Why Are Gang Members Platformed While VJM Publishing Is Cancelled?

Those who follow the NZ media scene may have noticed something unexpected: gang members getting platformed while VJM Publishing gets deplatformed. Why would murderers and rapists be given a voice in the mainstream media, while a non-criminal speaker of multiple languages with a postgraduate science degree is denied one? This essay explains.

Most consumers of media assume that the purpose of the mainstream media is to inform the masses. This is incorrect. This belief is naive, almost childish. The reality is that the purpose of the mainstream media is to shape public opinion. To that end, they platform people who help shape the desired narratives and they deplatform people who don’t.

Whose desired narratives? As explained in Clown World Chronicles, the current rulers of the world are known as globohomo, an alliance of international banking and finance interests (on the right) and globalist Commies and cultural Marxists (on the left). The globohomo alliance (a.k.a. the Globohomo Gayplex) wants the same thing as every other tyrannical, authoritarian ruler throughout history: submission.

This explains why gang members, like the Black Power boss pictured above, are platformed in the mainstream media.

As anyone familiar with gang members will know, they almost always prey on vulnerable people. This means the poor, the sick, the elderly or the young. Very seldom do they inconvenience middle-class people and never would they touch a member of the ruling class.

As such, gang members aren’t a threat to the people who own the mainstream media. To the contrary. Gang members spread fear and terror in the communities who would otherwise be most likely to come together to oppose Establishment oppression – the working classes and the disadvantaged. Those very same revolutionary elements that threaten tyrants everywhere are weakened by the presence of criminals.

As Ted Kaczynski said, “[the system] needs people who are docile and obedient and don’t make trouble.” The most effective way to create such a populace is fear. Gangs spread fear more effectively than almost anything, and that fear leads to paralysis in the face of authority. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, but it has to be accepted that gangs are a weapon of the Establishment, and they ultimately do the bidding of the Establishment.

VJM Publishing, by contrast, fights for the vulnerable. Our pages are full of essays and articles that champion the worker, the freethinker and the spiritual sacrament user. We openly state the very last thing things that the Establishment wants to be known: that consciousness survives the death of the physical body and that there’s nothing, fundamentally, to be afraid of.

This makes us an actual threat. The spiritual truths about the nature of reality are the most liberating things of all. Anyone who is truly aware of the immortality of the soul also understands that nothing that the Establishment can threaten us with in this life is truly terrible. Anyone who knows this can laugh off the fear-mongering propaganda that the mainstream media vomits out to keep us submissive.

The fact that we can back up our assertions with facts and evidence makes us a major threat. In fact, VJM Publishing articles are far more likely to reference actual scientific literature than any of the mainstream media. This is because VJM, having earned a postgraduate degree in psychology, actually understands the science, unlike the mainstream media presstitutes who just parrot whatever powerful people say.

Any intelligent and objective person would be more inclined to believe something VJM Publishing wrote than to believe something in the mainstream media. So the very presence of an outfit like VJM Publishing costs the Establishment millions of dollars per year through neutralising their propaganda.

As Josef Goebbels understood, even one single voice counter-signalling mainstream propaganda is enough to make people start asking questions. That’s why authoritarians all throughout history have made sure to control the narrative.

This is why TradeMe was hounded by far-left extremists into refusing to sell Clown World Chronicles on the grounds that it’s racist (while continuing to sell Mein Kampf). Clown World Chronicles is the most accurate criticism of the Western political Establishment ever written by a New Zealander, and that simply could not be permitted by that Establishment and their Antifa lackies.

In summary, gang members are platformed because they spread fear, mistrust, suspicion, hysteria and division, all of which serve the interests of those who own the mainstream media platforms. VJM Publishing’s message of good news, by contrast, directly opposes those interests. As such, we must remain underground while murderers and rapists are given centre stage.

If you enjoyed reading this essay/article, you can get a compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles from 2021 from Amazon for Kindle or Amazon for CreateSpace (for international readers), or TradeMe (for Kiwis). Compilations of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2020, the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2019, the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2018 and the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2017 are also available.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, subscribe to our SubscribeStar fund, or make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!

