Big old poof, sittin’ in the sky
Bossin’ us ’round,
I guess He doesn’t have enough to do,
Can’t sort His own shit out
So He has to give us arseholes
About feeding skinny kids
Why doesn’t He feel bad?
He’s the one who made them,
Racist, too, since he made all the poor ones black.
Or did he make all the black ones poor?
Simon P. Murphy is the author of His Master’s Wretched Organ.
Down And Out in Nelson and Stoke
On the fuckin’ benefit.
His case manager Te Aroha gives him arseholes.
A right fuckin’ rark up.
Doesn’t want to thin apples,
Doesn’t want to fillet Hoki.
Just wants to write about the psychic elements
And the topography of impinging dimensions
Not much good being a smart cunt if he’s sitting at home on the dole
Not working for his money.
Te Aroha’s had a bloody gutsful
And so has Raelene
No more going to the drags,
No more car shows at Rangoon,
No more midget stock car racing
Til he gets his fuckin’ act together.
He thinks he a smart cunt,
Says he can invert mental polarities
And formulate a geometric model for translating
The operations of higher dimensions into the lower,
But he can’t even remember his 9-digit client number
Or where he last saw his community services card.
Te Aroha has just about lost all hope,
Raelene is sick of Hell’s Angels knocking on the door
Looking for Hermes after selling them a bad batch.
Maybe what he needs is to sort his shit out,
Go on an Outward Bound course,
Might get his foot in the door with the army,
Maybe even an apprenticeship.
Maybe he could do his fork-lift licence,
Or maybe go back and finish his School Certificate,
Instead of poring through the Necronomicon
Or scrying alien constellations.
Simon P. Murphy is the author of His Master’s Wretched Organ.
It is said that “politics makes for strange bedfellows”. Well, so does the sister industry to politics, prostitution. The major difference between politicians and prostitutes, as this essay will illuminate, is that there are things that prostitutes are too ashamed to do for money.
The Sanders-Clinton alliance was weird, but not especially weird by the standards that we have now degenerated to. It’s not especially surprising that a defeated social democratic candidate would endorse the more left-wing of the remaining two.
One truly weird one that has been going strong for over a century is the Marxist feminist – Christian fundamentalist anti-porn and prostitution alliance.
These two forces both have an immense hatred of natural sexual liberty. The Marxists want to destroy all natural sexual impulses and pervert them into worship of the state, whereas the Christians want to lay guilt trips on people for these same impulses and call them sinful.
For these reasons the two have combined against women.
This was never going to be a particularly strong alliance, though, for the reason that the Marxists want to promote all manner of sexual degeneracy in place of natural sexual relations, whereas the Christians want to suppress and repress everything, natural or otherwise.
Another unusual alliance is that of the various control freaks who oppose cannabis law reform.
This has seen the Police (who do not want to lose the power they have to control people or the funding given to them to do so) and the alcohol companies (whose product causes over half of the damage that the Police have to clean up) to get into bed with each other.
Here it is really the Police that have been cucked by business interests. Because alcohol and pharmaceutical companies see cannabis as a competing product, they have bribed the people that the Police answer to to make it illegal – and the men and women of the Police force pay the price.
The fact that this has resulted in making life immensely more difficult for the Police themselves, who have to face the carnage wrought by booze on a daily basis, appears to be completely lost on them – they continue to vocally oppose cannabis law reform.
Even weirder are the shifting anti-nationalist forces that have opposed Brexit, Trump and which now oppose Marine Le Pen.
This alliance has seen trendy liberals who consider themselves leftists coming out on the side of the political establishment (including the conservative parties), the international bankers, the corporate media and the unelected European Commission against the working class that the left supposedly exists to help.
This column has previously raised the possibility that these people may, in fact, be crypto-conservatives, and it’s certain that some are.
Most of them, though, are genuinely stupid enough to believe that they are acting in favour of the underdog and the unfortunate when they come out in support of the same globalist forces who have spent the past 30 years attacking the standard of living of the working classes.
