To apply this phenomena into ethically philosophical aspects, other than Utilitarianism, Kantianism created by Immanuel Kant, is another perspective to be considered as well. The major points being discussed in this journal are the motivations leading Anders Breivik to have the intention he has claimed, leading him to embark on the massacre, a universal law of Nature and the history of Western Europe.
As for motivations, the first idea is the multiculturalism, Islam threatens the survival of Europe of uncontrolled immigration, the Muslims, which he believes are conquering Europe. The second is the idea of the Labor Party, which he believes has failed the country and the people. To these theories, there are differences of internal and external motivations along the line. For the first internal motivation, according to court officials, Breivik said that “he was trying to save Norway and Western Europe from cultural Marxism and a Muslim takeover” [1]. Basically, his paranoia grew about Islam. Though, the percent of Islam population in Norway is estimated only 1.8% of the total population [2]. Still, He believes himself to fight a one-man war against the roots of evil that he identifies with the internal enemy of Marxism and multiculturalism and the external enemy of Islam. Another internal motivation, few years before, Breivik perceives that Europe is only for the Caucasians. It can only be perfect and conservative to have only Caucasians. Thus, he has the idea that one of the elements making Europe imperfect is the Muslims who to him, seem to have been deteriorating the culture, tradition, and ways of life in Europe. Therefore, he has these thoughts that there is a need to handle this imperfection and have people noticed on this issue. Thus, he plans to kill people to get the public’s attention, and have people being aware of Islamic in Europe, relating to the fact