The Cosmic Penitentiary

My mother has a theory that this world is one gigantic prison, known as “The Pen”. This theory is based on the observation that most of the people walking the streets of the West look like the inmates of mental asylums. It’s apparent on first glance that there’s something seriously wrong with most people here – so what’s going on?

This essay will explain from an Elementalist perspective.

Many of us have found ourselves wondering how we got here. Of all the possible worlds that one might incarnate into, what did we do to deserve to incarnate into this one, full of violence, sickness, death and misery? It seems like a punishment to be born into a world where we inevitably die, and almost always in extreme pain.

The truth is that we’re all in The Cosmic Penitentiary, a.k.a. “The Pen”: a prison for criminal souls.

As above, so below: we got put in The Pen for the same reason that criminals in the human world get put in prison. In the human world, society decides that certain elements within it are injurious to the greater good, and so it expels them into quarantine zones that we call jails, prisons or penitentiaries. This is roughly analogous to how the human body expels excrement and urine.

In the cosmic world, elements that are injurious to the greater good are similarly expelled – into lower dimensions that serve as quarantine zones. In Elementalism, these dimensions are collectively known as the Hell Realms, as depicted in the theology of many different religions. This world is one of them.

If we do enough self-inquiry, and are fully honest with ourselves, we will agree that it’s perfectly fair that low-frequency fragments of consciousness are forced to incarnate among their own kind. Once this is accepted, it’s possible for true healing to begin; it’s possible to direct one’s life in such a manner that low frequencies are transmuted into higher ones.

A penitentiary is somewhere a person is sent to if they are too arrogant and need to learn some humility. Each of us have been forced to incarnate into The Pen on account of that our selfish behaviour in previous lives has disgusted God. The punishment for this is to die – that is to say, to experience the utter helplessness of dying and death, with a view to being inspired by this into spiritual reformation.

The beings in the higher dimensions, who we share the Great Fractal with, did not want to have low-frequency consciousnesses stinking up their otherwise pleasurable experience. This is entirely understandable. Public restaurants don’t allow people who haven’t showered for months to stink up the ambience, so why would beings in higher dimensions allow the spiritual equivalent?

We are forced to incarnate among our own kind, whether we like it or not.

In the same way that trashy people attract trashy people in this world, and in the same way that classy people attract classy people, trashy fragments of consciousness attract trashy areas of the Great Fractal, and classy fragments of consciousness attract classy areas of the Great Fractal. As per the Law of Assortative Reincarnation, every fragment of consciousness reincarnates in a world full of similar frequencies.

All of us have a relatively low frequency of consciousness as a result of crimes committed in previous lives. Some of us were murderers, others were rapists, robbers, liars, fraudsters. All of us were odious enough that the majority part of the Great Fractal does not want to be associated with us. But because of our pride we are unrepentant. As such, we have to be punished.

To punish a criminal consciousness, it isn’t enough to subject it to suffering. So the Hell Realms are not full of demons who were created specifically to torment their victims. It’s much simpler than that. The Hell Realms are populated by beings who create Hell around them through their own selfishness. And as such, they punish each other.

A being sentenced to The Pen, therefore, has behaved in such a selfish manner that the rest of reality has forced them to incarnate here, where they are surrounded by other selfish beings, and thereby learn that selfishness is antithetical to Godliness. This they learn from the suffering caused to them by the other beings, all a reflection of themselves.

Proof that this world is one of the Hell Realms comes from the fact that everything here must die, and that we must kill each other to live. Such a grisly reality makes clear to even the most incalcitrant fragment of consciousness that selfishness is against the Will of God. And if it doesn’t? You just reincarnate here again until you do figure it out.

A world in which one must die is a perfect ego shredder. Just as people are humbled within this lifetime by being put in prison, people are humbled between lifetimes by being put in The Pen.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, subscribe to our SubscribeStar fund, or make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!

The Power Of Preconception

If you really want to understand where someone is coming from, why begin with a label? Isn’t that the final nail in the coffin of open-mindedness? Just what do we think it means being open-minded, or open-hearted?

If you are meeting someone for the first time and you have heard in advance that he or she has certain political or religious commitments that you are uncomfortable with, then in some way you make your mind up ahead of time – certainly if you give him one or more labels. Just watch for yourself how in advance of even meeting him you put him into a mental box.

“I would open myself to you more, but I learned that you are one of the types of people I tend to disagree with. You are easily confused, weak, gullible and deluded.” You would be surprised just how much of our mental content we can pack into our own personalised labels for other people. Just investigate them to find out. So he is this, or she is that – what does that mean to you? That is the important question.

Not what that means in regards to them, but what it means for you. What assumptions do you have pinned onto them? Does that ball fall within their court, or yours? Do they have to change, or is there something in you that needs to change?

There is a kind of litmus test for whether somebody is causing you suffering, specifically whether the trouble is coming from their end or whether the trouble is actually flaring up at your end. This is to ask whether the same thing you are having a problem with from them is also the exact same thing bothering everyone else.

The fact is, other people around may be being triggered by other things this person does or says that don’t bother you. What if you can’t stand their attitude, and someone else who talks to them has no problem with it? Maybe they have some friends or acquiantences who see the world similar to them, and those people aren’t put off at all by their attitudes or the way they talk.

Perhaps they even prefer to spend their time around this person than they do with you. Maybe you don’t help support their ideas, maybe you don’t laugh at their jokes. If there is even one other person who is not disturbed by this person in the same way that you are, this is proof that what is coming from them is not inherently problematic.

Perhaps the person who are having this difficulty with is your colleague at work, and you can’t stand hearing anything he has to say. What if his father speaks to him and wants to hear everything this person has to say because he loves his son? The father is not necessarily an enlightened being, he just has a completely different relationship with this person than you do. He sees this person a way that involves an entirely different set of circumstances.

Have you ever had the experience of seeing people meet, maybe exchanging a few sentences, then one of the people afterward confiding in you “I don’t like her, she’s a bitch”, or “that guy is such an arrogant idiot.” The complexity of a human being is packed into a minute reductive judgment, based upon our first impressions.

Now, I will concede that there are plenty of times where our first impressions of a person can indeed pass on a lot of valuable information about them. I’m not disputing this. What I want to discover is, what does our judgment actually, finally say about them? What does it say about you? Can they never change? Can you never change?

It is easy to go around looking at people through a lens of judgment. It is so easy that once we are taught to do it, we can easily keep doing it all the time, just like being taught to ride a bike. Why stop? This is how I do it, just the way I was taught! We may even conclude that we are benefitted by this conditioning we agreed to, that we are somehow one-up on the play. However, we are actually missing something in holding to this conditioning – we are missing reality. The stakes are that high.

If you think you know someone based on conclusions drawn from brief social interactions, or even ways they have behaved or spoken historically, then your perception is crippled and you are entirely missing what is real about them. Look at anyone through your filters and you will always be in error. You cannot hope to learn anything new in this way.

Do you know yourself? Because if you were truly acquainted with your own nature, you would never have cause to refine your superficial judgments about other people into some kind of lasting conclusion. Do you ever remember a time where you have heard someone else’s opinion about you and how you reacted to that? Do you remember how it felt to know that they couldn’t possibly have sufficient information to reach that conclusion about you?

If you know who you are, you know who they are. Conclusions inside us are a little like people living in the same city. They may live in the same place, but they don’t necessarily come into daily contact with each other. Perhaps these things inside you have never even met.

You can facilitate this kind of meeting by allowing stillness inside. Stop shaking, stop stirring. All of your activity is actually causing the great majority of the problems. You won’t arrive at an acceptable mental position or conclusion. You know that they are all inadequate, because how would somebody you know describe you?

You know who you are, and you know that the descriptions and conclusions don’t touch you. If they did, the depth of you would be describable to another person, but it isn’t, and never will be.

