Soft Prohibition is Still Prohibition, and It Will Still Fail

The New Zealand Government, in its limitless beneficence, has decided that we innocent Kiwis need to be protected from the insidious horror drug that is tobacco. The means they have chosen to protect us with is by taxing us more when we purchase cigarettes. Speaking honestly, this strategy could be rightly described as soft prohibition – and it’s just as stupid as hard prohibition.

The logic goes like this. A person’s willingness to buy a good such as tobacco is a function of the price of that good. Because tobacco is not considered medicinal, its use is considered to do nothing but cause disease. So, its use costs taxpayer money in the form of healthcare. Therefore, if you increase tobacco taxes, people will use it less and tax money will be saved on dealing with the effects of the diseases tobacco causes.

The fact that this had led to the absurdity of the Government claiming to impoverish tobacco users for their own benefit hasn’t stopped them from raising the taxes anyway.

The rise in tobacco tax has, predictably, led to a spate of robberies of dairies and other places selling tobacco. As Dan McGlashan has previously written for this newspaper, the majority of regular tobacco smokers were already doing it hard, even before the tax increases.

As this column has previously argued, tobacco ought to rightly be seen as a mental health medicine. The main reason it isn’t is because of the total dominance of materialist dogma in medical and scientific circles – the same materialist dogma that has created our prehistoric mental health system.

It doesn’t take a forensic psychology degree to be able to predict that making an expensive drug even more expensive, when many desperate people rely on it to cope with the stresses of the day, is going to lead to robberies and violence.

Ridiculously, if the Police were to apply the same logic to tobacco that they apply to cannabis, they would say that tobacco itself causes crime and that the dairy robberies are evidence that tobacco should be made illegal.

Obviously, alcohol prohibition failed and cannabis prohibition failed. Not only did they fail, but they did so at the cost of many billions of dollars, the destruction of many millions of lives, and the eradication of any faith that the younger generations may ever had had in the competence or good will of the Government or the Police.

So why on Earth would we want to repeat those two catastrophic errors with tobacco?

The most likely answer is that our politicians are as thick as pigshit and are either too stupid to learn anything from history or too arrogant to think that the laws of reality through which history unfolds apply to them.

Increasing the taxes on tobacco, with the intent of gradually making it prohibited, will increase the amount of violence and crime around the substance to a commensurate degree.

Just like prohibition did with alcohol. Just like prohibition does with cannabis. It will fail, just like prohibition always has done and always will do, because human nature will never concede that a bunch of old control freaks in Wellington have the right to prohibit the people from the free use of medicinal plants.

This won’t stop them from trying, of course. The politicians know that they are not affected by the consequences of the laws they pass. Thus, they know that it won’t be them getting robbed and slashed with machetes – they get their six-figure MP’s salary no matter what.

The real concern is what actions might be taken by those who are getting robbed. Already, dairy owners know that they are widely perceived as a soft target thanks to both not being armed and stocking large amounts of valuable tobacco.

The usual response to this degree of risk of violent robbery is for the dairy owners to start keeping firearms behind the counter.

Politicians in New Zealand don’t have the courage to admit that the Drug War they have conducted against the New Zealand people for 40 years has failed, so we know they will not have the courage to admit that their attempt to make tobacco illegal is also failing.

Probably they will keep raising the taxes until someone gets shot dead. After all, it’s neither them nor their families suffering.

Understanding New Zealand: Voting Patterns of Age

The electoral divide between Labour and National is usually characterised as one of wealth, and to a major extent it is. But it is also about age to a major extent, and some of the correlations between age and party allegiance are surprisingly strong.

The correlation between being in the 50-64 age group and voting for National in 2014 was a very strong 0.74. The correlation between being in this age group and voting Labour in 2014, by contrast, was also very strong but negative, at -0.68.

These correlations are especially strong if they are compared with the respective ones for the 30-49 age group. This age group is almost entirely indifferent to the mainstream parties. The correlation between being aged 30-49 and voting National in 2014 was 0.19, and for voting Labour in 2014 it was -0.04.

Really old people like to vote Conservative more than anything else. The correlation between being aged 65+ and voting Conservative in 2014 was 0.71. Even the correlation between being aged 65+ and voting National was weaker, at 0.65.

Some might be surprised to see that the correlation between being aged 65+ and voting New Zealand First was not near as strong – only 0.10. However, as mentioned in the section about the party, the association between crotchety old pensioners and New Zealand First support is mostly a fabrication.

Indeed, at the other end of the age range, support for New Zealand First was about the same level – the correlation between being aged 15-19 and voting New Zealand First in 2014 was 0.05. This suggests that the early signs of Generation Z being a conservative throwback to a previous mentality may well be replicated in New Zealand.

