I found on nearly every page of the manifesto evidence of profound moral deformity.
www.theatlantic.com
Nowhere in that article does the author acknowledge the existence of essentially identical manifestos by other killers who echo the same rhetoric and link to the same sites. Their are multiple examples to choose from, but he goes for the Unabomber - a killer who was caught over a quarter century ago, and whose crimes bear absolutely no resemblance to this spate of mass shootings, other then the existence of a manifesto? Why talk about Kaczinski, but not so much as mention Crusius or Earnest or Roof or Breivik?
"Reading this manifesto is unlikely to convert anyone to its cause. The experience would be uncomfortable and unpleasant for anyone but a hardened, violent racist."
Could say exactly the same about Tarrant's manifesto (titled "The Great Replacement"). Ask the Buffalo shooter if that document's incoherent ramblings (1/4 of the Buffalo killer's manifesto was a direct copy and paste) could "convert anyone to its cause." Here's what he says:
Tarrant’s live-streamed attack, Gendron’s document states, “started everything you see here.”
“Brenton started my real research into the problems with immigration and foreigners in our White lands, without his live-stream I would likely have no idea about the real problems the West is facing,” it continues.
So much for "unlikely to convert anyone to its cause", eh?
??