition in the latter 17th century, when hardly any sunspots appeared for 70 years — and Northern Europe underwent the worst years of the so-called Little Ice Age.”

In that case, let us hope that man-made pollutants do warm us up a bit. Cutting them back now might be disastrous.

His point though, is that it’s an ideal time to measure these effects and settle the climate debate once and for all. For that, we need open and honest scientists to take the measurements and trustworthy politicians to draw the correct conclusions.

We certainly shouldn’t allow people like Gordon Brown or the Miliband brothers anywhere near the action.

Annoyment of the Week
A Gordon Brown-free zone

Some people love to stand out from the crowd. As a rugged individualist myself I have no objection to that, provided it’s an improvement on the norm, and is not done purely for attention-seeking purposes.

What BBC man Evan Davis wears in bookshops has no interest at all for me, although the last time I saw him on TV, he was so thin he could have been a bundle of sticks in a suit.

When it comes to professional activity on the BBC’s Today programme, though, some line must be drawn. This is a show listened to largely by a middle-aged and elderly audience. The programme’s content and presenters mostly reflect that fact.

Last week it was discussing the Rosetta project. Rosetta is a spacecraft designed to land on a passing comet in 2014. To build up sufficient velocity to get to the rendezvous, it has to be swung around the Earth and Mars three or four times, rather as a discus thrower will twirl around before launching his projectile down the track.

Who on earth thinks up these schemes? Surely this one must come from the same stable as our chum, the Large Hadron Collider? Yes, it’s the European Space Agency, and we are paying for it. Warm glow? Thought not.

Rosetta is currently being swung around the Earth, by the way, hence the interest.

Anyway, Evan’s contribution to the project was groanworthy. While both the newsreader and the science correspondent, Pallab Ghosh, used “miles” to describe its trajectory around our planet, our hero preferred kilometres.

Grinding of gears as ageing audience attempts to divide by eight and multiply by five, thus missing the rest of the item.

Oh dear!

A word of thanks to Google.

A couple of weeks ago I complained that I had been relegated to page 3 of the search engine’s results for my admittedly rather common name “john evans”. Top of the bill was a John Evans who could carry “very heavy weights on his head, including bricks and cars” (pictured above).

Now while I have enormous admiration for my namesake, and certainly couldn’t emulate him in the motorhead stakes, page 3 was the equivalent of a Siberian salt mine compared to the top-five slot previously held.

I’m delighted to report that the Google guys have relented and yours truly is back in third spot. Thanks to everyone at the Googleplex.

Now could you please restore our PageRank of 5 to this site?

The by-election result in Glasgow North East was welcomed by a drowning Labour party much as a shipwrecked man might clutch at a floating matchstick in stormy seas.

The idea is that they now have the incumbent SNP on the run north of the border. The newly “insurgent” Labour party believes it can retain at least some of its traditional stronghold base in Scotland at the General Election.

I’ve no doubt it can, but much good will it do them. However, I must admit to having a secret wish for a Labour wipeout in all its heartlands, even if it entrenches the nationalists in Edinburgh. Alex Salmond is reported to have a pact with David Cameron on events following a Tory victory in England, Wales and possibly Northern Ireland.

One thing’s for sure, he’s going to find it hard to win a breakaway referendum under current economic conditions. The United Kingdom is not the European Union and 300 years carries a darn sight more weight than 37.

A Glasgow smile, anyone?

Bo Jo, or Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, if you’re not in the loop, is fighting a splendid battle to save the City of London and those love-to-be-slimy bankers who burrow like Hobbits there.

He’s fighting on two fronts. Brown seems determined to give them a good kicking before he slopes off into sullen oblivion in May. The European Commission, backed eagerly by the French, are hell bent on denuding Britain of its massive colony of alternative investment managers — Hedgies, to you and me.

It looks like a lonely battle. The Conservatives are reluctant to throw their weight behind unpopular bankers and are currently hiding behind a wall of technical adjustments.

Have no fear, Bo Jo, Syntagma is with you all the way!

John Evans

Recent Related Commentary
DIARY: Pravda, The British Realm, Annoyment, Newsnicht, Chumpishness, Rompuy for ever
DIARY: Syntagma Books, Annoyments, Scottish calumny, David Milibug, Advice to Cabinet, Zealotry
DIARY: Hague in The Hague, Annoyments, Pelagius strikes back, Mad Aid, Googling yourself, The Zen of consultancy
DIARY: Mayan prophesies, Oil shale, Met Office winter, Policy wonkers, Historical historians, Publishing a book

Despite the spate of negative results in referendums on aspects of the European Union, the EU Commission and its heavyweight political supporters have not given up on their main aim: to convert the EU into a single country.

The currently proposed constitution — now called the Lisbon Treaty — would turn a grouping of nation states into a legal entity in its own right with the power to sign international treaties on behalf of member states and the right to overturn any nation’s laws. It includes an embryo army poised to requisition the forces of any EU country worth having, a flag, a “national” anthem, a passport system and the beginnings of a diplomatic corps with its own embassies around the world.

All it needs is a name.

The European Union is largely operated for, and on behalf of, Germany and France, the two original founders. What they want, they tend to get. In the treaty after next, assuming they find a way to browbeat Ireland into accepting most of the Lisbon Treaty, the question of the name of the new country of Europe is sure to figure. What might it be?

It would have to satisfy the egos of the Germans and the French and be mildly acceptable to the rest. One obvious name stands out: Frankia.

France was originally named after the Germanic tribe, the Franks, which gave us Charlemagne and other worthies of the “Holy Roman Empire”. It’s a name that would flatter both Paris and Berlin, and emphasize their status as joint controllers of the new European empire. The former French currency, naturally, was the franc.

The British would hate it, of course, and, assuming Labour governments are a thing of the past by then, would probably withdraw.

But would, say, a David Cameron government have the moral force to renegotiate Britain’s terms along the lines of an association agreement? Matthew d’Ancona has an excellent “testing the waters” piece in today’s Telegraph on what Cameron can expect on becoming PM in two years from now. One of his most important points is that serious challenges bring massive opportunities for radical change.

Cameron will certainly be faced with the kind of economic reconstruction that Margaret Thatcher tackled so fearlessly in the early 1980s. She succeeded in transforming Britain from basket case to Anglo-Saxon Tiger in less than a decade.

I’m not going to recite my own shopping list of what a new British government needs to do, as it’s way too long. But lancing the European boil is absolutely essential for British independence and for unity in the Tory party. It would also allow the country its familiar role as a freebooting trader again, free from the paralysing regulatory environment and toxic cost base spewing out in all directions from Brussels.

Frankia, in any shape or size, is no longer in Britain’s national interest. David Cameron may just become the saviour of the nation, a Winston Churchill for the 21st century.