Young people, for their part, prefer to vote Green more than anything else. The correlation between being aged 15-19 and voting Green in 2014 was 0.22, and between being aged 20-29 and voting Green in 2014 it was 0.56.

The big two parties appear to have very little support among young people in general. The correlation between being aged 20-29 and voting National in 2014 was -0.34, and with voting Labour it was only 0.32. Worryingly for them, the correlation between being aged 20-29 and voting for a party as unlike them as ACT was 0.25.

Taking this into account alongside the strong correlation between being young and voting Green, it appears that the big two parties are fated to fall into ever weaker positions as the Greens absorb the discontents from Labour, ACT absorbs the discontents from National and New Zealand First absorbs the discontents from the entire system.

The very youngest two age brackets obviously does not tell us about the voting preferences of those aged under 15, but they do tell us about the voting preferences of their parents and therefore gives us a clue as to what influences will be at work on the next generation.

In particular, we can see the influence that the higher birth rate of Maoris has. All of the parties generally associated with a high degree of Maori support (Maori Party, Internet MANA, New Zealand First, Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party and Labour) had correlations of at least 0.45 with both of the age groups of 0-4 and 5-14 years of age.

The Maori Party and the ALCP were the strongest of these, New Zealand First and Labour were the weakest, and Internet MANA was in between.

The degree of disenfranchisement that the young suffer can be seen from the fact that there is a very strong correlation of 0.77 between median age and turnout rate in the 2014 General Election. This correlation is so strong that it speaks of a widespread perception among the young that there really is no point in voting on account of that the entire system is set up specifically to serve people other than them.

The strongest negative correlation between median age and voting for any party in 2014 was with the Labour Party, which was -0.70. The reflection of this was that the strongest positive correlation was with the National Party, which was a whopping 0.81.

The only other party that generally appealed to old people was the Conservatives. The correlation between voting for them in 2014 and median age was 0.75.

Definitively underlining the fact that the stereotype of creeping swarms of pensioners voting New Zealand First every three years is totally false, the correlation between voting New Zealand First in 2014 and median age was actually negative (although not significant) at -0.08.

The Greens, despite that they are the mutual nemesis of the New Zealand First Party, appeal to a similar average age of voter. The correlation between voting Green in 2014 and median age was -0.17.

Predictably, there were significant negative correlations between median age and voting for any of the minor Maori-heavy parties. These were Maori Party (-0.66), Internet MANA (-0.65) and ALCP (-0.55).

*

This article is an excerpt from Understanding New Zealand, by Dan McGlashan, published by VJM Publishing in the winter of 2017.

Understanding New Zealand: Demographics of Men and Women

There has been plenty of talk about the “gender gap”, which is the fact that the average Kiwi woman earns less per hour of labour than the average Kiwi man. This article looks into why this might have come about.

The correlation between being male and median personal income was on the border of statistical significance, at 0.23. That tells us that the average Kiwi male controls an income that is a fair bit larger than what the average Kiwi female controls. Looking at this on a more granular level, we can understand why.

There is very little difference between men and women when it comes to the plum jobs. The correlation between being male and having a personal income between $100-150K was 0.01 and with having a personal income of $150K+ it was 0.03.

So being a male and working in a plum job is essentially uncorrelated. However, as one goes down the income bands, it is possible to see that there are more men in middle income jobs than women, and more women in lower income jobs than men.

The strength of the correlation with being male peaks at $50-60K, where it is 0.22. A person in this income band is likely earning between $25 and $30 per hour, or at least 50 hours a week, so this is where a solid part of the full-time work force is cranking away.

As one goes even further down the income bands, however, we can see that an ever higher proportion of the workers are women. In the $30-35K income band there is a perfect absence of correlation with regard to male or female, but every income band lower than this has a positive correlation with being female.

The most significant is having a loss or no income, which has a correlation of 0.27 with being female.

By far the heaviest contributor to the fact that men occupy disproportionately more middle income bands than women is the moderately significant correlation between being male and working full-time (0.48), and the moderately significant negative correlation between being male and being unemployed (-0.48).

After all, it’s hardly suprising that a man’s paycheck is 20% bigger if he also works 20% more hours. In fact, the gap perhaps ought to be even larger than this because men work the vast majority of overtime hours.

There is no significant correlation between being male and working for a wage or salary – this was 0.11. There were, however, significant correlations between being self-employed and male (0.40) and being self-employed with employees and male (0.50).

This tells us that a disproportionate amount of the risk in the area of employment is borne by men. Women are more likely to take a safe job that had slim prospects of both advancing and of being fired or made redundant, whereas men were more likely to take entrepreneurial risks or to take on jobs in highly competitive (and highly rewarding) environment.

