Chapter Ten in Free Speech Under Attack is ‘China’s Sinister Influence’ by Robert Stanmore. In this essay, Stanmore describes the Chinese influence on free speech suppression in Australia and New Zealand. China is even worse than Islam, in Stanmore’s estimation. China has the money to buy off the Western free press. It has already bought the New Zealand National Party.
Stanmore recounts how China uses their network of Confucius Institutes to influence university culture in China’s favour. They also use a scheme called the Confucius Classroom Program to bring propaganda to primary and secondary students. New Zealand is in a dangerous situation because both National and Labour are beholden to China, although National more so.
Chapter Eleven is ‘”De-platforming” speakers’ by Tim Wikiriwhi. He defines deplatforming as when a speaker is prevented from using a platform because those in authority don’t want to let that speaker expound their views. Wikiriwhi recounts how Bruce Moon, Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern were deplatformed by authoritarian leftists afraid of criticism of their immigration policy.
Wikiriwhi quite rightly points out that censorship achieves little but introduce darkness and ignorance to a political discussion. He also, quite rightly, draws attention to the immense scale of Muslim rape gangs in the Western World, an issue that should be discussed. The essay ends with an appeal to the fundamental value of free speech and how governments should not interfere with what the people say or hear.
Chapter Twelve is ‘The Thug’s Veto’ by Peter Cresswell. This is easily the shortest essay in this book, at only four pages. Cresswell defines the Thug’s Veto as when people use the threat of violence or chaos to get an event they disapprove of shut down. This is a small part of what is more generally known as cancel culture.
Cresswell here points out that laws against “hate speech” are tantamount to laws against criticising evil. Moreover, it’s apparent from the beginning that such laws will not be applied evenly. Left-wingers will escape censure for levels of hate that right-wingers will be hammered for. Those pushing for hate speech laws are fighting for irrationality, and are against reason.
Chapter Seven in Free Speech Under Attack is ‘Banning a Political Pamphlet’ by Tim Wikiriwhi. This is a polemic against Andrew Little’s efforts to introduce hate speech legislation and to ban the 1Law4All pamphlet about the Treaty of Waitangi. Here, Wikiriwhi – himself Maori – supports the sentiments of the pamphlet by agreeing that the British settlement of New Zealand was a net positive for the Maori people.
This essay is quality in its invective, describing Peter Dunne as an “obsolete politician” and making use of the adjective “ham-fisted”. It demolishes the social justice warrior case that British colonisation lowered the quality of life in New Zealand, and makes an impassioned case for the value of free speech. The SJWs won’t be able to scream “Racist!” at Wikiriwhi, so they will likely ignore him.
The Treaty of Waitangi and British colonisation, bringing the advantages and restraints of civilised government to New Zealand for the first time, were the best things that ever happened to New Zealand and the Maoris benefitted enormously from them.
Chapter Eight is ‘Islam and Free Speech’ by Robert Stanmore. This essay discusses the various measures taken by Muslims to shut down free speech in the guise of preventing blasphemy. Stanmore recounts Muslim attacks against free speech in several Western nations, whether by using violence, intimidation or the law. He (correctly) points out that the Koran encourages Muslims to kill non-believers.
Stanmore encourages us here to learn from the example of Britain and Canada, where Muslims are numerous enough to influence the law by threat. In the vast majority of cases, Muslim immigrants show no sign of willingness to conform to the expectations of their host nations, and show every sign of willingness to force their hosts to conform. This is a danger we should be extremely wary of.
Chapter Nine continues in a similar vein. This short chapter is called ‘The Fraud of Islamophobia’. Here, Stanmore recounts the multiple admonitions to violence found in the Koran, and how Muslims are reluctant to reject these verses. Disappointingly, he ignores the violence inherent in the Bible, and the murderous way that Christianity itself has spread.
Stanmore even makes the laughable assertion that Christianity is inherently a peaceful religion akin to Buddhism or Hinduism. Despite these errors, he is able to list a number of scriptural horrors within the Koran that suggest Islam is not compatible with a modern Western way of life. A “religious hatred” law is unacceptable.
The term ‘abolitionism’ refers to the political movement that sought to abolish chattel slavery. It was a popular term in the 19th century, when first the British and later the Americans made it illegal to own other people. However, as this essay will examine, the battle against slavery merely shifted to a different front – the metaphysical one.
Controlling slaves physically is a major undertaking. They have to be shackled so as to not escape the plantation, and beaten or whipped so as to not shirk labour. Plantation owners in the antebellum South found themselves spending a great deal of their profits on keeping their slaves in line. Slave rebellions were common.
Eventually, the slave owners realised, it was unnecessary to keep people in chains and shackles when they could simply control their minds and their spirits. Controlling the minds and spirits of the slaves meant that the slave owners controlled all of their actions anyway, without having to physically abuse them and generate resentment or risk rebellion.
The enslavement of the mind and the spirit is linked to the Silver Right and the Golden Right of alt centrism. Simply put, a people cannot be free unless they’re both free to think for themselves and free to reconnect with God. The metaphysical abolitionist demands the removal of any obstacle preventing these two goals from being achieved.
Enslaving the mind, however, is the expertise of the Western ruling class. This they achieve through control of the popular narrative.
Ever since the publication of Edward Bernays’s Propaganda in 1928, the ruling elites have structured the education and media systems to both condition people to feel bad for questioning the popular narrative, and to feel good for enforcing that narrative on those who question it. The end product is a country of willing slaves, as submissive as any other herd animal.