Not even close – words do not do us justice. If someone describes me and says “he is melancholy” I know it is rubbish, because they have never seen how much joy is inside me. If someone describes me and says “he is such a good brother” I know that they haven’t seen the times where I have been deliberately cruel to my siblings. People don’t have the facts. Their judgments are operating within an extremely narrow band and on very limited data. It is simply bad science to say you know someone in any conclusive way.

Even the best way I can describe a person’s true nature as Being doesn’t really suffice. I can paint a picture with words, but that would be all it is. I could say that a soul or psyche is like a very deep ocean, and only the most superficial currents appear to other people. The lower parts are immeasurably deep and still, and most of who a person truly is resides there. This gives us a nice image, painted by words, but it doesn’t really do any person true justice as a description.

A painting of a sunrise is still just a painting of the sunrise. The painting can lose its hue, or be damaged in a flood. The sunrise can’t, because that is the real thing.

What exactly is the remedy to this nonsense? We invite a place of stillness within us. In this respect, I mean stillness as in refusing to move outward into judgment. Instead of stepping forward as is our habit, we step back. It is easy to just say “don’t judge people because it is bad” but that doesn’t really work, because people say that all the time and we still judge. A moral precept imposed upon you isn’t going to change anything because it is simply a command issued on presumed authority, it can’t be a catalyst for understanding.

The change we need to invite is not at a superficial level.

We aren’t looking to program ourselves with some new conditioning. Just try meeting a person with the notion that they aren’t who you say or think they are. They aren’t even who they say they or think they are! Why should your description of them be any more accurate than their own? Remember that these are only words spoken by them, and those words are prone to further distortion having to pass through your own mental filters. A person may take a very dim view of themselves, or a very optimistic view, or even a completely delusional view. So instead of meeting them on the level or their or our interpretations, what if we commit to meeting them on the level of reality?

I’m not saying that when we refrain from forming judgments that we are therefore seeing through perfectly clear windows. All I am suggesting is that it is fine to meet someone and not draw any conclusion about who they are. We can start to give ourselves a deeper permission to release the habit and burden of doing this because it really is our burden, because it is robbing us of authentic interaction with others. It does us an injustice as much as it does them.

We may even think we need to do all of this in response to some kind of moral imperative about going easy on other people, but that is really just more conditioned self-talk. It is really just as much us that we are releasing from suffering in this loosening of our grip on these judgments and preconceptions. We aren’t improved by them at all – we really do suffer because of them. Not only do we punish ourselves by pushing away authentic intimacy in meeting with others, but we also punish ourselves by way of agreeing that others’ judgments about us are as legitimate as our judgments about them.

It is a two-way deal.

We are conditioned to be so hard on ourselves that we rarely if ever stop and see how simple reflection and consideration of what is true might relieve our suffering in this life. Our ongoing task is to keep walking this path of discovery and see whether there is any inherent suffering to be found in this world.

Remember that, as the Buddha counsels, the mind is the forerunner of all things. If we experiment with this claim and adopt it as a heuristic, just how much suffering will we find inherent in this world, suffering that we ourselves are not causing? I invite you to find out. I hope you are as pleasantly surprised as others have been.

Simon P Murphy is a Nelson-based esotericist and philosopher, and author of His Master’s Wretched Organ, a brilliant collection of weird fiction stories.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, subscribe to our SubscribeStar fund, or make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!

Understanding Nationalism vs. Globalism Is The Key To Understanding The Political Landscape of 2022

Mainstream political commentators, most of them wingcucks, are having extreme difficulty understanding the global politics of 2022. The common reaction to the recent electoral success of the Sweden Democrats and the Brothers of Italy is to shriek about far-right-wing extremism. But this is not an accurate way of understanding the phenomena at play.

The truth is that anyone still thinking in terms of left vs. right has a grossly flawed understanding of the political landscape. The relevant political axis in 2022 is globalist vs. nationalist. Only those who think in terms of globalist vs. nationalist can understand the patterns shifting through the mass political consciousness right now.

The only reason why anti-immigration sentiments are considered “far-right” is because Communists were on the winning side of World War II, and assumed control of the Western media shortly afterwards. Because they won, their enemies had to be dismissed as extremists, and because they were left, their enemies had to be dismissed as right. As such, nationalism became incorrectly conflated with the far-right.

This is why, in recent years, we’ve been spun a narrative of the pro-immigration left and the anti-immigration right.

In reality, the right is more than happy to support the mass immigration of cheap labour. Incoming British Prime Minister, Conservative Leader Liz Truss, has promised to open the immigration floodgates, with today’s “Conservative” logic apparently reduced to a simple equation: migration = growth.

So if the conservative right wing is in favour of the mass immigration of cheap labour, on account of that it pushes rents up and wages down and thereby makes the rich richer and the poor poorer, then the left wing must be against the mass immigration of cheap labour. Right?

Wrong. Apparently the left wing is also in favour of the mass immigration of cheap labour, as is the far-left. And so, by some twisted logic, opposing the mass immigration of cheap labour is far-right.

Moreover, the globalist religious elements of the right wing also want mass Third World immigration. For many Christian fundamentalists, borders and national sentiments are an impediment to God’s command that all are one in Rabbi Yeshua. To that end, they’re happy to import as many non-whites as possible, reasoning that the blending of the nations will hasten Rabbi Yeshua’s return.

If far-right corporate interests want mass Third World immigration, and if far-right religious interests want mass Third World immigration, then it does not make any sense to say that opposing mass Third World immigration is a far-right position. If far-right nationalist interests oppose it, then the relevant aspect is the nationalist one.

When it comes to immigration and labour rights, it’s time to forget left vs. right. Adherence to neither left nor right has much predictive value in this matter. The only logical approach to such questions is to think in terms of nationalist vs. globalist.

The nationalist approach to immigration is that it must serve the interests of the nation. This is not inherently an anti-immigration attitude. It means that immigration from low-IQ countries must be forbidden. Those immigrants tend to produce low-IQ offspring who cannot meet the cognitive demands of Western societies, and who end up becoming net drains on their host societies.

A reasonable nationalist would not necessarily disagree with immigration from high-IQ countries, unless it was of sufficient volume to disrupt social cohesion. Most nationalists make a clear distinction between ‘compatible’ and ‘incompatible’ cultures when it comes to immigration, but one thing is always agreed upon – immigration of low-IQ people from incompatible cultures has to stop.

The globalist approach to immigration, by contrast, is the more the merrier. Every extra labour unit pushes up house prices by increasing demand for housing, and pushes down wages by increasing the supply of labour. In other words: the more immigration, the more the rich get richer and the more the poor get poorer.

Globalist logic is that it doesn’t matter if the native working classes earn enough money to own homes and raise families. The most important thing is the profits of the international banking and finance interests, and these profits are maximised by maximum immigration. Any disruption this might cause to the ordinary lives of working-class people is not considered important.

This globalist arrogance has led to nationalist sentiments, not right-wing sentiments, rising all around the Western World.

It’s important to note that the globalist far-right is not rising much, if at all. The ACT Party is doing reasonably well in New Zealand, polling at about 10%. But this has less to do with the rise of the far-right and more to do with the lack of confidence in the mainstream conservative National Party.

Few of the young men who are flooding into the alternative right (to which ACT belongs) are agitating for more cheap labour or greater corporate control, much less for medieval-style theocracy. As such, their sentiments are best understood as the masculine expression of a nationalist mentality. That masculinity is associated with the right is secondary; nationalist interests are primary.

The electoral success of Giorgia Meloni’s party demonstrates that a feminine expression of nationalism is now rising to join the masculine expression. With both masculine and feminine aspects of nationalism rising, the return of nationalism to the main stage is inevitable. Understanding today’s political reality requires that one think in terms appropriate to these developments. The future is nationalist vs. globalist.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, subscribe to our SubscribeStar fund, or make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!