For example, there were significant correlations between being female and working in the healthcare and social assistance industry (0.43) and the education and training industry (0.32), and a near significant one between being female and working in administrative or support services (0.17).

In all three of these industries it is common to have a regular, secure 9 to 5 job.

On the other side of the coin, there were significant correlations between being male and working in the agriculture, forestry and fishing industry (0.45), the hospitality industry (0.28), the construction industry (0.25) and the rental, hiring and real estate services industry (0.24).

All of those industries are characterised by it being common for either workers to have the option of working longer hours or being more or less forced into it. The hospitality and rental, hiring and real estate industries in particular make it easy for anyone wanting to work 60+ hours a week to do so.

So talk of a “gender gap” that evinces an instituional and endemic underpayment of women across the nation is hyperbole. The best jobs are split evenly between men and women and, below that, men earn more because they choose to work themselves to death at a much higher rate.

Somewhat surprisingly, there is a correlation of 0.42 with being male and living on the South Island. That might seem very strange until one takes into account the vastly accelerated death rate of Maori and Pacific Islander males, especially past age 50 or so. Because most of these men live on the North Island, their early deaths leave a significant imbalance of women among the remaining communities.

Other facets of this same phenomenon can be observed in the significant correlation between being female and being Maori (0.32). Obviously, as males and females are born at roughly the same rate, much of this correlation has to be explained by a greater death rate among Maori men.

Some may be interested to observe that there were significant correlations between being female and belonging to a number of religious traditions generally associated with disadvantaged people. In particular, these were significant correlations between being female and following any of Mormonism, Ratana, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Maori Christian, Pentecostalism or Christian not further defined.

The main reason for this is the tendency for women to turn to religion or spirituality after a significant male other has left their lives, particularly in the case of Maori women.

*

This article is an excerpt from Understanding New Zealand, by Dan McGlashan, published by VJM Publishing in the winter of 2017.

Did Richie McCaw Destroy International Rugby?

The Sydney Bledisloe Cup match of 2000 was a high water mark in international rugby. In front of 109,000 people, the world champion Australia team and the desperate, wounded All Blacks fought to the death like Ali and Frazier. Many who saw it said at the time it was the most extraordinary rugby match ever played, with an iconic match-winning performance from none other than Jonah Lomu.

The All Blacks prevailed on that night, 39-35, but the Wallabies would win by one point three weeks later to retain the Bledisloe Cup, and at the time it seemed like the advent of professional rugby was about to make for a titanic era of contests for this trophy.

Professional rugby seemed like it was going to bring a lot of razzamatazz to the Southern Hemisphere circuit – Super Rugby was also huge that year. The ACT Brumbies topped the table at the end of the pool stages, and ended up losing the final at home against the Canterbury Crusaders by one point.

The next year, 2001, marked the Super Rugby debut, also for the Crusaders, of one Richie Hugh McCaw. As it turned out, McCaw was not so much a rugby player as a genius that played rugby.

He only played eight minutes of Super Rugby that year, but he did play a full NPC season, and was good enough to win selection to the All Blacks’ end of year tour, where he was handed a debut against Ireland, and promptly won Man of the Match.

The next year, 2002, McCaw became a Crusaders regular. In an odd echo of the future, the Crusaders won every single match that year, taking the Super Rugby title undefeated – something never achieved before or since.

2003 might have been the end of the golden summer for Australian rugby. They lost the Bledisloe Cup, but managed to knock the All Blacks out of the World Cup, going on to take an all-conquering England team to extra time in the final.

Come 2017, and Australia has not won the Bledisloe Cup since. Richie McCaw may have retired two years ago, but in the same way that Mansa Musa’s pilgrimage to Mecca depressed the price of gold in the Middle East for decades afterwards, McCaw’s decade of almost total dominance still depresses Australian rugby.

This year’s Super Rugby table makes for confusing reading. The current leaders of the Australian conference, the Brumbies, have fewer tournament points than the current wooden spooners of the New Zealand conference, the Blues.

New Zealand rugby is so dominant that the 4th-ranked Kiwi team, the Highlanders, has only lost three games all season. Despite this, they can’t climb any higher than 4th because the Hurricanes have only lost two, the Chiefs one and the Crusaders zero.

Even worse is the effect this dominance has had on the Internet rhetoric. At the turn of the century, trans-Tasman rugby banter was between equals. In recent years, however, it has taken a darker turn: the prison rape metaphor, once only applied to descriptions of All Blacks matches against the hapless Celts, crept into summaries of Bledisloe matches.

