About a year ago, my boyfriend (Eivind) was wrongfully arrested for what they saw as incitement to violence and glorification of violence. At the time, he made an argument that cop murder was morally right in the face of oppression, as cops are the enforcers of the worst of the feminist laws. He also cheered a couple of times, when news about a cop killed came in the media. He didn’t actually tell anyone to kill, or plan a rebellion, or whatever. He just expressed a view that violence can indeed be a solution in situations like these, a view that you can express and get away with, if your political leaning is to the left, and preferably feminist.
One day, I was chatting with my boyfriend. He went for a jog and simply didn’t return. It was late at night, so I became increasingly worried that maybe he got run over by a car, killed, being robbed, etc. I almost lost my mind not knowing where he was. The next evening, cops called me and told me he was arrested. The person who raised a case against my boyfriend was the police attorney Rudolf Christoffersen (http://search.aol.com/aol/image?q=rudolf+christoffersen&v_t=aimright-ff&s_it=searchtabs ). I googled him and found out that this guy was the one who harassed a family of gypsies recently, and held the parents in an empty cell for a week. They were later cleared of their charges. He also caught Amy Winehouse smoking pot while she was visiting Norway. In short, it seemed like someone who enjoyed harassing the weakest and to concern himself with the most made up, victimless crimes.
My boyfriend had to sit in jail for almost a month. He wasn’t even convicted, but in Norway they are allowed to hold you in jail before the trial for the silliest of reasons. The reasons were fear that he will destroy evidence (as if he could remove all the traces of his blog and claim he never said the things he said). Another reason was “concerns that he will repeat the crime”. Basically, they said “well, he still hates cops, so we can’t let him go, because there is high chance of recidivism”. That it, he’s in jail for expressing hate for cops and they were gonna hold him in jail until he stopped hating cops.
My boyfriend was lucky to have a good lawyer, who proved to the Supreme Court that internet was not public according to the law, and thus an incitement charge can’t be made. Of course, it’s absurd, but the law was very old and did not take internet into account. They let him go. They were pretty angry the law was so old and still not updated, although it was supposed to be updated already in 2005, just to catch people like my boyfriend. Hastily, they finally updated the law, and now it’s illegal to incite violence online, if your speech could reach at least 20-30 people.
What I find surprising is how some allies blame Eivind for this law. Also, it is also surprising the anti-cop hate Eivind expressed is seen as such a big deal. For some reason, some people think it’s pathological. I’m saying that, but it doesn’t mean I agree with his statements. I simply find them utterly uncontroversial. I think all of these people are suffering from what I would call the Feminist State Stockholm Syndrome, and will explain why.
In many ways, the feminist state is like a kidnapper. They have total power over your life, and in a confrontation, you will most often lose. It would be a very unequal fight, to put it mildly. They also hold other people in a similar position. However, if you’re a good boy/girl, they will allow you basic things, like freedom to continue as you are without being harassed by them. However, those victims that do act up, rebel and want to get away are not treated so well. You can be put in an empty cell for a week, without warning, and then deprived of your freedom to live as you wish for the next few years. And like a true kidnapper psychopath, they will blame it on you.
See what you made me do? Your insistence on fairness is nothing but whining of the overprivileged, so you need to be punished. If you didn’t try to escape, you wouldn’t be experiencing beatings right now. If you didn’t talk back, you wouldn’t be in a cell right now. You brought it on yourself.
Eventually, some victims start believing it, and lose sympathy for those who still have their head together.
You mustn’t talk back to the Feminist State. The Feminist State is good to you if you just shut up and obey. It didn’t even beat you all that much for your transgression this time, see how fair it was? Why are you so angry, I don’t understand. The rest of us are doing quite well.
And now that the new law is in place, some of the people will blame Eivind for it. After all, it was his case that made the state change the law hastily. However, they don’t realize that a kidnapper is not truly their protector and caretaker, and a kidnapper can do anything as a reaction to a victim’s resistance, and blame it on them. The abuser can make up a random rule on the spot and make it of great importance and meaning in the head of a victim, and the victim will believe it. And they are taught to be scared of breaking this rule, or even thinking that the abuser is being abusive by enforcing it. After a certain amount of time, watching someone resist the abuser is shocking and controversial.
Here’s the thing. You can fool a kidnapper. You can sweet talk to a kidnapper. You can escape, call outside help, disarm them, knock them out, etc. But you can’t start agreeing with them and seeing them as authority. And you most likely can’t reason with them either. They only start being reasonable when they can’t afford to be unreasonable anymore.
In view of all this, it should be clear why someone will think violence is an appropriate response. I’m more into all the other options available, and wouldn’t recommend violence. I just don’t gasp when someone suggests it.