How The Mainstream Media Stifles Dissent

Many regular followers of the mainstream media have noticed a pattern: every time any opposition to globohomo stands up, the media immediately rips into them. This is the result of a deliberate propaganda strategy, carried out by the ruling class, to stifle dissent by using the mainstream media as the gatekeepers of which ideas are allowed to be normalised. This essay explains how they do it.

The general rule is that anyone who stands up to represent their people, but without the approval of the owners of the mainstream media, will be smeared by that media as either insane or evil.

Noam Chomsky likes to point out that the mainstream media normalises opinions by limiting the opinions expressed, but allowing vigorous debate within those limitations. They do this by platforming people who have similar opinions, and then exaggerating the import of any differences. The impression created is that the true, reasonable position is between these two apparent poles.

The use of this strategy meant that dissenters could simply be ignored. Anyone outside the narrow window of acceptable opinion never had their voices heard, so their ideas never entered the mainstream consciousness. This strategy worked excellently until the rise of the alternative media, particularly the Internet-based alternative media, which allowed people to share content without corporate or governmental oversight.

Power is control of the minds of the masses. However, before one can gain that control, one must first gain the attention of the masses. The main power of the mainstream media is to gatekeep that attention. Alternative media, such as VJM Publishing, might produce higher-quality content, but we are not yet in a position to broadcast it to the masses. Despite this limitation, we can reach enough of them to force the mainstream media to adapt their strategy.

Their new strategy is simple: everyone who opposes the owners of the mainstream media is labelled insane or evil. Those are the two labels that get placed on every single free thinker, without exception. If they are incompetent, like most people are, they are labelled insane. Only the competent – and therefore, truly dangerous – are labelled evil.

The standard tactic is to find the most influential authority figure who is willing to smear the target as insane or evil, and then to give that figure a platform. An example is given in the image at the top of this article. The Groundswell protests do not have the approval of the globalists who own the media (unlike the Black Lives Matter protests), so the organisers of those get smeared as “crazy”.

The natural reaction of the average credulous pleb is to assume that the Groundswell organisers must actually be crazy, for, if that wasn’t true, an authority such as the leader of Federated Farmers would not have been allowed media space to make the claim. Surely such a bold statement, if false, would have been denounced by some other authority figure. It must therefore be true.

By featuring a cavalcade of authority figures disparaging the target, the media reduces the standing of the target in the mainstream consciousness. This reduces their influence, as people become shy to be associated with the next nutjob or the next Hitler. This makes it hard to get any resistance movement going.

Examples abound.

Sue Grey of the Outdoors Party regularly gets disparaged as insane, and has done ever since she came out in favour of cannabis law reform. Being female, and being associated with cannabis, she’s a prime target for accusations of mental illness. Reddit provides several examples of her being called a “wingnut” and multiple calls for her to be silenced or fined into oblivion.

Paddy Gower tried to smear Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern as evil, but he only succeeded in making himself look like a clown. That didn’t stop the rest of the mainstream media from referring to the Canadians as “far-right”. Anyone questioning the foremost addiction of the Western ruling classes – the addiction to cheap labour – is tarred with the Nazi brush.

The mainstream media has brought out the big guns for the ongoing protests by Australian tradesmen in Melbourne and other places – these protesters have been dismissed as both “conspiracy theorists” and “far-right”. The tradesmen are too obviously masculine and based to get dismissed as crackpots, so they get compared to Nazis. It’s an absurd comparison on the face of it, because the tradies are protesting for freedoms and the government is trying to impose authoritarianism. But not too absurd for Clown World.

In short, if a person is feminine or does drugs they’re written off as schizophrenic; if they are masculine or oppose the mass importation of cheap labour they’re written off as Nazis. Insane or evil – that’s how every alternative to the Establishment is smeared by their lackeys in the mainstream media.

The truth is that the dissenters are much less insane or evil than the current ruling class. Not only has the current Western ruling class built an economic system that is destroying the planet, but they’re happy to destroy any of us in order to keep that system running full speed. The mainstream media, and their owners, are more insane and evil than their targets.

If you enjoyed reading this essay/article, you can get a compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2020 from Amazon for Kindle or Amazon for CreateSpace (for international readers), or TradeMe (for Kiwis). A compilation of 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, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund. Even better, buy any one of our books!

How Many Human Rights Is The New Zealand Government Currently Violating?

The human rights of New Zealanders are outlined in the Bill of Rights Act. This legislation describes the ways in which the Government is, in theory, prohibited from causing harm to the New Zealand people. The astonishing and terrifying fact is that a number of these rights are being violated, right now, by the Sixth Labour Government – and only VJM Publishing cares enough to report on it.

In fact, almost all of our civil and democratic rights (i.e. Sections 12-18 of the Bill of Rights Act), plus some others, are being violated at time of writing.

The COVID-19 pandemic is being used as an excuse by the Government to ignore Section 11, which states: “Everyone has the right to refuse to undergo any medical treatment.” The reality for many today is that they must take a coronavirus vaccine or lose their jobs. It’s illegal in New Zealand to coerce someone into giving up a human right on threat of losing their job, but such is the current hysteria around coronavirus that people are doing it anyway.

Section 13 was violated by the Operation Whakahumanu Police harassment campaign, and the ongoing threat of further harassment. Although Kiwis supposedly have “the right to adopt and to hold opinions without interference,” we can still have cops turn up on our doorstep to intimidate us into silence if we hold the wrong opinions. It seems that intimidation doesn’t quite meet the threshold of interference.

In the case of VJM Publishing, all it took was us selling t-shirts that said ‘It’s Okay To Be White’, and the Police came to our offices to interrogate us about our “concerning” opinions. If one authoritarian snitch claims that a particular opinion you hold is shared by the boogeyman of the moment, then suddenly you’re “ideologically adjacent” to that boogeyman and therefore a threat to national security.

Section 14, which deals with freedom of expression, has been violated in numerous ways. Apparently “Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form.” This section has been violated in more ways than just Operation Whakahumanu.

Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux’s attempt to speak in Auckland showed that public officials can override the New Zealand public’s freedom to receive information on a whim. Auckland Mayor Phil Goff decreed that the subject matter Southern and Molyneux intended to cover was too hot for the globohomo stronghold that is the Auckland economic zone, and the Canadian duo were duly banned from speaking.

The prohibition on the use of spiritual sacraments violates Section 15, which states that “Every person has the right to manifest that person’s religion or belief in worship, observance, practice, or teaching, either individually or in community with others, and either in public or in private.” This particular right was already being violated when the Human Rights Act was passed, and still is.

It’s illegal to practice the Greco-Roman Mystery religions, because these religions involve the use of spiritual sacraments which are illegal. Psilocybin-containing mushrooms, the basis of e.g. the Eleusinian Mysteries, are considered a Class A drug by the New Zealand “Justice” System. This means that the Police will destroy anyone exercising their right to manifest a Greco-Roman Mystery religion in worship, observance or practice.

A hierophant who shared a psychedelic sacrament in a group setting for the sake of communing with the divine, as our Indo-European ancestors did for thousands of years before the scourge of Abrahamism befell us, could face life imprisonment as a penalty, this being the maximum penalty for “supply of a Class A drug”. Life imprisonment for practicing one’s religion is about as severe a human rights abuse as one can get, yet it’s on our law books right now.

Section 16, then, which states that “Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly” is violated in several ways. The most egregious recent example is the arrest and imprisonment for Billy Te Kahika and Vinny Eastwood on August 18th (they have still not been released). Apparently the COVID-19 Response Act means that Section 16 of the Human Rights Act goes out the window.

This is not to mention that Section 16 is also violated by the prohibition on gathering to hear Southern and Molyneux and by the prohibition on gathering to practice Greco-Roman Mystery religions. Peaceful assembly means nothing, it seems; if the Establishment considers you a threat, they will smash you.