At its nadir, the Internet rhetoric was entirely based on the degree of sexual impotence the Australian players and fans would suffer as a consequence of the losses and for how many years afterwards. The jokes were that the children of Australian players would be too ashamed to admit their paternity to their classmates.

So the question is this: was Richie McCaw so good at rugby that he actually destroyed the international game? Did he set standards so high that all other nations just gave up on hoping to ever match them?

Probably not. After all, Australia made it to the World Cup final in 2015, and they did about as well there as any other side could have hoped to have done – namely, a loss by a two-try margin.

Alexander the Great died at age 33, and within months of the same age Richie McCaw retired from international rugby. The struggle for a successor to Alexander saw his empire shatter into four pieces and then to further disintegrate.

Kieran Read now leads the All Blacks, and his side might play the role of the Seleucid Empire, the early favourites to recreate the total world domination that McCaw once achieved.

However, no order can exist indefinitely, and it is in the nature of peaks to erode into valleys. The standards set by McCaw are unlikely to be maintained for the simple reason that the men tasked with doing so will not possess McCaw’s genius.

This column believes that it is in the Australian nature, despite a decade of denial, to recognise the smell of blood at the first opportunity and to take advantage of it. Therefore, it predicts that the current sorry state of Australian rugby will not last for much longer.

And as long as one side can stand up to the All Blacks the others will always believe themselves to have a hope.

Understanding New Zealand: Internet MANA voters

As the Maori Party split away from Labour, so did the MANA Party split away from the Maori Party, and then it joined up with Kim Dotcom’s Internet Party to become the Internet MANA chimera. But who did Hone Harawira’s machine end up appealing to?

Like the Maori Party, Internet MANA appealed to Maoris. The correlations between voting Internet MANA in 2014 and with both voting Maori Party in 2014 and being Maori were 0.84.

Correspondingly, there are strong correlations between voting Internet MANA in 2014 and voting for all of the Maori-heavy parties in 2014. Between voting Internet MANA in 2014 and voting Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party in 2014 the correlation was 0.76; with voting New Zealand First in 2014 it was 0.44; and with voting Labour in 2014 it was 0.41.

Curiously, Internet MANA voters were exactly as unlikely to have sympathies for National or Conservative as Maori Party voters. As with the Maori Party, the correlation between voting Internet MANA in 2014 and voting National in 2014 was -0.75, and the correlation with voting Conservative in 2014 was -0.64.

Perhaps the major demographic difference between Maori Party voters and Internet MANA ones is that the latter were slightly less Maori and slightly more Pacific Islander and Asian. The correlation between voting Internet MANA in 2014 and being a Pacific Islander was 0.07, and with being Asian it was -0.23 (compared to 0.01 and -0.30 for the correlations between these two groups and voting Maori Party).

In fact, the general demographic trend is that Internet MANA voters, despite being generally disenfranchised, are doing slightly better than Maori Party voters. Correspondingly, the correlation between voting Internet MANA in 2014 and turnout rate in 2014 was, at -0.69, slightly weaker than for the Maori Party (-0.74).

Although most of the demographic distinctions are subtle, one of the clearest is when it comes to education. The correlation between voting Internet MANA in 2014 and having no qualifications was 0.42, which was weaker than the equivalent for the Maori Party. Also, unlike with voting for the Maori Party in 2014, voting for Internet MANA in 2014 had no significant negative correlation with holding either of the two highest academic qualifications.

Further underlining the minor class differences, Internet MANA voters were marginally less likely to be on the unemployment or invalid’s benefits, and marginally more likely to be on the student allowance. Also, they were much less likely to work in manufacturing and slightly less likely to be regular tobacco smokers than Maori Party voters.

They were, however, essentially the same age. The correlation between voting Internet MANA in 2014 and median age was -0.65, making them the smallest smidgen older than Maori Party voters. This underlines the degree to which Internet MANA differentiates itself from the Maori Party primarily through subtle class differences and not age.

Curiously, Internet MANA voters were more likely to be self-employed than Maori Party voters, but were less likely to be self-employed with employees. This might reflect the degree to which Internet MANA voters, or at least a significant cadre of them, are more likely to be immigrants and therefore less likely to be established than Maoris.

It may be that, in so far as Internet MANA appeals to a newer sort of New Zealander, it also appeals to a sort of person who does not have the intergenerational poverty and trauma that many Maoris suffer from. This may explain the small differences in wealth, health and educational outcomes.

*

This article is an excerpt from Understanding New Zealand, by Dan McGlashan, published by VJM Publishing in the winter of 2017.

Understanding New Zealand: Demographics of Employment Status

Knowing about the category of person who is self-employed with employees tells us a lot about the sort of person who has most of the power in New Zealand at the moment.

