I just finished reading a very interesting interview from Norwegian metal musician Varg Vikernes, who was found guilty of murdering his bandmate back in 1993. His thoughts on life are quite interesting - I don't agree with a lot of what he says, but I can definitely see his point of view on some issues.

Edit: Before people misconstrue this post as me supporting his ideas, it's not. He has some very valid points on a few issues, and then some that I think are completely wrong. But to me, the conviction of his beliefs is fascinating. I always love reading about completely varied viewpoints (although they usually clash with mine) because it always leads me to reconsider my own position on things.

Posted by roy on May 30, 2005 at 04:10 PM in Ramblings | 6 Comments

Related Entries

Comment posted on May 30th, 2005 at 11:04 PM
In general, i.e. not necessarily in absolute.

Disagree:
- Racial purity/rejection.
- Paganism.

Agree:
- Drugs.
- Cultural imperialism.
- Meaning of life.
- Women.

Things I don't mention cannot be presumed as disagree/agree or being at a crossroads.

ghost_tree (guest)

Comment posted on May 30th, 2005 at 06:00 PM
I tend to agree to some extent with his views on women and drugs, but saying internationalism leads to the destruction of all human races in favour of one degenerated and spiritually schizophrenic mongrel race with no culture is completely retarded.
Comment posted on May 30th, 2005 at 07:12 PM
Those two points I did find to be quite true to me as well.

I do understand where he's coming from with this cultural stuff - there is a strong argument to be said in globalization diluting certain cultures. I think there's an inevitable shift in the genetic pool towards greater mixing... whether this actually causes cultures becoming 'lost' is, in my opinion, not necessarily going to happen (maybe there's some correlation, but I think proving cause will be difficult).

In any case, he's an interesting guy.

Want to comment with Tabulas?. Please login.

ghost_tree (guest)

Comment posted on May 30th, 2005 at 07:25 PM
The assumption that internalization leads to dilution of certain cultures and degeneration is rather pessimistic. It could go the other way and bring forth enlightenment. Compare the rich multi-cultural attitude of Canada and USA and how it fosters an open mind as opposed to lets say North Korea.

And really, I'm still not too sure of the value of preserving cultures. Look at the fight to preserve aboriginal tribes all over the world (an extreme example, yes). Why do we do it? Instead of helping them move on with the rest of the world, we preserve them and study them like zoo animals.
Comment posted on May 30th, 2005 at 07:57 PM
"<em>The assumption that internalization leads to dilution of certain cultures and degeneration is rather pessimistic.</em>"

"<em>Compare the rich multi-cultural attitude of Canada and USA and how it fosters an open mind as opposed to lets say North Korea..</em>"

I agree with you on both points, but I think there's always been a give-and-take for generational Americans ... I think one of the "costs" of globalization is simply the fact that we're growing more alike on a socioeconomic level. Like you allude above, I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing... but some people do, and I'm not going to say that they're wrong.

Ultimately I think that the way one values culture (i.e. is it better to have a higher standard of living vs. living in a unique culture) is going to determine the viewpoint that you have in regards to globalization and the effect on "culture dilution."

I'm not North Korea apologist, but I remember reading somewhere (some propaganda crap from their website, probably) where instead of focusing on the benefits that SK has reaped from globalization (higher standard of living, more educated masses), NK's propaganda machine would say that globalization is evil, not because of the gains made there, but because SK had become <em>environmentally dirty</em>. Nothing was as great as NK's "pristine" sanctuaries which paid tribute to the great Chosun past (I'm paraphrasing here).

This is obviously a ludicrous argument, but there are some people that I bet would buy this argument (Vikernes included) because of the different way they weight "progress."
Comment posted on May 30th, 2005 at 04:27 PM
More psuedo-intellectual, pretentious tripe from an 'artist.'