Section 17 claims that “Everyone has the right to freedom of association” yet, in practice, only favoured groups are allowed that freedom. If you’re the Mongrel Mob, you can associate freely without interference, but if you’re Action Zealandia, you will find yourself getting targeted by the media (which is, in practice, merely the consent manufacturing arm of the Government).

It might seem strange that New Zealanders of European descent don’t have the freedom to associate without getting smeared by the media, when gang members can not only do so but also get positive press coverage. The only real response to this is to shrug and say “We’re in Clown World now.”

The COVID-19 Response Act has also kicked Section 18 in the arse. Section 18 guarantees that “Everyone lawfully in New Zealand has the right to freedom of movement and residence in New Zealand” but coronavirus hysteria has also seen this one get ignored. The Government doesn’t even have to explicitly override this section; they only have to order the Police to ignore it and they know the Police will obey.

Section 18 also means that the ad hoc roadblocks set up in some rural places are human rights violations. New Zealanders have the right to travel on public roads, which means that other New Zealanders do not have the right to arbitrarily block those roads. Chimping out over coronavirus because you watched too much television is not adequate cause to violate other people’s human rights.

Section 19 is violated in several ways today. This section claims that “Everyone has the right to freedom from discrimination on the grounds of discrimination in the Human Rights Act 1993”. But in practice, anyone can discriminate or be discriminated against – all it requires is the political power (or lack of it) to persuade others to consider you a favoured (or unfavoured) group, a process described by Edward Bernays in Propaganda.

Old people get a big fat basic income of at least $370 per week not available to younger people, brown people get scholarships not available to whites (and sometimes preferential medical care), homosexuals get a level of media attention not available to heterosexuals and women and men both have exclusive spaces not available to the other. In theory, discrimination is illegal, but in reality anyone can freely discriminate against anyone else, as long as they have political power.

The only solution to these constant violations is to replace our toothless human rights system with the Sevenfold Conception of Inherent Human Rights, and empower the average citizen to enforce this conception with violence. This would involve the average citizen being taught about the Sevenfold Conception while at school and then, when an adult, given a state-issued semi-automatic rifle and instructions to use it on any politician threatening the rights outlined in that conception.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund. Even better, buy any one of our books!

Open The Door To Islam, Open The Door To Hell

With the terrorist attack at the New Lynn Countdown supermarket last night, Kiwis will now have to live with what Europeans have suffered for the past 20 years: ever-present ambient terror while out in public. The more intelligent Kiwis will soon come to realise something that intelligent Europeans realised 20 years ago: when you open the door to Islam, you consign your country to Hell.

The most predictable thing about the terror attack at the Auckland supermarket was the chorus of cries to not blame Islam. Even though we were told by Jacinda Ardern herself that the Christchurch mosque shootings were the collective responsibility of all white people, we have also been told by Ardern that last night’s terror “was carried out by an individual – not a faith, not a culture, not an ethnicity – but an individual person.”

Perhaps the second most predictable thing about the attack is that no-one in the mainstream media will ask who let the terrorist into the country to begin with. No mainstream journalist will track down who approved his visa. No-one will ask why a person like this was allowed into the country in the first place. VJM Publishing already figured out who opened the gates – it was our 53rd Minister of Immigration, National’s Jonathan Coleman.

As for why a New Zealand Minister of Immigration would open the doors to a terrorist, the answer depends on how much conspiracy theory you can handle.

The first thing to establish is that the supermarket attack was not an isolated incident. Since 2014, Muslims have carried out over a hundred terror attacks in Europe, with almost 400 total deaths. This is nothing unusual – it’s merely a hundred more examples of the now well-established 1400-year pattern of Muslims slaughtering anyone foolish enough to let them in.

Although the mainstream media will act like the motivations for the supermarket attack are mysterious, they’re actually very simple. The terrorist was an Islamic supremacist who believed that we Kiwis are filthy kuffirs who ought to submit to Islam or be destroyed. He was motivated by the idea that he was fighting a holy war against the enemies of the God of Abraham.