This sort of person has more power than anyone because they can legally cause more disruption than anyone. No politician cares too much if a single individual threatens to leave the electorate, but if an employer threatens to relocate their company with its 200 jobs then a politician will suddenly care very intently.

Surprisingly, there is no particularly strong difference between those who work for a wage or salary, those who are self-employed, and those who are self-employed with employees when it comes to median personal income.

These three groups have correlations of between 0.54 and 0.41 with median personal income, with the self-employed the strongest and the self-employed with employees the weakest.

However – as this section seeks to illuminate – holding political power is not merely a function of wealth, although wealth is a contributing factor.

There were very strong correlations between being of European descent and both being self-employed (0.58) and being self-employed with employees (0.70). This relates to the point made above about the power in an economy being held by a sort of person who was not necessarily the same as those who made the money.

Pacific Islanders were the least likely to be in either of those two categories. The correlation between being a Pacific Islander and being self-employed was -0.50, and with being self-employed with employees it was -0.61.

Being Maori was also negatively correlated with being in these categories of employment status: -0.44 with being self-employed and -0.36 with being self-employed with employees.

This reflects the fact that Islanders generally have less social capital than Maoris, despite often being better educated, and that Islanders generally have less financial capital than Asians, despite often having moved to New Zealand earlier and being more culturally established.

Anglicans comprise a large proportion of the power elite, as can be seen by the correlations between being Anglican and being self-employed (0.40) and being Anglican and being self-employed with employees (0.58).

This latter correlation is strong enough to tell us that Anglicans have a lot of political power in New Zealand through occupying essential positions in industry.

Other religious orientations with the strongest correlations with being self-employed with employees were Presbytarianism (0.45), having no religion (0.37) and Brethren (0.22).

These four groups: Anglicans, Presbytarians, those from no religious tradition and the Brethren, comprise the true power elite of New Zealand. The reason for this is because it is these people who own everything: generally they are directly descended from early settlers and owners of large farms.

Here it is possible to further illuminate the distinction within the highly-skilled occupations between the managers who run everything and the professionals they depend on to get things done.

Certain religious traditions had positive correlations with working for a wage or salary but negative correlations with being self-employed with employees.

Catholicism was the most notable of these. The correlation between being Catholic and working for a wage or salary was 0.30, with being self-employed it was -0.23 and with being self-employed with employees it was -0.31.

Other religious traditions which had positive or near neutral correlations with working for a wage or salary but negative correlations with being self-employed with employees were Buddhism (0.11 versus -0.24, respectively), Hinduism (-0.03 versus -0.44) and Islam (-0.03 versus -0.49).

Ultimately these statistics reflect how these latter traditions have higher proportions of recent immigrants who, despite often being highly educated and earning good money, have not had the time to establish themselves as part of the power elite. These immigrants often moved to New Zealand because their high skills were needed by the landowners and managers who were more established.

It’s also possible to observe the fault lines of a generational conflict between the Baby Boomers, whose education is patchy, and Generation X and the Millennials, who generally have modern educations but who are yet to dislodge the deeply entrenched Boomers.

The correlation between having a Master’s degree and working for a wage or salary was 0.33, and with being self-employed with employees it was actually negative, at -0.02. This latter correlation is incredible if one also considers that the correlation between having NZQA Level 1 (School Certificate) as one’s highest qualification and being self-employed with employees was 0.22.

Explaining much of this comes down to the fact that establishing oneself as a member of the power elite is more a function of age than of education.

The correlation between median age and being self-employed with employees was a strong 0.71, whereas with working for a wage or salary it was -0.37. This tells us that, over and above just about anything else, the power elite is old, and the people they hire to do their bidding are young.

To take a more granular perspective, the correlation between being aged 65+ and being self-employed with employees was 0.56, which is interesting if one considers that any person in this age bracket can also claim a pension of $350+ per week which is not means tested.

This is not just a function of greed, of course: realistically, many of the people running a company, especially if it’s one they own, cannot simply give up all of their responsibilities at one moment.

Generally they employ the under-50s. The correlation between being in the 20-29 age bracket and working for a wage or salary was 0.37, and between being in the 30-49 age bracket and working for a wage or salary was 0.52.

The power elite is also much more likely to be male than female. The correlation between being male and working for a wage or salary was 0.11, but the correlation between being male and being self-employed with employees was 0.50.

This isn’t simply a matter of male nepotism: the correlation between being male and doing unpaid work in the family business was 0.48. The truth is that it is in the nature of Kiwi men to work, and the vast majority of us would rather work than just sit around or have nothing to do.

The last point about the power elite that might not be well understood is the degree to which it is intergenerational, especially in the case of farming interests.

Some light can be shed on how strong this degree is by consideration of the correlation between working in agriculture, forestry and fishing and doing unpaid work in the family business, which was an extremely strong 0.90.

*

This article is an excerpt from Understanding New Zealand, by Dan McGlashan, published by VJM Publishing in the winter of 2017.

How Individualism Defends the Anglosphere

In the aftermath of the Great Depression, a couple of extremely virulent and aggressive political movements swept the Western world – communism and national socialism – eventually leading to the deaths of some 50 million people. How did the Anglosphere avoid getting sucked up in these murderous, psychopathic insanities?

The soul-grinding deprivation of the Great Depression caused horrific trauma all around the world. Perhaps on account of an absence of historical guidance and precedent, a number of countries voted extremists, demagogues or lunatics into power on the grounds that desperate times called for desperate measures.

But none of the core Anglosphere nations of Britain, America, Canada, Australia or New Zealand came close to voting a totalitarian into power before World War Two, and none of them have since.

As the European Theatre of World War Two dawned, there seemed to be three major forces. The central powers, represented by Germany, Italy, Austria and Romania, were fascist; the eastern powers, represented by Russia, were communist; and the western powers, represented by the British Empire, America, France, Holland and Scandinavia, were liberal democracies.

The liberal democracies won, and won an opportunity to reshape the world in their image in the coming decades – which they mostly seized.

But ninety years after the streets of Europe were once filled with running battles between communists and national socialists, it looks like they’re going back to the same stupidity.

So why didn’t the Anglosphere put a totalitarian in power before World War Two, and why aren’t we going to put one in power in the coming decade, as the inexorable laws of demography push Europe closer to civil war?

There is a different culture in the Anglosphere. Namely: we are not a slave race, and so we do not tremble in worship before power. In fact, almost uniquely in the world (along with Holland and Scandinavia), we openly express contempt for those who wield it.

Because of this, we don’t get swept up in mass movements and personality cults like the Europeans. There is no concept in the Anglosphere of awaiting some great leader to free us from a terrible and unfortunate state of disgrace, such as which put Hitler in power. Neither is there the kind of entrenched, systematic corruption that leads to the mass resentment of the wealthy that puts Marxists in power.

In fact, if anyone stands up with even vaguely Hitler-like rhetoric, that person is immediately shut down for being a crackpot. There’s no way that you can stand on a street corner and rant about Jews without getting jeered at or having garbage thrown at you.

The trajectory of the British Union of Fascists was much different to that of the Nazi Party: “As the party became increasingly radical, however, support declined. The Olympia Rally of 1934, in which a number of anti-Fascist protestors were attacked, isolated the party from much of its following.”

Even at the apogee of British fascism, The Battle of Cable Street, a maximum of 3,000 fascists were met by 20,000 counter-demonstrators. They were even outnumbered two to one by the Metropolitan Police, which made them, at peak strength, orders of magnitude weaker than the Sturmabteilung in Germany.

And no fascist movement in America, Canada, Australia or New Zealand became anywhere near as strong as the BUF.

There seems to be an inherent wisdom in the Anglosphere consciousness that is capable of recognising massively dangerous egos and imposing a kind of order upon them before they become capable of doing too much damage. It is not in our nature to grovel before a big man; our nature is pulling the fingers, flipping the bird, saying “fuck you”.

It seems to be the natural gift of the Anglo people to keep order without the need for totalitarianism – perhaps a function of having the right amount (not too much, not too little) of diversity of thought, much like the Swedes with their lagom or the Dutch with their famous tolerance, care is taken to act with the correct proportionality.

This is probably a combination of the concept of fair play, which prevent anyone from falling too far down, and the concept of the tall poppy syndrome (Swedish: Jantelagen), which prevents anyone from developing a disruptively large ego.

Anglos generally don’t brook shadowy, sinister conspiracies like other Westerners, and are prone to instantly reject ideologies that require that human nature fundamentally be reshaped, believing in almost all cases that such a thing is simply not possible.

This column has long predicted that natural demographic laws will force Europe into a kind of civil war when Muslims in Europe realise they have the numbers to enforce their religious proscriptions on the natives. This will probably lead to the coming to power of another tyrant, because it is the nature of Europeans to swing from one extreme to another.

Whether the Anglosphere will shed the blood of its young men another time to put the European continent to order is another consideration.

Understanding New Zealand: Demographics of Education

Most people have a vague idea that education is for intelligent people who want to increase their human capital and how to leverage it more effectively, and that educated people more or less run everything. For these reasons, education correlates fairly closely with being part of the Establishment.

Many will be surprised to read that there are no significant positive correlations with being of European descent and having any of the university degrees. Two of them are even negative: the correlation between being of European descent and having a Bachelor’s degree is -0.03, and with having a Master’s degree it is -0.02.

