Norwegian premier Jens Stoltenberg had to admit that since World War II the country has not faced a disaster comparable to what it recently had to endure. The nightmarish shooting spree at a youth camp of Norway's ruling party took the lives of tens of young people, and the total death toll from the Oslo blast and the random killings at the camp reached 76.

The name of the perpetrator, Anders Behring Breivik, is topping media headlines across the world. In fact, this might have been a part of his plan – at least, attackers who staged similar massacres in the US, Great Britain or even the generally trouble-free Finland typically sought this ill kind of fame.

In Breivik's own description, the attack was ruthless yet warranted. His Twitter account contains only one passage – a quote from John Stewart Mill saying that “One person with a belief is equal to the force of 100 000 who have only interests”. The beliefs of the 32-year-old man with the appearance of a stereotypical Scandinavian were laid out in a 1,500-page "manifesto" recently published on-line and titled “2083: A European Declaration of Independence”, in which he represents himself as an opponent of multiculturalism and Marxism and calls for the establishment of a pan-European society based on traditional values. Reportedly, Breivik maintained no direct links with any radical right groups, but placed numerous posts on anti-Islamic Internet sites where he slammed the Islamization of Europe and espoused the fundamental transformation of the Norwegian society. Part of the story is that the Norwegian killer evidently admired crusaders and Knights Templars. Templars in today's world are a mere masonic order, Breivik also being known as a member of an Oslo masonic lodge.

In line with the “Better late than never” wisdom, Norway is hurriedly rethinking its approach to security. The country is reverting to border control in dealing with the Schengen Area, prompting speculations that the terrorist acts are attributable to an international network rather than to just one person, and implementing other, so far unannounced, security measures.

Premier Jens Stoltenberg issued a televised address pledging even greater democracy and openness of the Norwegian society in response to the twin terrorist attack. "You will not destroy us. You will not destroy our democracy or our ideals for a better world," said Stoltenberg. By the way, he was absent from the government building hit by the blast and stayed for a day at a secret safe location. It took Stoltenberg – as well as Norway's royal family – a whole day to offer condolences to the nation.

The state machinery's reaction in Norway seems chronically slow. The Utoya Island massacre went on for over an hour while the police received phone calls from terrified teenagers, checked what was happening, forwarded the information along the chain of command and finally bothered to intervene. The death toll could be even higher but, exposing their own lives to risk, locals on motorboats took to helping the people trapped on the island escape.

«You will not destroy us», said the premier talking about the response, but the meaning of the promised “greater democracy” remained cryptic. Isn't the proliferation in Europe of the so-called populist parties energized by outrage over the continent's progressing Islamization a popular response? Parties with anti-Muslim agendas are gaining ever greater support in the Netherlands, Austria, and France. Germany's recently established Freedom Party is a phenomenon reflecting the same tendency, as are anti-Muslim rallies across Europe, bans on mosque construction and Muslim veils, etc. Regardless of the perceptions within the European political class, the above clearly are forms of the popular response.

Governments in all parts of the world tend to be unreceptive to the  change. It takes time before they start sealing off national borders to prevent the whole Africa from relocating to Europe or, as did German chancellor A. Merkel, reluctantly admit the collapse of multiculturalism.

Lenin's outline of a pre-revolutionary situation included two key factors: the ruling class cannot carry on with the old mode of governance and the social lows do not want to carry on with the old socioeconomic order. The scheme appears fully applicable in the case of today's Europe.

It will be ages before the populist parties in Europe put on enough weight to accordingly tailor national legislations, but desperate loners ready to act are already moving to the front stage. It is scary that for a lot of people Breivik can eventually become a hero as a crusader who sacrificed his life to the cause of fighting against the Muslim occupation and that his followers can start serially launching terrorist attacks.

Europe may be preaching tolerance, but chances are its population's grievances are about to become overwhelming. If this is the case, the establishment's push for multiculturalism can easily echo with an anti-Muslim brand of terrorism. The answer to the inescapable question about responsibility is likely to be simple, and it may be a good idea for European governments to start reigning in the political elites' aspirations before fighting erupts in the streets and Europe's populism takes a shape of downright fascism…