The first step to inducing a population into trusting the mainstream media is to pacify them through the education system. 12 years of schooling is enough to condition most people into believing that questioning the popular narrative is an act of evil, and only by going along with it can happiness be found. It’s a simple matter of punishing those who ask questions and rewarding those who submit.
Controlling the popular narrative through the mainstream media means that Western elites control the permissible boundaries of thought. By normalising certain topics of discussion through repeated media exposure, they abnormalise others. The term ‘Overton window’ refers to that range of political positions that have been thus legitimised.
Any idea expressed in the mainstream media is legitimate; any idea not expressed in the mainstream media is illegitimate. If the elites really don’t like an idea, they simply instruct the talking heads on the television to describe supporters of that idea as ‘conspiracy theorists’. By discouraging unwanted lines of reasoning, the elites can keep people going around in circles, chasing mental phantoms like rats on a wheel.
The results of this widespread brainwashing are easily noted. The ruling elites merely have to broadcast the necessity of something over the television, and the masses will fall unquestioningly in line. If a talking head on the television says that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, the masses will demand his destruction. If the talking head says to wear a mask to prevent coronavirus, the masses obey.
The metaphysical abolitionist opposes all of this. Metaphysical abolitionism demands that people be allowed to think freely. So a metaphysical abolitionist will reject the importance of mainstream schooling, will discourage the consumption of the mass media and will encourage people to consume alternative media of all kinds. Their favourite thing is people getting together, away from normies, to discuss what the truth really is.
However, even if we did manage to break the psychological conditioning that enslaves our minds, there is a greater challenge.
Our minds may have been enslaved for a hundred years, but our spirits have been enslaved for even longer – ever since Christians destroyed the Eleusinian Mysteries in the 4th Century A.D. Since then, we’ve been the slaves of those who would tell us lies about God. The metaphysical abolitionist opposes this and wishes for the spirits of all people to be free.
In the same way that the ruling elites can engender intellectual submission by restricting intellectual expression to a range of harmless ideas, they can engender spiritual submission by restricting spiritual expression to a range of pointless superstitious dogmas. The humiliation engendered by forcing people to worship an idol of Rabbi Yeshua ben Yosef instead of God has the effect of inducing passivity. With spiritual slavery follows slavery of every other kind.
Although humans have been using spiritual sacraments such as cannabis and psilocybin to reconnect with God for thousands of years, their use is mostly illegal in the modern West. The laws prohibiting them are explained to us as laws protecting the people’s mental health, but this is a total lie.
The truth is that cannabis and psilocybin are illegal because they are spiritual sacraments.
All spiritual people know that the truth will set you free, so those who would enslave the spirit must tell lies. Spiritual sacraments such as cannabis and psilocybin teach people the spiritual truths about reality: that consciousness is eternal and that God not only exists but also wishes the best for us. These sacraments have been made illegal so that the common people remain blind to the lies of the elites.
Spiritually speaking, the vast bulk of the population divides neatly into two halves: the slaves who follow whatever mainstream religion is pushed on them as children, and the malcontents who, recognising the mainstream dogma to be lies, reject the question of spirituality entirely. Genuine spiritual seekers – those who reject both the “Christian” label and the “atheist” label – are thus marginalised.
Metaphysical abolitionism demands that the human spirit be as free as the human body. This requires that people have free access to whatever spiritual sacrament they feel will help them reconnect with God. All spiritual sacraments must be legal and readily available: cannabis, psilocybin, LSD, DMT – the lot.
In summary, the metaphysical abolitionist advocates for free speech, free thought and for the annihilation of dogmatic religious strictures. This is to advocate for free minds and free spirits. The abolition of chattel slavery has been achieved already, at least in the West. It’s time to achieve the abolition of a much more insidious form of slavery, that of our minds and spirits.
The next edition of the VJMP Reads column is Free Speech Under Attack. This book is a compilation of essays written by New Zealand authors with an interest in liberty.
The book is published by Tross Publishing, who appear to have an interest in anti-Establishment material (much like VJM Publishing).
The first chapter is ‘The Struggle For Free Speech’ by Jeremy Fisher. Here, Fisher outlines the history of speech suppression efforts since the 13the century. The Church has played a major role, requiring that people apply for a licence to print books. 16th century England restricted the printing of books to a guild, lest the wrong person print some.
Fisher recounts that many American colonies were founded by people who had been persecuted for their opinions in Europe. Suppression of speech was sophisticated, using a system of licences and stamp duties to pre-empt dissent. Political parties used the law to suppress the free expression of their opponents.
The second chapter is ‘Preparing the Ground to destroy Free Speech’, also by Jeremy Fisher. Here Fisher describes the authoritarian mindset of the opponents to free speech. The authorities push political correctness to make people easier to control. Thinking follows speech, so if they ban the speech they ban the thoughts.
Fisher labels political correctness as a form of totalitarianism that must be destroyed. He describes the role that organisations such as the Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Centre and Antifa play in suppressing free speech.
The third chapter is also by Fisher, and is called ‘The Deception of Hate Speech’. The chapter recounts the efforts of organisations like the United Nations and the Organisation of Islamic Co-operation to fight free speech under the guise of fighting xenophobia and hatred. Most of the examples of free speech suppression listed here come from Britain, which, as VJMP has previously argued, is fucked anyway.
Many religious ideologies, in particular Islam, have seized upon the hate speech laws to stifle criticism. Islamists have managed to reinstate blasphemy laws under the guise of hate speech laws. Fisher ends the chapter with the conclusion that the purpose of hate speech laws is to stifle dissent.