The correlations between being of European descent and having an Honours degree or a doctorate were 0.16 and 0.22, respectively.

This is explainable by the fact that surprisingly few graduates in New Zealand were born here.

The correlation between being born in New Zealand and having a Bachelor’s degree was -0.61; with having an Honours degree it was -0.45; with having a Master’s degree it was -0.59 and with having a doctorate it was -0.32.

One can predict from this that the correlations between being Maori and having a university degree are significantly negative, and indeed they all are stronger than -0.40.

Because our immigration system makes it easier for people who have university degrees to come to New Zealand, we can see that the Pacific Islander and Asian populations – a large proportion of which were born overseas – are much better educated than most people might realise.

Pacific Islanders in New Zealand are much less likely than Kiwis of European descent to have an Honours or a doctorate degree, but the correlation between being a Pacific Islander and having a Bachelor’s degree is only -0.10, and with having a Master’s degree it is only -0.08.

Asians, for their part, are much, much more likely than the average Kiwi to have a university degree. The correlation between being Asian and having a university degree was 0.28 for a doctorate, 0.60 for a Master’s degree, 0.41 for an Honours degree and 0.64 for a Bachelor’s degree. All of these are significant.

The correlaton between being born in North East Asia and having a Bachelor’s degree was a very strong 0.72.

Looking at the correlations between belonging to certain income bands and having a certain educational level underlines the degree to which an education is the ticket to social advancement in New Zealand.

The correlations between having no academic qualifications and being in any of the income bands between $10-40K were all over 0.70. Having no academic qualifications also had correlations of 0.84 with being a regular tobacco smoker, 0.76 with being on the invalid’s benefit, 0.57 with being a single parent, 0.57 with being on the unemployment benefit and -0.68 with net median income.

So by a variety of measures, it’s clear that a person’s level of academic qualifications are generally a pretty good indicator of where they stand in socioeconomic terms.

There were already significant improvements in socioeconomic standing for Kiwis who only went as far as NZQA Level 3 or 4.

Having NZQA Level 3 or 4 as one’s highest academic qualification had correlations of -0.26 with being a regular tobacco smoker, -0.21 with being on the invalid’s benefit, -0.07 with being a single parent, 0.05 with being on the unemployment benefit and 0.12 with net personal income.

These are already vastly better statistics, and the step up from finishing high school to having a university degree is just as great as the step from having no academic qualifications to finishing high school.

Having an Honours degree as one’s highest academic qualification had correlations of -0.64 with being a regular tobacco smoker, -0.55 with being on the invalid’s benefit, -0.49 with being a single parent, -0.39 with being on the unemployment benefit and 0.72 with net personal income.

It’s evident, therefore, that a higher education is extremely strongly correlated with general well-being. The ultimate cause of this might well be natural intelligence, which is of course out of the scope of this study. However, in so far as education correlates with intelligence, we can make an educated guess at the habits of educated New Zealanders by looking at education.

Interestingly, the correlations between education levels and religion spanned the whole spectrum. Some religious traditions in New Zealand are exceptionally well eduated on average; others exceptionally poorly.

The best educated are the Buddhists and the Jews. The correlation between being Buddhist and having no qualifications was -0.72, with having NZQA Level 3 or 4 it was 0.43 and with having an Honours degree it was 0.52. The correlation between being Jewish and having no qualifications was -0.70, with having NZQA Level 3 or 4 it was 0.42 and with having an Honours degree it was 0.76.

Catholics are the next best educated religious demographic, which is a reflection of the large proportion of Catholics that were born overseas and had to get through the immigration system. The correlation between being Catholic and having no qualifications was -0.32, with having NZQA Level 3 and 4 it was 0.19 and with having an Honours degree it was 0.31.

Curiously, the next best educated demographic were of those who had no religious affiliation, and the bulk of these people were born in New Zealand. This might not surprise any readers who are materialist atheists, because this sort of person dominates the universities of this nation.

The correlation between having no religion and having no qualifications was -0.08, with having NZQA Level 3 and 4 it was 0.15 and with having an Honours degree it was 0.27. It may be that a fair proportion of these people were born into a religious family but then came to reject their faith after exposure to university culture.

The average New Zealander who identifies as a Christian has a significantly poorer education than the average New Zealander. The correlation between being a Christian and having no qualifications is 0.15, with having NZQA Level 3 and 4 it was -0.34 and with having an Honours degree it was -0.30. Probably this is a reflection of the fact that there are a fixed number of hours in the day to read books and so reading the Bible must necessarily come at the opportunity cost of reading non-fiction.

