Why They Will Never Solve The Homelessness Crisis

Increasing levels of homelessness have been observed all over the Western World. The waiting list of families in severe need of housing in New Zealand has increased sevenfold since 2016, and has nearly quadrupled since the Sixth Labour Government came to power in late 2017. A similar situation exists in America, where “tent cities” of homeless people now surround major metropolitan areas.

A great deal of thought has gone into solving this crisis – or so we’re told. Apparently it’s an issue of great concern to the leaders of the West, who are doing everything they can to get their young people into houses. The reality is that they don’t care about homelessness at all – in fact, they want more of it. Homelessness serves a very important social role.

Like much of human behaviour, whether or not the lower classes rebel is a function of two factors: reward and risk.

The greater the reward for rebelling, the greater the likelihood it will happen. The more oppressed a people are, the greater the reward for rebelling. Anyone who has to endure daily humiliations, especially those of a physical kind, will soon come to feel that it’s worth rolling the dice.

The greater the risk for rebelling, the less the likelihood it will happen. This is why ancient kings used to put every male in rebellious villages to the sword. Others had to learn that the consequences of rebellion were either self-determination or death.

The ruling classes have always had to keep this reward-to-risk balance titled towards not rebelling. A failure to do so could mean that those ruling classes were violently deposed.

Ever since the advent of agriculture, the ruling classes have been preoccupied with one question: how to get people to work. Tilling fields is much less interesting than hunting. Left to their own devices, people would rather hunt and fish, and then lie around the rest of the time, than till fields and accumulate a surplus of grain.

Using violence to force people to work led to rebellion. So the ruling classes had to be subtle about tinkering with the reward-to-risk ratio.

One approach was to increase the reward for working. This was originally how early societies came to have a schedule of festivals, such as harvest festivals in Autumn, fertility festivals in Spring, and festivals for Midsummer and Midwinter. The idea was that people would more readily work a week of tilling fields if they had a festival to look forward to.

The other approach was to increase the risk of not working. As mentioned above, the ruling class couldn’t simply whip people, because they would rebel. The punishment for not working had to be more subtle. The usual solution was ostracisation. Anyone considered to not be working hard enough was deemed a ‘bludger’ or ‘malingerer’ and abused psychologically, instead of physically.

In contrast to physical abuse, psychological abuse can be dished out with very little chance of retaliation. So the ruling classes of today seek to maximise the amount of psychological abuse they inflict upon the lower classes, and that means spreading fear. The ruling class, in the final analysis, are little different to terrorists, and to that end they deliberately cultivate visible homelessness.

Most homelessness has been purposefully created by the ruling class, because they need to have people visibly suffering in public in order to scare the rest of the population into submission. In the terms used above, homelessness has been purposefully cultivated by the ruling class in order to increase the risk of not working.

The presence of homelessness means that the working classes put their heads down and obey orders without complaint, for fear of being made homeless themselves.

Many people have wondered about the logic of doubling the refugee quota, as Labour did in 2017. It seemed especially mysterious, as we were already in the grip of a housing crisis at the time, and each refugee family we housed meant one Kiwi family had to go without.

But that was the precise outcome intended.

The reason why they let the refugees in, and give them housing, while leaving Kiwis to suffer homeless, is because they want Kiwis to suffer. They want the average New Zealander to see his fellows suffering and homeless every day, because this will keep the average New Zealander compliant.

This strategy, which could be summarised as “A boot stamping on a human face, forever,” has reached its apogee in today’s America, where major Californian cities are now surrounded by miles and miles of tents. Los Angeles is believed to contain 60,000 homeless, many of who live in tents in the downtown commercial area.

This need to threaten people into submission is why they will never solve the homelessness crisis.

Much like cannabis prohibition, homelessness serves the purpose of signalling the government’s cruelty, and thereby works to bring the lower classes into a state of compliance. The homeless have to be there, so that the average citizen can be reminded of the consequences of resisting the government’s will. The more tyrannical the government becomes, the more homeless there will be.

The presence of homeless people, then, could be considered a sign of tyranny. Therefore, the homelessness problem won’t be solved until the tyranny one is.