The pro-Islam league of homosexuals, however, tops them all.
It appears that, because Muslims are generally considered outsiders in Western society, other groups who are also generally considered outsiders have decided to see Islam as a kindred spirit under the motto of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
Unfortunately for the homosexuals, the Muslims they love and the Christians they hate are both Abrahamists, and as they are both male supremacist religions they share a common hatred of homosexuality.
Indeed, homosexual conduct is punishable by death in all of Afghanistan, Brunei, Gaza Strip, Iran, Iraq, Mauritania, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen.
But thanks to a mutual hatred of The Man, homosexuals are frequently willing to passionately defend a religious tradition that would like to see them thrown from rooftops.
That has to be the West’s weirdest political alliance.
Today’s most shameless example of corporate propaganda masquerading as journalism comes, as it often does, from Stuff. The article discusses the subject of whether New Zealand’s welfare system is too generous and whether this is responsible for the difficulty that employers are currently having retaining staff.
What distinguishes the corporate whores like Susan Edmunds – who write pieces like this – from people who used to practice what was known as journalism is that, here, no effort is made to provide any kind of balance to the piece.
The only people quoted in the piece are business owners and right-wing thinkers, such as the Chief Executive of the Employers and Manufacturers Association. Nowhere are any worker’s representatives or even any workers given a voice.
The obvious rebuttal to the slant of this piece is to point out that the free market dictates that if you can’t get workers then you have to pay better wages, so that employers are themselves to blame if no-one wants to work for them.
In 2001, I worked at a variety of bars and cafes in Christchurch to save money for a move to Northern Europe. At the time I was generally paid $8 an hour, as that was the minimum wage at the time.
Later that year I was working in Sweden, where they paid me $22 an hour for equally unskilled work and apologised for it being such a low wage.
When I was in Northern Europe, I was surprised to learn that they do not have minimum wage legislation. They were surprised to hear me tell that such an implicit deal is not universal.
My stories about being paid barely enough after tax to buy a Big Mac after an hour’s work were met with surprise – after all, isn’t New Zealand supposed to be a wealthy country?
The reason for this is cultural: it’s not culturally permissible in Northern Europe to employ a person to work full-time for you and then to not pay them enough money to live on.
Kiwis don’t afford each other the same degree of respect. Ultimately, the reason why there has to be minimum wage laws in New Zealand is that in our culture it’s not considered immoral to pay someone less than they can live on for their full-time labour.
This is even though such an arrangement is the norm in societies where the interactions between employer and employee are between free men. New Zealand has been influenced by the master-slave employment relationship that characterises the New World of which we are a part. We have been influenced by America, Australia and Brazil.
The reason why Bill English lies about how all Kiwis are on drugs is so that his owners in the National Party membership can import third world workers on temporary visas to work for wages that Kiwis know too well are unfair.
In terms of profitability, there’s not that much of a difference between a slave who can be beaten at a whim without consequence and a worker on a temporary visa who can also be abused without consequence because if they complain about it they will get sent home. Because the former is illegal in New Zealand our employer class has to settle for the latter.
All of this raises a question.
In Saudi Arabia they have solved this problem by importing a slave class (that now outnumber the native Saudis by over two to one, just like in ancient Rome). It’s easy to get into Saudi Arabia as a worker from Pakistan, Bangladesh or the Philippines – it’s just that you have no rights and can be disposed of at any time.
A similar arrangement would suit the mentality of New Zealand employers down to the ground. After all, if you don’t want to pay your workers enough so that they can eat and send their kids to school with shoes on, why not just import slaves?
Perhaps all Kiwis can agree that, if our economy won’t work without a steady supply of fuel in the form of cheap temporary workers who get disposed of as soon as they get sick or complain, it’s best that we use foreigners for the purpose?
Making slavery legal again in New Zealand would also make it possible for the New Zealand middle class to have domestic servants, which is, after all, the fantasy of every National voter.