The most poorly educated, however, are Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses – probably a reflection of the predatory and aggressive proselytising culture of these movements.

The correlation between being a Mormon and having no qualification was 0.40, with having NZQA Level 3 or 4 it was -0.04 and with having an Honours degree it was -0.40. The correlation between being a Jehovah’s Witness and having no qualification was 0.74, with having NZQA Level 3 or 4 it was -0.41 and with having an Honours degree it was -0.71.

*

This article is an excerpt from Understanding New Zealand, by Dan McGlashan, published by VJM Publishing in the winter of 2017.

Understanding New Zealand: Conservative Party Voters

The Conservatives are a strange sort of movement. In many ways they appear to be some kind of rump movement of people who didn’t like it when National decided to move into the 21st century.

The strongest correlation between voting Conservative in 2014 and voting for another party in 2014 was with National – this was 0.77. This is strong enough to suggest that many Conservative voters would have been former National voters, or would have been severely tempted to vote National in 2014.

National was the only party to have a significant positive correlation with voting Conservative in 2014.

There were two parties that were close to uncorrelated. The correlation between voting Conservative in 2014 and voting New Zealand First in 2014 was 0.01, and with voting ACT it was 0.13.

The former of these is probably because both movements compete for the angry, scared old person vote, and the latter is probably because both movements share an indifference towards the poor.

Voting for any of the left-wing parties had significant negative correlations with voting for the Conservative Party in 2014, further emphasising the degree to which the Conservative movement appeals (and is intended to appeal) to disaffected National voters.

The correlation between voting Conservative in 2014 and voting Greens in 2014 was -0.42, and with voting Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party it was -0.54. This pair involved slightly weaker correlations than for the other three parties, primarily because Green and ALCP voters are closer to middle aged.

The correlation between voting Conservative in 2014 and voting for the Labour, Maori or Internet MANA parties were -0.63, -0.64 and -0.64 respectively.

Age is the main reason for the strong negative correlations between voting Conservative and any of these parties. The correlation between voting Conservative in 2014 and median age was 0.75, which means Conservative voters are almost as old as National voters.

Conservative voters are even more likely to be on the pension though. The correlation between voting Conservative in 2014 and being on the pension was 0.64, compared to a correlation of 0.50 between voting National in 2014 and being on the pension.

Conservatives are also less educated than average. Whereas the correlations for voting National in 2014 and having any of the university degrees were all positive and either significant or bordering on it, the correlations for voting Conservative in 2014 and having any of the university degrees were all negative and bordering on significant.

Females are less unlikely to vote Conservative than they are to vote National. The correlation between being female and voting Conservative in 2014 was -0.19, compared to a correlation of -0.35 between being female and voting National in 2014.

One major way the two differ is with respect to wealth. The average National voter is much wealthier than the average Conservative one. The correlation between net median income and voting Conservative in 2014 was only 0.06, compared to National’s 0.53.

In fact, looking at the correlations with income bands tells us that wealth is the major differentiator between Conservative and National voters.

The income band that had the strongest positive correlation with voting Conservative in 2014 was the $20-25K band, which was 0.17. All of the correlations between voting Conservative in 2014 and any income band above $25K were negative (although they were all very weakly correlated; not close to significant).

By contrast, all of the correlations between voting National in 2014 and any income band above $60K were positive and significant.

One of the largest differences was that with median family income. The correlation between median family income and voting National in 2014 was 0.42; for voting Conservative it was -0.08.

Oddly, although the average Conservative was more likely than the average National voter to be a Christian, these tended to belong to denominations that were less part of the establishment than the National voters.

The correlation between being a Christian and voting Conservative in 2014 was 0.37, compared to 0.29 for voting National in 2014.

Conservatives, though, were much more likely to belong to the Brethrens. The correlation between being a Brethren and voting Conservative in 2014 was 0.54, compared to 0.25 with voting National in 2014.

Conservatives were also much more likely to be Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Ratana, Pentecostalists or “Christian not otherwise defined” than National voters, who were more likely to be Anglicans, Presbytarians or Catholics.

Also, the average National voter is slightly less likely to be religious, whereas the average Conservative is slightly more likely to be religious.

The average Conservative is also less likely than the average National voter to be a Kiwi of European descent. The correlation between being of European descent and voting Conservative in 2014 was 0.46, compared to 0.60 between being of European descent and voting National in 2014.

All of this suggests that the main Conservative constituency is those who are like National Party voters in many demographic ways, but who do not have the same level of wealth or social status. It could even be that there is a degree of resentment among them because they are often both old and poor.

*

This article is an excerpt from Understanding New Zealand, by Dan McGlashan, published by VJM Publishing in the winter of 2017.