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!

This World Is One Of The Hellish Realms – But That’s A Good Thing!

Life on Earth can seem so terrible that sometimes one asks oneself if this might be hell. It certainly seems as if we are surrounded, not only by suffering, but by beings whose true will is to increase that suffering. As this essay will elaborate, this world may be hellish, but this is actually a great spiritual opportunity in disguise.

The first thing we have to ask ourselves is what the fuck we’re doing here.

What’s apparent, after very little thought, is that we’re all going to die – therefore material concerns are meaningless. The inevitable deaths of our physical bodies mean that it’s meaningless to accumulate wealth, or status, or even memories of pleasure. All is rendered null upon the utterly inescapable expiration of our physical bodies.

The purpose of being in this place must therefore be something spiritual.

Elementalists believe that the cessation of suffering comes from raising the frequency of one’s consciousness. Elementalism teaches of a great spiritual axis that stretches from perfect harmony with the Principle of Evil in the lowest place, to perfect harmony with the Will of God in the highest. The purpose of life in the hellish realms is to transmute that frequency of consciousness into the highest possible form.

This is achieved by saying Yes to that which God says Yes to, and saying No to that which God says No to, and saying Yes to that which the Principle of Evil says No to, and saying No to that which the Principle of Evil says Yes to.

The more evil there is in the world, the more opportunity there is for us to defy the Will of the Principle of Evil. The more savagery, brutality, callousness and neglect in the world, the more opportunity to act work in favour of civility, class, compassion and good cheer.

If we had incarnated into one of the heavenly realms, there would be little to do other than just chill out. That’s great fun if one is of a high spiritual frequency, because then one gets to experience the pleasure of interacting with other beings of high spiritual frequency. Every moment is a blissful revealing of some astonishing novelty.

If one is of a low spiritual frequency, however, it’s not enjoyable to incarnate in the higher realms, because one will get rejected by the beings that inhabit them. In most cases, those beings will not want to sully themselves by interacting with a being of a low frequency, any more than a group of humans would invite a pig to dine with them at a restaurant. And the difference in frequency between beings of two different realms can be much, much greater than the difference in frequency between humans and pigs.

After enough time has been spent being shunned and rejected, most beings realise that they don’t really belong in such a realm, around high-frequency beings. The sense of loneliness that they feel will eventually become overwhelming. And so they will incarnate, by choice, into the hellish realms, where the density of the world affords the opportunity to radically alter one’s frequency of consciousness.

In these hellish realms, one is confronted with the reality of death, which does not exist in the heavenly realms. The reality of death makes it possible for us to say No to it. All creatures that are born must die, but to dwell on this is to miss the point. The point is that by working to say No to death in this realm, we work to align our consciousness with the Will of God.

Even without the threat of death, suffering is ever-present in any realm below the heavenly ones. So by working to say No to suffering in this realm, we can also work to align our consciousness with the Will of God.

Any being that enters one of the hellish realms, and then works to say No to suffering and death, will raise the frequency of their consciousness. Raise it high enough, and it will become possible, after death, for them to be welcomed into the next world as a hero. In any case, they will get a realm full of beings who are a fractal expression of their own frequency, as per the Law of Assortative Reincarnation.

If one has raised their frequency of consciousness high enough, then incarnating into the next world will come as a great relief. One will be reunited with the frequencies that one encountered in one’s past lives, and on the best possible terms.

If not, one will incarnate into next world imperfect. This might also come as a relief, as one might still be liberated from the sensations of suffering that accompany existence in this hellish world. This relief, however, will soon turn to dismay, as the beings in the higher world come to reject one for being of such a low frequency of consciousness.

Many might prefer, in such an instance, to incarnate into one of the hellish realms. Rather than being shunned by high-frequency beings in one of the heavenly realms, and suffering the immense loneliness that ensues, many would prefer to wage spiritual warfare with the Principle of Evil here in one of the hellish realms. The rewards are much greater and much more immediate.

Being here, in this hellish realm, could be thought of as much like moving overseas for a higher income. It’s scary, challenging and often frightening and unpleasant, but the rewards are much greater than remaining in comfort. The hellish nature of this place creates such a powerful temptation to do evil that truly heroic resistance to that evil becomes possible.

Ultimately, then: this world may be hell, but that’s a good thing, because it gives us a chance to rapidly and dramatically change the frequency of our consciousness. With a sufficient effort of will, it’s possible to transmute even the nastiest and most bestial consciousness into something angelic.

If this world were less hellish, and if the suffering here would be less intense, the opportunity to transmute the frequency of one’s consciousness would be less. The decisions we made would be less impactful, because the influence of the Principle of Evil would be much weaker. Only a very gradual shift in frequency would be possible.

There are realms more hellish than this. Let us work to not go there!

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!

Free Speech Under Attack VI

This reading carries on from here.

The 16th chapter in Free Speech Under Attack is ‘Free Speech and the Fate of Socrates’ by Tim Wikiriwhi.

This chapter recounts the trial and death of Socrates, who angered the elites of ancient Athens by telling the truth. Those who represented the status quo, and who therefore benefit the most from the commonly-accepted lies, were happy to tell lies about Socrates or to use political force against him.

This is not much different to how Human Rights Commissioner Paul Hunt got the mainstream media to tell the nation that VJM Publishing was similar in mentality to Brenton Tarrant, just because we sold ‘It’s Okay To Be White’ t-shirts. There is nothing that a corrupt ruling class hates more than an honest person explaining the lies and falsehoods used by the ruling class to maintain their dominance.

Wikiriwhi puts it best when he says that “Free speech has always been despised by those seeking to perpetuate falsehoods and control the minds of the ‘sheeple’.” This point cannot be laboured enough – those against free speech always take their position because they wish to perpetuate lies.

Unfortunately, Wikiriwhi credits Protestant Christianity with free speech in the West, when Protestants were still burning people at the stake for heresy as little as 400 years ago. Calvinists in Switzerland were even happy to burn to death as great a man as Michael Servetus. The truth is that all the rights we possess have been prised from the claws of an Abrahamic theocracy that has darkened the West for over 1,600 years.

However, Wikiriwhi is dead right when he says that free speech has to be defended to the utmost, for, without it, all the other freedoms are lost in turn. He’s also right when he points out that the modern left hate no-one more than a member of a slave demographic who has escaped the plantation (Wikiriwhi is Maori). He concludes by pointing out that trying to silence people is the real hate.

The 17th chapter is ‘Hey, Give Us Back Our Rights’ by Robert Stanmore.

Stanmore opens this chapter by recounting the ways that free speech rights have been stripped away in favour of supposed other rights. The New Zealand Human Rights Act makes abusive and insulting language illegal – Stanmore contends that this should be changed. Laws must punish actions, not thoughts.

He points out that most of the political elite support restrictions on free speech, as shown by their widespread support for the Harmful Digital Communications Act in 2015. As such, the people are going to have to fight them in order to assert their rights to free speech.

This chapter mentions, at several points, David Seymour’s Freedom to Speak Bill. It also points out that it is often foreign interests that are against our rights to speak freely. Fundamentally, however, our enemies are not foreigners but the enemies of Western Civilisation themselves, whether external or internal. Free speech is an essential human right, and anyone who would take it from us is our enemy.

In summary, Free Speech Under Attack is an excellent and brave book by some intelligent and original thinkers. It’s a very timely volume, given the relentless and broad-fronted assault on free speech currently being carried out by authoritarians, particularly leftist ones. With any luck, many of the suggestions in it will be adopted by a wider movement of free people.

Anyone who believes in cognitive liberty and who doesn’t trust the mainstream media (i.e. the typical VJM Publishing reader) would enjoy reading this book.

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!

Neoliberal Totalitarianism

The 20th Century gave us the right-wing totalitarianism of the Nazis and the left-wing totalitarianism of the Communists. The trauma caused by these ideologies caused people to gravitate towards the centre, in the belief that this was the opposite of totalitarianism. But the 21st Century has given us a new, centrist form of totalitarianism: the neoliberal form.

