Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:53:35.974Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Who or What to Blame

Competing Interpretations of the Norwegian Terrorist Attack

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 October 2014

Thomas Hylland Eriksen
Thomas Hylland Eriksen*
Affiliation:
University of Oslo, Norway [[email protected]].
Get access

Abstract

The terrorist attack in Norway on 22 July 2011, carried out by a right-wing extremist, was a shocking event, leaving 77 dead and dozens seriously wounded. It soon gave rise to a range of interpretations and explanations as to the causes and implications of the attack. Engaging with classical anthropological and more recent sociological literature on trust and blame, the article shows that there was no hegemonic narrative or explanation of the attack, and similarly no broad agreement over the steps to be taken in order to reduce the chances of future attacks. Six different attempts to account for the terrorist attack are described, but only two correctly identify demographic change, migration and the rise of xenophobic politics as the underlying causes of the terrorist attack. This suggests that the high level of trust characteristic of Norwegian society is likely to be reduced as a result of accelerating change and accompanying social fragmentation.

Résumé

L’attentat terroriste réalisé en Norvège le 22 juillet 2011 par un partisan de l’extrême droite a constitué un évenement particulièrement choquant. De nombreuses interprétations et explications ont cherché à rendre compte des causes et implications d’une attaque à l’origine de 77 morts et de dizaines de blessés sérieux. A partir d’un dialogue avec l’anthropologie classique mais également des travaux sociologiques plus récents consacrés à la confiance et à la culpabilité, cet article montre qu’il n’y pas eu un récit ou une explication majoritairement accepté de l’attaque, tout comme il n’y a pas eu d’accord général sur les mesures à prendre afin de limiter les risques de futures attaques. Sur les six tentatives d’explications recensées, seules deux identifient correctement le changement démographique, les mouvements migratoires et l’émergence des politiques xenophobes comme des causes sous-jacentes de l’attaque terroriste. Ceci suggère que l’augmentation du changement sociale comme de la fragmentation sociale qui l’accompagne contribue à réduire le niveau jusqu’alors élevé de confiance caractéristique de la société norvégienne.

Zusammenfassung

Der Terroranschlag, der am 22. Juli 2011 in Norwegen von einem Mitläufer rechtsextremer Gruppen verübt wurde, war ein schockierendes Ereignis, das sehr rasch zu einer steigenden Anzahl von Interpretationen und Erklärungen der Gründe und Konsequenzen führte und mehrere Dutzend Verletzte forderte, sowie 77 Personen das Leben kostete. Aufbauend auf klassischer anthropologischer und neuerer soziologischer Literatur zum Thema Vertrauen und Schuld, verdeutlicht der Beitrag, dass es weder zu einer allgemein anerkannten Darstellung oder Erklärung des Anschlags noch zu einer Übereinkunft bezüglich der zu ergreifenden Maßnahmen gekommen ist, um das Risiko neuer Anschläge zu verhindern. Sechs verschiedene Interpretationsansätze werden beschrieben, wobei nur zwei den demographischen Wandel, die Migration und die Entstehung xenophober Politiken eindeutig als Ursache für die Anschläge identifizieren. Dies deutet daraufhin, dass der hohe Grad an Vertrauen, charakteristisch für die norwegische Gesellschaft, wahrscheinlich aufgrund der zunehmenden sozialen Veränderungen und Fragmentierungen abnimmt.

Keywords

TrustBlameSocial changeCohesionTerrorismConfianceCulpabilitéChangement socialCohésionTerrorismeVertrauenSchuldSozialer WandelKohäsionTerrorismus
Type
Exceptional Cases
Information
European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie , Volume 55 , Issue 2 , August 2014 , pp. 275 - 294
Copyright
Copyright © A.E.S. 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aamnes, Frida, 2014. Personal communication.Google Scholar
Aftenposten, , 2013. “Malplassert snillisme om 22. Juli-rapporten” [Misplaced kindness about the 22 July report], Aftenposten, 16 August 2013.Google Scholar
Andersson, Mette, 2012. “The debate about multicultural Norway before and after 22 July 2011”, Identities, 19 (4): 418-427.Google Scholar
Bangstad, Sindre, 2011. “Islamofobi, rasisme og religionskritikk” [Islamophobia, racism and criticism of religion], Kirke og kultur, 4: 247-259.Google Scholar
Bangstad, Sindre, 2014. Anders Breivik and the Rise of Islamophobia (London, Zed).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauman, Zygmunt, 1999. Globalization—The Human Consequences (New York, Columbia University Press).Google Scholar
Bauman, Zygmunt, 2000. Liquid Modernity (Cambridge, Polity).Google Scholar
Boltanski, Luc and Thévenot, Laurent, 2006 [1991]. On Justification: Economies of Worth, trans. Catherine Porter (Princeton, Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Borchgrevink, Aage S., 2012. En norsk tragedie: Anders Behring Breivik og veiene til Utøya [A Norwegian tragedy: Anders Behring Breivik and the roads to Utøya] (Oslo, Gyldendal).Google Scholar
Douglas, Mary, 1992. Risk and Blame: Essays in Cultural Theory (London, Routledge).Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald, 2000. Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Eide, Elisabeth, Kjølstad, Maria and Naper, Anja, 2013. “After the 22 July Terror in Norway: Media Debates on Freedom of Expression and Multiculturalism”, Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 3 (4): 187-196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eriksen, Thomas Hylland, 2011. “A Darker Shade of Pale: Cultural Intimacy in an Age of Terrorism, Anthropology Today, 27 (5): 1-2.Google Scholar
Eriksen, Thomas Hylland, in press. “Nation and Scale: A Case from Norway”, in forthcoming volume edited by Gingrich Andre and Ulf Hannerz.Google Scholar
Evans-Pritchard, Edward E., 1983 [1937]. Witchcraft, Magic and Oracles among the Azande, Gillies Eva, ed. (Oxford, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Fukuyama, Francis, 1995. Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity (London, Penguin).Google Scholar
Gellner, Ernest, 1988. “Trust, Cohesion, and the Social Order”, in Diego, Gambetta, ed., Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations (Oxford, Blackwell: 142-157).Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony, 1990. The Consequences of Modernity (Cambridge, Polity).Google Scholar
Goodhart, David, 2004. “Too Diverse?” Prospect, 95: 30-37.Google Scholar
Gullestad, Marianne, 2006. Plausible Prejudice: Everyday Experiences and Social Images of Nation, Culture and Race (Oslo, Universitetsforlaget).Google Scholar
Hervik, Peter and Meret, Susi, 2013. “Erostratus Unbound: Norway’s 22/7 Converging Frames of War”, Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 3 (4): 179-186.Google Scholar
IMDI, 2012. Integreringsbarometeret 2012 [The integration barometer 2012] (Oslo, IMDI). Downloaded on 15 July 2014 fromhttp://www.imdi.no/Documents/Rapporter/Integreringsbarometeret_2012.pdf.Google Scholar
Kohn, Marek, 2008. Trust: Self-Interest and the Common Good (Oxford, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Kymlicka, Will, 1988. “Liberalism and communitarianism”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 18 (2): 181-204.Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas, 1979. Trust and Power: Two Works by Niklas Luhmann (Chichester, Wiley).Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas, 1988. “Familiarity, Confidence, Trust: Problems and Alternatives”, in Gambetta Diego, ed., Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations (Oxford: Blackwell, 94-108).Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair, 1981. After Virtue (Bristol, Bristol Classical Press).Google Scholar
Misztal, Barbara A., 1996. Trust in Modern Societies (Cambridge, Polity).Google Scholar
Moene, Karl-Ove, 2013. Ulikhetens og likhetens likevekt [The Equilibrium of Inequality and Equality], Tidsskrift for velferdsforskning, 2: 96-106.Google Scholar
Möllering, Guido, 2001. “The Nature of Trust: From Georg Simmel to a Theory of Expectation, Interpretation and Suspension”, Sociology, 35 (2): 403-420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadel, Siegfried, 1952. Witchcraft in Four African Societies: An Essay in Comparison, American Anthropologist, 54 (1): 18-29.Google Scholar
NORSTAT, 2011. “Islam er en trussel mot norsk kultur” [Islam is a Threat against Norwegian Culture]. Survey accessed athttp://www.nrk.no/norge/ser-pa-islam-som-en-trussel-1.7847186 on 15 July 2014.Google Scholar
NOU, 2012. Rapport fra 22. juli-kommisjonen [Report from the 22 July Commission], Government of Norway, White paper.Google Scholar
Ridley, Matt, 1996. The Origins of Virtue (London, Viking).Google Scholar
Rothstein, Bo, 2000. Trust, Social Dilemmas, and Collective Memories: On the Rise and Decline of the Swedish Model, Journal of Theoretical Politics 12: 477-499.Google Scholar
Rothstein, Bo and Uslaner, Eric M., 2005. “All for All: Equality, Corruption, and Social Trust, World Politics, 58: 41-72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrady, Nicholas, 2009. The Last Day: Wrath, Ruin, and Reason in the Great Lisbon Earthquake of 1755 (London, Penguin).Google Scholar
Simmel, Georg, 1990 [1900]. The Philosophy of Money (London, Routledge).Google Scholar
Skirbekk, Helge and Grimen, Harald, eds., 2012. Tillit i Norge [Trust in Norway] (Oslo, Res Publica).Google Scholar
Standing, Guy, 2011. The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class (London, Bloomsbury Academic).Google Scholar
Strand, Nina, 2014. Partisekretærens ukjente 22. juli-historie. [The Party Secretary’s unknown 22 July story], Tidsskrift for norsk psykologforening, 51 (7): 546-558.Google Scholar
Strømmen, Øyvind, 2011. Det mørke nettet: Om høyreekstremisme, kontrajihadisme og terror i Europa [The Dark Web: On Right-Wing Extremism, Counterjihadism and Terror in Europe] (Oslo, Cappelen Damm).Google Scholar
Titley, Gavan, 2013. “They Called a War, and Someone Came: The communicative Politics of Breivik’s Ideoscape”, Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 3 (4): 216-224.Google Scholar
Uslaner, Eric M., 2004. Corruption, Inequality, and the Rule of Law (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Ye’or, Bat, 2005. Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis (Cranbury, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press).Google Scholar