His intention – as with all who think like him – was to keep stabbing us, and shooting us, and raping our women and children, until one of two things happen: either we convert to Islam, or we disappear.

Ardern claimed that the terror attack “was carried out by an individual, not a faith, not a culture, not an ethnicity, but an individual person who was gripped by ideology that is not supported here by anyone or any community.” The reality is that plenty of Muslims support ISIS and the general ideology of Islamic supremacism. The Muslim community is the grass in which snakes like yesterday’s terrorist hide.

A Pew opinion poll found that “support in some degree for suicide bombings among younger European Muslims ranged from 22 percent in Germany to 29 percent in Spain, 35 percent in Britain and 42 percent in France.” A BBC poll in Britain found that a quarter of British Muslims sympathise with the Charlie Hebdo terrorists of 2015. Things are so bad that it’s more common today for British Muslims to join ISIS than to join the British Army.

What Kiwis have utterly failed to understand is that Muslims view the Muslim conquest of the world in much the same way that Kiwis view the All Blacks winning the Rugby World Cup: as the best possible thing that could happen. Last night’s terror attack was, for them, like watching the All Blacks scoring a try is for us. It was a victory for their team (the believers) against the opposition team (the infidels).

The Islamic State will happily admit to what is written in the paragraph above. Anyone doubting this needs to read Issue 15 of Dabiq magazine, the English-language magazine published by ISIS to explain their intentions and aspirations. One article in Issue 15 of Dabiq is titled ‘Why We Hate You & Why We Fight You‘. Here it is openly admitted that “We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers; you reject the oneness of Allah…”

There are believed to be some 60,000 Muslims in New Zealand. We know from the polling mentioned above that at least a quarter of Muslims living in other Western countries are ISIS sympathisers. If a similar proportion of them are ISIS sympathisers in New Zealand, that works out to be around 15,000 people.

Can you handle the idea that there are 15,000 people currently resident in New Zealand who consider yesterday’s mass stabbing to have been a good thing that increased the glory of Islam? That’s the reality that we now have to face. We’ve opened that door.

The grim, blood-stained reality is: now that we’ve opened our borders to Islam, and allowed it to gain a foothold here, the terror attacks will never end. We know this because the established modus operandi of Muslims in every area in which they gain a foothold is the same: to terrorise the locals until they submit to Islam. To never allow them a moment of peace otherwise.

Attacks like last night’s, and a hundred times worse, have been happening in Europe for decades. In Britain, 19,000 girls are raped every year by Muslim grooming gangs. New Zealand already has the refugee that won’t stop offending. Why open the borders any further to this menace?

The correct response to the supermarket attack is twofold.

First, a complete and total stop to all Muslim immigration to New Zealand. This means a total stop to all entry into New Zealand of Muslims from other countries. No refugees, no students, no family reunification, no work visas. Only apostates and women (i.e. victims of Islam) will be allowed into New Zealand from Muslim countries.

Second, everyone who supported or facilitated mass Muslim immigration to New Zealand has to be removed from public office, and barred from ever holding public office in the future. These people have demonstrated such a degree of poor judgment that they’re indistinguishable from traitors. They’ve opened the door of Hell to New Zealand, and people like them have to be discouraged from doing so again in the future.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund. Even better, buy any one of our books!

They Would Go Back To Chattel Slavery If They Could

A number of wage subsidy scams are being reported right now, usually involving a worker being coerced into working for free or for discounted wages. Many people seem surprised that employers would be so brazen as to take advantage of a struggling person, especially in times when solidarity is needed. The reality is that employers would go back to chattel slavery if it wasn’t against the law.

The typical attitude of an employer in New Zealand is most accurately summarised by the Magic Talk caller known only as “Mark”. Mark called in to say that Kiwis were lazy and that immigrants made much better workers. This contempt for New Zealand workers is shared by most of the ruling class. John Key spoke for this ruling class when he said that we need to import foreign workers because Kiwis are lazy and on drugs.

As any Kiwi who has worked overseas knows, Kiwi workers are highly sought-after specifically because we are not lazy. If we had been lazy, we would never have survived the challenges put before us in our short history, because those challenges demanded that we shape an entire nation out of almost nothing, and we overcame them.

The truth, as is widely understood if not widely admitted, is that workers who are dependent on their employer for a visa will be much more submissive, and will accept much worse treatment, than those who are not dependent. This is why foreign workers are desired in New Zealand and New Zealand workers desired in foreign countries.

The mentality of the average employer, anywhere in the world, hasn’t changed much from 200 years ago. People from the working class are still considered cattle; their suffering is routinely ignored in the pursuit of profit. The mindset of today’s employer is still to put profit first and to discount human suffering, especially if those suffering are poor. It’s little different to the mindset of a cotton plantation owner.

Understanding the psychology of the employer – and, thereby, understanding why our economies are structured the way they are – requires the realisation that the ruling class would rather pay the workers nothing at all. If society was governed by an employers and landowners union, it would happily go back to chattel slavery.

Because the ruling class can’t get away with that, they can only push the worker as close to chattel slavery as the law allows. This is achieved by taking away as much of their productivity as legally possible. And so, most of the productivity of every worker is taken from them by the three lions of profits, taxes and rents.

The employer in a capitalist system is obsessed with profit. Profit is a matter of maximising incomes and minimising expenses, and the major expense is usually labour. It’s not cheap to get a person to work on your plantation all day when they’d rather be at home taking care of their family and community. So employers usually have to pay big. This has conditioned them to seek out any and all opportunity to maximise their access to cheap labour.

It can be said that cheap labour makes the world go around.

One of the first things that Brazil did after coming into existence was to import slaves – some 5 million were brought to Brazil before 1866, mostly to farm sugar cane. America, likewise, didn’t wait long before importing African slaves of their own. Even though only 300,000 were brought to the United States, it was enough to significantly depress wages in the Deep South. Much of colonial South and Central America operated on the slave plantation model pioneered by the Portuguese.

Australia and New Zealand never operated on this model. The Anzac ruling classes, however, have always been subject to the same temptations as the other colonial ruling classes. The temptation to maximise profit by minimising the cost of labour has always been present, sometimes intensely. We can see this from the fact that the Western ruling class have pushed the workers as close to slavery as possible without calling it slavery.

Rather than import slaves, and maintain them at the employer’s own expense on their plantations, it’s easier for those employers to import foreign cheap labour, and dump them into working-class neighbourhoods to fend for themselves. This is not only as profitable as chattel slavery, but it outsources the mental labour of arranging to feed, clothe and house the workers back to the workers themselves.

The importation and then naturalisation of cheap labour externalises the cost of diversity onto wider society, while keeping all the profits for the employer. The major negative consequence of diversity is lower wages. This occurs because diversity makes it more difficult for the working class to present the united front necessary to force the employer class to share the productivity of the workers.

The net result of 70 years of the mass importation of cheap labour: our wages have fallen so far that the average worker has no hope of owning their own home. The mainstream media screams ‘Racist!’ at anyone who draws the connection, but even high-school economics students understand that an oversupply of cheap labour will inevitably crash the price of working-class wages.

In 1992, the average Kiwi could buy the average house after about 7,000 hours of labour at the average wage. Today, so much of the average Kiwi’s productivity is sucked away in profits, taxes and rents that it takes over 25,000 hours of labour at the average wage to buy the average house. Vast numbers have completely given up hope. It’s already becoming the case that people are working just to stay alive, and some have to borrow money just to be able to do that!

All this was made possible by the working class getting pushed, closer and closer, over several decades, towards chattel slavery.

If you would like to support our work in other ways, please consider subscribing to our SubscribeStar fund. Even better, buy any one of our books!