Terrorism Works! For Proof, Compare The Treatment Of Cannabis Users To The Treatment of Muslims

The ruling classes of the West make a strenuous effort to deny the effectiveness of terrorism. They make a big show of not negotiating with terrorists, and claim always that their calculations are not influenced by terrorist atrocities. Their actions, however, demonstrate the exact opposite. The sad fact is that terrorism does work, and proof of this is all around us.

Everyone knows that cannabis users are peaceful people. The typical cannabis user is some kind of hippy who considers violence to be the last resort of the bestial. Violence at music festivals where people are smoking cannabis is almost unheard of, and when it happens it’s usually because someone brought alcohol or meth in.

Unfortunately, this peacefulness doesn’t work out very well for the cannabis users. The Clay Tenet of anarcho-homicidalism holds that violence is the basis of self-defence, and the unwillingness of the average cannabis user to get violent has led to a failure to defend themselves against abuse.

Governments all around the world are happy to abuse cannabis users for the flimsiest of reasons. In New Zealand, a referendum where 50.7% of the respondents voted to lock cannabis users in cages was taken as sufficient justification to do exactly that. Governments everywhere know that they can abuse peaceful people as much as they like.

This willingness to abuse cannabis users is not limited to governments. The corporate world is also happy to pile in. The New Zealand Herald, most conspicuously, took advertising money from Family First to spread malicious lies about cannabis users. Many other mainstream media outlets gleefully ran advertisements calling for the continued persecution of cannabis users, even when those advertisements were clearly lying.

Contrast the treatment of Kiwi cannabis users with the treatment of Muslims.

The Labour Party falls over itself to appease Muslims. After the Christchurch mosque shootings, the Sixth Labour Government grovelled profusely to the resident Muslim community. Jacinda Ardern even went as far as appearing in an Islamic headdress, even though a large proportion of Labour voters are from demographics hated by Muslims, such as homosexuals and professional women.

Labour has now gone so far to appease Muslims that it’s willing to destroy the most precious aspect of Kiwi culture: free speech. The latest authoritarian proposal is to put Kiwis in cages for up to three years for “offensive speech”, where the definition of ‘offensive’ is left wide open to interpretation by the fashions of the day.

This proposal has been pushed by prominent Muslims such as Anjum Rahman, who has long campaigned for the abolition of free speech in New Zealand. Muslims have pushed similar laws in other Western countries, following their religious imperative to eradicate the local cultures of every place they conquer. The most notable example is Scotland, where it has now been made illegal to speak ill of Islam in one’s own private dwelling.

Why would New Zealand institutions such as the Government and the mainstream media treat a foreign cult of hate with more respect and decency than their own cannabis-using kin? It’s very difficult to imagine the Sixth Labour Government passing a law affecting Muslims without consulting them, or the New Zealand Herald taking money to advertise an anti-Muslim political position.

So why do people grovel to Muslims yet put the boot into cannabis users at the first opportunity?

The simple answer is that people are cowards, especially people with ambitions to be seen as moral authorities by the wider public. As Christopher Ryan’s character put it in The Young Ones episode Cash: “These people respect strength.” Here, strength is defined in the basest possible terms, as the ability and will to cause physical suffering to one’s enemies.

The 1,400-year trail of corpses and carnage that Muslims have left throughout the world is enough to make clear to all that opposing their will comes with an implicit threat of violence. Many tens of millions have been faced with the choice of either submitting to Islam or having their throats slit, and the descendants of those who chose to submit now comprise some 25% of the world’s population.

That proportion of the 25% who live in Western countries have not been shy about using violence to intimidate their hosts.

The last six years in Europe have given us the November 2015 Paris attacks (130 killed), the July 2016 Nice truck attack (86 killed), the June 2016 Atatürk Airport attack (45 killed), the March 2016 Brussels bombings (32 killed), and the May 2017 Manchester Arena bombing (22 killed), among dozens of smaller atrocities. None have happened in New Zealand yet, but every intelligent person can see them coming.

The Labour Party knows that an unwillingness to institute hate speech laws will anger Muslims. They also know that there is a fair chance, if Labour does anger Muslims, that those Muslims will lash out with violence. As such, Labour has made a show of submitting to them.

They have no such concerns about cannabis users, who are peaceful people.

Had cannabis users in Europe murdered thousands of prohibitionists over the past decade, the cannabis laws in New Zealand would be entirely different today. No-one would have dared to come out opposing cannabis law reform in last year’s referendum, and without visible opposition the reform side would have won heavily.

The grim reality is that terrorism works, because it makes other people become compliant to your will out of fear of being targeted next.

The solution, however, is not for cannabis users to start committing acts of terror. The solution is for our legal system to recognise principle ahead of expediency. To achieve this, it has to be torn down and reformed based on a coherent ideology such as the Sevenfold Conception of Inherent Human Rights. With such a solid philosophical basis, our legal system can definitively put right ahead of might and thereby deter terrorism instead of encourage it.

If you enjoyed reading this essay/article, you can get a compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2019 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 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!

Tobacco Prohibition Will Fail Like Alcohol And Cannabis Prohibition Failed

The New Zealand Government announced yesterday that they intend to prohibit tobacco. Being the mealy-mouthed, gutless scum that they are, they didn’t outright state this. Rather, they obfuscated the fact that tobacco use will effectively become illegal by introducing new regulations that make it technically still legal, but practically all but impossible to get hold of.

The new regulations will make New Zealand one of the most stringently anti-tobacco jurisdictions in the world. In becoming so, New Zealand will pick up the baton once held by Nazi Germany, which was the first country to widely persecute tobacco users on the grounds of public health. The Sixth Labour Government, also being authoritarian socialists, have copied the Nazi idea of prohibiting tobacco out of supposed concern for the public health.

The reality is that tobacco prohibition will be an expensive and pointless failure. This we can say with confidence, because alcohol and cannabis prohibition were also expensive and pointless failures. So why is Labour going through with a policy that obviously won’t work?

As the great historian Basil Henry Liddell Hart wrote in Why Don’t We Learn from History?, one of the main reasons why politicians keep making mistakes is that they keep denying reality. Politicians denied that alcohol played a role in good mental health by facilitating sociability. They also denied that cannabis was a psychiatric medicine that alleviated anxiety and depression. Both of these denials of reality, motivated by puritanical authoritarianism, led to enormous suffering.

The fact is that tobacco is an excellent medicine for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. This reality is denied by today’s politicians, who parrot the addiction myth promulgated by puritanical authoritarians. But it’s well understood by the many people who use tobacco to treat the suffering associated with conditions like PTSD, C-PTSD and schizophrenia. It had been understood by most people for centuries, until the addiction narrative took root.

What people who use tobacco to treat the symptoms of psychiatric conditions understand is that prohibition simply doesn’t work.

It didn’t work for alcohol – alcohol prohibition simply created a black market that empowered criminal empires and led to countless deaths. It didn’t work for cannabis – cannabis prohibition simply created a black market that empowered criminal empires and led to countless deaths. It won’t work for tobacco either.

There is already a black market for tobacco in New Zealand, and it’s estimated to comprise 11.5% of the size of the total market. That hasn’t yet led to criminal empires and countless deaths – but it will. This is inevitable.

By making tobacco a high-value item, instead of the low-value item it is when freely traded on the legal market, the Government has created an incentive for the black market to supply it. This means, instead of being mostly sold by retailers like dairies, criminals will move in and dominate the tobacco trade. The predictable consequence of this is more violent crime.

Another predictable consequence of prohibiting tobacco is that the suicide rate will skyrocket. Although it’s denied by the political class, tobacco is a mental health medicine, and many New Zealanders are only just hanging in there thanks to the solace it offers. A ban on tobacco will force these already mentally vulnerable people to go cold turkey. This will make them act impulsively and irrationally.

Yet another predictable consequence is that future tourist receipts will plummet. Why would a tobacco user choose to vacation in a country where tobacco is prohibited? They’d rather go almost anywhere else. Tourists rarely visit countries that have alcohol prohibition, because those places are horrible, soulless hellholes. Unfortunately for us, that’s how many tourists will now perceive New Zealand.

