About This Blog

Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973) was the greatest economist of my time. His greatest works can be accessed here at no charge.

Mises believed that property, freedom and peace are and should be the hallmarks of a satisfying and prosperous society. I agree. Mises proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the prospect for general and individual prosperity is maximized, indeed, is only possible, if the principle of private property reigns supreme. What's yours is yours. What's mine is mine. When the line between yours and mine is smudged, the door to conflict opens. Without freedom (individual liberty of action) the principle of private property is neutered and the free market, which is the child of property and freedom and the mother of prosperity and satisfaction, cannot exist. Peace is the goal of a prosperous and satisfying society of free individuals, not peace which is purchased by submission to the enemies of property and freedom, but peace which results from the unyielding defense of these principles against all who challenge them.

In this blog I measure American society against the metrics of property, freedom and peace.

Sunday, July 22, 2012

Is This An Example Of The Media's Liberal Bias?

I listen to the radio virtually all morning at work every Sunday. This morning was interesting because ABC News not only covered the Aurora, CO Batman shootings, but also made a point to commemorate the 2011 terrorist attacks in Norway which occurred on July 22.

The Norway attacks killed 77 people and injured 319.

So far, all well and good.

The suspicious part of the ABC report was when the announcer made a point of saying that the Norway attacks were committed by a "self-confessed far-right wing extremist."

The convicted perpetrator of the Norway attacks was Anders Behring Breivik. Wikipedia describes him as having a "far-right militant ideology" which it describes as follows:
In it he lays out his worldview, which includes support for Islamophobia, Zionism.[26] anti-feminism,[30][31] It also expresses support for far-right groups such as the EDL[32] and paramilitaries such as the Scorpions.[33] It regards Islam and Marxism as the enemy, and argues for the violent annihilation of "Eurabia" and multiculturalism, and the deportation of all Muslims from Europe.[34] Breivik wrote that his main motive for the atrocities was to market this manifesto.[35]
The question is: Why is this ideology right wing?

It seems to me that these types of nuts are so extreme that any reference to a standard political spectrum is useless and deceiving. Couldn't Breivik just as easily be described as far left?

In Wikipedia's listing of Far-right politics it says:
Proponents of horseshoe theory interpretation of the left-right spectrum identify the far-left and far-right as having more in common with each other as extremists than each have towards moderate centrists.[7]
I tend to agree with horseshoe theory. Follow the link above for a more complete description of it.

So, was ABC's report biased? Or am I just being hypersensitive?

No comments: