On May 17, a young man, whom no one seemed to actually know, died in the explosion of a massive bomb outside a California IVF clinic in what authorities describe as an a deliberate act of terrorism. A manifesto that he left behind suggests that he intended to take his own life, and indeed that he believed that his own life and the lives of everyone else were in some way “destructive.” It is logical that he would attempt to blow up a clinic that participated in the creation of new life.
This story might seem unimportant if the young man had acted on a whim or if he were insane, but the fact is that he acted quite rationally, however misguidedly, following years of ideological training and reflection. Twenty-five-year-old Guy Edward Bartkus was not insane; if anything, he was too rational, too consumed by ideas, too disconnected from society and from his physical nature. Like Dostoevsky’s Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment, Bartkus was apparently isolated and obsessed by ideology, in his case by pro-mortalist ideas — the belief, according to NewsNation, that “it’s better to die than to continue existing and that it’s wrong to bring new sentient life into the world.”
Bartkus’s “crime” was that he was so overwhelmed by the sense that human beings in general, and himself in particular, are a damaging to existence that new birth needs to be stopped and existing humans eliminated. His “punishment” was the self-inflected death via an explosive device so powerful that his body parts were scattered on the street far from where the bomb was set off.
If the Bartkus case were an isolated incident, there would be little more to say. The problem is that it was not. Bartkus’s female friend, Sophie Tinney, was killed, reportedly at her own request, back in April, and the death may have spurred Bartkus’s plan of action. Bartkus is also said to have been in touch with and written on internet sites devoted to the same anti-life propositions.
At first blush, some readers may connect Bartkus’s attack on a fertility clinic with what they view as “similar” attacks by pro-lifers on abortion facilities. No comparison could be more inappropriate. Bartkus’s motives and those of the anti-life websites he seems to have visited are the opposite of pro-life groups, who wish to preserve life instead of destroying it.
It’s important to understand just how radical today’s anti-life movement has become. According to fastslang.com,
at its core, Anti Life is a rejection of life itself. Its adherents believe that existence is inherently painful and pointless, and that the only way to escape this suffering is through self-destruction. They see death not as an end, but as a release from the chains of existence, and actively seek out ways to hasten their own demise.
Anti-lifers are by nature nihilistic and often engage in violence, sabotage, or terrorism, including anti-government and anti-authority actions similar to what Bartkus engaged in. According to reports, “despite its extremist views, Anti Life has attracted a growing number of followers in recent years. Some see it as a way to rebel against a society they feel has failed them, while others are drawn to its nihilistic and anarchic worldview.”
Just how many hardcore adherents there are is difficult to know, but according to Victor Davis Hansen, as many as one third of Americans may be termed “alienated”:
The American stranger embraces a pessimistic view of this country, rather than the therapeutic view shared by most Americans. Given the nation’s cultural and financial profligacy, he assumes things are going to get worse. Or at least he accepts that they cannot go on as they are. The medicine (that will fall on him to administer) will be as catastrophic as the lethal disease (which he thinks was caused mostly by others).
As Hansen stresses, the anti-lifer is nihilistic, cynical, and prone to violence or sympathy with violence. Bartkus’s manifesto along with his scattered online writings suggest he was engaged in a “war with pro-lifers.” Bartkus’s website revealed a “hatred of religion” and of life in general. Newspaper reports quote Bartkus as writing that “life can only continue as long as people hold the delusional belief that it is not a zero sum game causing senseless torture, and messes it can never, or only partially, clean up.” He stated, “I think we need a war against pro-lifers” and added, “It is clear at this point that these people aren’t only stupid, they simply do not care about the harm they are perpetuating by being willing agents for a DNA molecule.” Bartkus also expressed his admiration for Sandy Hook Elementary School killer Adam Lanza.
The case of Guy Bartkus is shocking in and of itself, but far worse is the fact that millions of others must hold equally radical ideations and that more than one hundred million others in the USA alone share similar if not so extreme views. We live in a country filled with moral confusion and infected by radical ideology — a country filled with Raskolnikovs who deny the beauty of life and the life-giving virtue of our civilization.
The anti-life movement, in the broad sense of the word, is neither small in number nor recent. It has been a force in American life at least since the 1960s and it will continue to be so for decades to come. We cannot wave a magic wand and convert young men and women like Guy Bartkus to the pro-life position, but we can continue to live in a hopeful manner and to express our beliefs unequivocally. The Bartkus case is an indicator of how far radical ideology can drive a human being into destructive action. For that reason, we must be all the more determined in our defense of life.
Jeffrey Folks is the author of many books and articles on American culture including Heartland of the Imagination (2011).
Pexels.
Jesus Christ is King
Comments are closed.