It might seem incredible that the Sixth Labour Government came to power in 2017 with the promise to stop persecuting medicinal cannabis users, but instead expanded the War on Drugs to include tobacco.

The simple explanation is that the Sixth Labour Government are authoritarian. This is why they refuse to countenance returning freedoms to the New Zealand people, but are quick to take freedoms away. They came to power in 2017 promising to allow Kiwis the right to use medicinal cannabis, but instead took away our firearms rights, our free assembly rights and now our free speech rights and our rights to use tobacco medicinally.

As George Orwell wrote, the future is a boot stomping on a human face, forever. New Zealand voters in 2017 might never have guessed that the boot would be worn by a breeding-age woman, but that’s the sort of surprise that the ruling class likes to throw the people’s way to keep us off-balance.

Understanding the Sixth Labour Government is as simple as understanding authoritarian socialists stomping down the people and the brainless NPCs who applaud it. This week’s announcement of the intention to prohibit tobacco will achieve no other purpose than to show the New Zealand people who their masters are. It will cause more suffering than it alleviates.

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!

Infantilisation, Feminisation, Negrification, Uglification, Stupefaction, Pacification

Observing the collapse of the West into Clown World, six sociological trends stand out above all others. Each of these trends has been deliberately engineered by the ruling class to make their subject populations weaker and easier to control. All of them involve promoting one set of behaviours and attitudes over another, to the detriment of the subject population.

The first trend is infantilisation.

Infantilisation involves keeping people in a state of helpless dependency even into adulthood. In particular, this involves inducing them to think and behave like adult children. Emblematic of this trend is the 40-year old collector of Star Wars figurines. Infantilised people are encouraged not to solve their own problems, but instead to tug the skirt of the local authority. This is also true of scientific disputes. Independent thought is strongly discouraged.

It’s essential here that people be kept ignorant about the true nature of reality. Instead of being informed accurately about the scientific nature of humankind and of the world, people are presented with a Disneyfied, Tellytubby version of affairs. It is never admitted that life is suffering and that the good guys die in the end just like the bad guys.

The second trend is feminisation.

This involves forcing women and feminine energy into male spaces. Anything traditionally masculine has to give way to feminine involvement. This trend is why one sees so much mainstream media decrying “not enough women in X” or praising “first woman in X”. All male spaces have to be broken open.

Today this can be seen most obviously in sport. The obsessive promotion of women’s sport has had the effect of removing an avenue for masculinity. Now there are even female referees and commentators in male games. The forcing of women into the military is a more extreme, if less obvious, example. The end result is a generation of feminised males unable to inspire any physical resistance.

The third trend is negrification.

It’s rare to see a white family in the mass media nowadays. A long-running series like Friends, without token diversity, would be impossible today. Much as children have been forced into adult spaces and females have been forced into male spaces, so too have non-whites been forced into white spaces. This is also accompanied by propaganda about “not enough non-whites in X” or “first non-white in X”.

Following from the increasing proportion of non-whites in traditionally white spaces is a lowering of general standards. As a result, r-selected behaviours and attitudes are driving out K-selected ones. The growing cultural obsession with analingus is perhaps the most telling example – arse fetishism is almost non-existent in fully white countries.

The fourth trend is uglification.

This can be seen most clearly in music and architecture. Today’s popular music is almost antithetical to the high culture of Beethoven and Vivaldi. Orchestral music has been replaced with crude jungle beats that appeal to the brain stem. A similar phenomenon has taken place with architecture. Brutalism is a name given to the architectural style that emphasises minimalism and concrete, but it’s so common today that most people think it’s normal.

Uglification can also be seen in fashion. The most notable example today is the promotion of Lizzo, a monstrously obese woman, as a model of beauty. Genuinely beautiful women are starting to become rare in mainstream media. The combined effect of the uglification of music, architecture and fashion is that people have lost their conception of what beauty is. This has had severe moral consequences.

The fifth trend is stupefaction.

In the early days of the Internet, it was possible to easily find information about any subject. These times were known as the Golden Age of the Internet. But as the information superhighway became more commercialised, hobbyist and enthusiast sites were pushed to the bottom of search results in favour of big advertisers. As the ruling class put more and more advertising between the people and the information, the masses became dumber and dumber.

Part of stupefaction involves the promotion of unqualified people as authorities. Bill Nye, “The Science Guy”, only has a Bachelor’s degree, and is therefore less of a scientific authority than the author of this article. Unqualified people are promoted as experts everywhere in the mass media, lowering the quality of public discourse and popularising misconceptions and falsehoods.

The sixth trend is pacification.

Aldous Huxley warned that the ruling class would one day train the masses to love their servitude, and that’s exactly what has happened. We have been pacified by having just enough of our material needs met to prevent any real discontent. No-one really has to go without food or entertainment nowadays, and this has led to an oversatisfied population that is willing to accept all kinds of human rights abuses.

Pacification is the end result of the infantilisation, the feminisation, the negrification, the uglification and the stupefaction of the masses. All of these trends have created a population that is utterly incapable of resisting the abuses of the ruling class – this being, of course, the ultimate reason why they were all pushed.

In the tyranny to come, no adult spaces will be allowed to exist, no male spaces will be allowed to exist, no white spaces will be allowed to exist, no beautiful spaces will be allowed to exist, no intelligent spaces will be allowed to exist and no space for courage will be allowed to exist. In short, no place of order will be allowed to exist, because any order among the masses provides the basis for resistance.

Much of the logic behind Clown World is about forcing chaos into orderly spaces for the sake of destruction. The more the ruling class can sow chaos among their lower-class enemies, the less the lower classes are able to resist the depredations of the rulers. And so, the more infantilised, feminised, negrified, uglified, stupified and pacified society becomes, the harder it becomes to own a home and to raise a family on one wage.

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!

Why I Don’t Sing The Maori National Anthem

The ceremonies before an All Blacks match are an essential part of setting the mood to enjoy the theatre. But many people sing along to the words of the Maori version of the national anthem without knowing what it means. I don’t sing the words to the Maori version of the national anthem because they are an insult to my people.

The God of Nations referenced in the English version of the national anthem is not the same as the God of Abraham. The English version of the national anthem was written by Thomas Bracken, a Freemason, and as such the God referenced is the true divinity beyond all cultures. It is not Yahweh, the God of the Jews.

Governor George Grey commissioned a Maori translation of Bracken’s poem in 1878. This was performed by Thomas Henry Smith, an English immigrant and a Christian. Being Christian, and following the Christian imperative to destroy all other spiritual and religious traditions, Smith took the opportunity to erase all reference to God in his translation and to replace it with reference to Yahweh.

“E Ihowā Atua”, from the first line of the Maori version of the national anthem, means “O Jehovah God”. The Ministry of Culture and Heritage informs us that “‘Ihowā’ is the standard version of God (Jehovah) and was the one used by Smith.” In other words, Smith, a Christian, twisted Bracken’s nondenominational anthem into an entreaty to the God of the Jews.

Now why would I, as a person who does not worship Yahweh, sing an entreaty to the Jewish God?

As a Ngati Porou, being asked to sing a song about Jehovah is an insult. It was in the name of Jehovah that the spiritual traditions of the Maori people were destroyed and replaced with base superstition. Early Christian missionaries eradicated all knowledge of Io Matua Kore, the god of this part of the world, to replace it with knowledge of Yahweh, the god of a foreign land.

This was a great crime, and one which has never been acknowledged, much less made up for.

I would happily sing the Maori national anthem if it were replaced by a entreaty that praised Io Matua Kore instead of the God of the Jews. The Maori version of the New Zealand national anthem needs to be rewritten, preferably by a Maori and not an English immigrant, and in such a way that removes reference to the God of the Jews and replaces it with the God of Aotearoa.

Then I would sing the Maori version of the national anthem with pride.

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!