Neoliberal totalitarianism announced itself last week with the unpersoning of American President Donald Trump. Trump was first banned from Twitter, and then FaceBook, and then the rest of the neoliberal establishment piled in. Within days, he was even banned from Spotify.

The tech tyrants justified this by saying that Trump had violated the terms and conditions of the respective websites. But Twitter continues to host representatives of ISIS – who have been described as “winning the social media war” – as well as supporters of the Chinese Communist Party who argue in favour of concentration camps, and people sharing videos celebrating the Charlie Hebdo murders.

Nazi totalitarianism sought to control everyone’s lives down to the minutest detail, and was willing to destroy anyone who resisted. Communist totalitarianism also sought to control everyone’s lives down to the minutest detail, and was also willing to destroy anyone who resisted. The rhetoric that these forces used may have been different, but fundamentally both were authoritarian movements.

Neoliberal totalitarianism is just as bad. Like Nazism and Communism, it seeks total control over the lives of the citizens. Much like other totalitarian systems, it involves Big Business and Big Government working together against the common person. The degree of authoritarianism is the same. As Trump learned, when the neoliberal totalitarians decide that you’re gone, you’re gone.

Neoliberal totalitarianism is much more sophisticated than either Nazism or Communism.

The crude tyrannies of the 20th Century were not at all shy about making enemies, whether external or internal. Theirs was very much a rule of iron. Dissenters were crushed, sometimes literally as in the case of Tienanmen Square. Consent was achieved through submission to fear. Secret police were an everyday menace.

The tyrannies of the 21st Century are more the rule of silver. The logic is to abnormalise violence as much as possible, with the intent of making it unthinkable for any of their victims to use it against them. Neoliberal totalitarianism achieves its power through absolute control of the media matrix.

The reason for the current purge of wrongthinkers from social media is to maintain the effectiveness of that media control.

Josef Goebbels, in his Principles of Propaganda, wrote that “Propaganda must be planned and executed by only one authority. It must issue all the propaganda directives. It must explain propaganda directives to important officials and maintain their morale. It must oversee other agencies’ activities which have propaganda consequences.”

This totalitarian approach was the basis of the Nazi propaganda strategy. Far from recognising the value of free speech, the Nazis banned every propaganda organ that wasn’t under their control. The Nazi Party would be the sole source of truth for the German citizenry. A similar situation arose in Communist countries.

Goebbels understood that, if all other voices were silenced, people would unquestioningly follow the narratives they were given. It was only when other voices started to question the veracity of the Nazi propaganda that it started to become less effective. So all those questioning it were silenced. Anyone pointing out how the Nazis were lying were liquidated, many in concentration camps.

Totalitarian governments attack free speech with more fervour than they attack any other freedom. This is because free speech is the basis of every other freedom. Without free speech, the other freedoms cannot be peacefully defended. The loss of free speech is therefore the breach in the dam that leads inevitably to tyranny.

The neoliberal totalitarianism of today is pushing for the same degree of central control over media content that existed in Nazi or Communist countries. They do this out of similar motivations to the Nazi and Communist totalitarians. Desiring power, and being indifferent to the suffering of the people whose freedoms would be lost, the totalitarian is happy to trade those freedoms away for more control.

The only major difference between the neoliberal totalitarians of 2020 and the Nazi/Communist totalitarians of 1940 is that today’s tyrants are more subtle. They use their total control of the apparatus of propaganda to train the citizens to police each other. They don’t need to put wrongthinkers in gulags if they can train the citizens to shun those wrongthinkers into submission.

Because the citizens themselves act as the overseers of the slave plantation, it feels like they are doing so consensually. As long as no-one questions why it is that people think they way they do, or who decided that they should think that way, the hate machine can roll onwards unimpeded. In this manner, wrongthinkers can be neutralised without provoking resistance.

Any future solution to neoliberal totalitarianism must base itself on anti-totalitarian grounds. This will require common agreement across all of left, right and centre that totalitarian measures are unacceptable. The first step might be to declare common agreement with George Washington that “If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”

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!