Elon Musk: Kshatriya

In the ancient Laws of Manu, a quadripartite division of society is made. Known in the West as the “caste system”, it divides people into prescribed social roles based on the type of person they naturally are. There are few more controversial ideas in the West today than the caste system, but there’s an esoteric truth to it that cannot be ignored.

In this conception there are brahmin (the scholars, priests and teachers), kshatriya (the warriors, rulers and administrators), vaishya (the merchants and farmers) and shudra (servants and labourers). Each person can be assigned into any one of these castes depending on the gunas they inherit, where gunas are understood to be properties, qualities or attributes.

This essay contends that this caste system reflects the true alchemical divisions of humankind.

Plato, in the Parable of the Metals in Republic, wrote about a division of human souls into gold, silver, bronze and iron. These are very closely analogous to the four castes, such that those with souls of gold are brahmins, silver are kshatriyas, bronze are vaishyas and iron are shudras.

These divisions are not as arbitrary as they might first appear. They come very close to a natural fourfold division of the Great Masculine Axis, namely into two precious metals and two useful metals, wherein the two precious metals represent the wealth of the royalty and the wealth of the gentlemen, and the two useful metals represent the commerce of the merchantry and the tools with which the peasantry works the soil.

This division, much like the cycle of energies represented in the Quadrijitu, is natural and archetypal. As such, it can be found in the West today even if not acknowledged. Not only can the souls of people be placed along this four-step axis, so can the spirits of times and places.

The current problem in the West is that we have sunk into a dark age, deeper and darker than any before. As such, there are no longer enough brahmins or kshatriyas for quality government. Society now mostly produces shudras, with the vaishyas forming the ruling caste.

In situations like these, what’s needed is for a kshatriya to rise up – a man of silver above the men of bronze and iron – and to lead the people to somewhere greater. It’s necessary for a higher man, with a higher vision, to lead the way, and for the masses to follow. This kshatriya must open the space for a new generation of brahmins to thrive before a true Golden Age can begin.

Enter Elon Musk.

The West today is marked by a complete collapse in spiritual values. The vast majority of us are soulless, nihilistic consumers, and most of the rest are clinging to the corpse of a religion that no-one really believes in any more. Nietzsche’s prediction that widespread atheism would lead to widespread misery comes more true every year.

We’re primed to enter a new spiritual paradigm. Never before has the West been more ready to receive a new interpretation of the perennial philosophy. All that’s needed is for some great king to make space for the priesthood of that new interpretation.

In purchasing Twitter, and in firing most of the censors, such that Twitter has become the Internet’s premier free-speech platform, Musk demonstrated to the whole world that there are values higher than profits. Free speech is such an important value that, without it, society is lost, and he understands this. Musk has raised a middle finger to the totalitarians and to their attempts at curtailing free speech.

This essay also contends that Musk is the first of the great kshatriya souls that will be born into the West as we pass out of our Iron Age and into a new Golden Age. These kshatriyas will create the conditions for the brahmins to expand into. That the brahmins have souls of gold means that, once enough of them are present, a class of philosopher-kings can be formed.

There are few things kshatriyas like more than making merchants seethe, which is why Musk trolls the money-worshippers so hard. Merchants can’t understand Twitter being used for a higher purpose (i.e. more than mere profit), hence why they’re so upset right now. But this is only the beginning.

If Elon Musk would form the provisions for a new spiritual school – one that is tasked specifically with bringing genuine spirituality back to mankind – the seething would be unprecedented. He would truly be the kshatriya king that created a portal for brahmins to re-enter the world.

The foremost sign that such a thing might be possible was when Musk smoked cannabis on the Joe Rogan show. Rogan is one of those who are aware that cannabis, along with other substances, is a spiritual sacrament. How long until Musk walks the pathway from cannabis to psilocybin and DMT? From at least one vantage point, that seems like his fate.

Elon Musk could be more than merely an heir to an emerald mining empire. He could be the spark that sets off a new spiritual era. The way he has run Twitter suggests that he is aware of higher values, something above the prime vaishya value of profit. Could he be the conduit through which higher values return to Western life?

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

If you enjoyed reading this essay/article, you can get a compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles from 2021 from Amazon as a Kindle ebook or paperback. 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!

Where To Now For The Freedom Movement?

Another General Election has been held in New Zealand. The special votes are yet to be counted, but one thing is already clear: the political establishment won the election, and the freedom movement lost. While we wait to see exactly which form of the political establishment will rule over us for the next three years, there’s an opportunity to take stock of where we are and where we’re going.

Let’s recount the history of the actual freedom movement.

In a New Zealand context the freedom movement truly began with the opposition to World War One. New Zealand introduced conscription in 1916. This meant the Government forced Kiwis to fight overseas to kill the enemies of the international bankers who rule the Anglo world. Naturally, sane people opposed this, leading to them becoming labelled as “conscientious objectors“.

Conscription is a major freedom issue. There are few more egregious examples of totalitarianism than forcing men to kill people they don’t know for reasons they don’t understand. The conscientious objectors to conscription in World Wars One and Two were therefore the first real freedom fighters in New Zealand. Archibald Baxter was a household name for this reason.

The battle against globalist military adventurism continued with the battles against compulsory military training, which didn’t end in New Zealand until 1972. The basic principle remained: freedom fighters oppose the Government forcing people to do things that aren’t in their interest.

When forced militarism ended in the wake of the end of the Vietnam War, the globalist control freaks opened up a new front against the peoples of the world in the form of the Drug War. Locking people up in prison for using medicinal substances or spiritual sacraments might not be as brutal as conscripting them into battle, but the callous sadism of it was enough to spark resistance.

The names of the freedom fighters who resisted the War on Drugs are numerous. Timothy Leary, Ken Kesey, Terence McKenna, Jack Herer and many others fought for the freedom to explore our own minds free of government interference. Inspired by such people, the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party was founded in 1996.

After the 20th Century ended we got 9/11 and the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act introduced restrictions on civil liberties that were previously considered unthinkable. First and foremost, it allowed for widespread spying on and surveillance of American citizens by the American Government. Incredible volumes of information were collected on everyone in an effort to predict the next terrorist attack.

These measures were soon copied by other Anglo nations, leading to the Search and Surveillance Act in New Zealand. The end result was a new wave of freedom fighters. Julian Assange and Edward Snowden are among the best known of those who resisted the new totalitarianism, this being more like Big Brother than even Orwell had predicted.

Recently we have seen the Covid pandemic excuse a new suite of totalitarian measures from the authorities. Vaccine mandates outraged a large number of people and led to the Parliament Lawn protests in 2022. These protests were one of the major achievements of the freedom movement in New Zealand, and created another new wave of people who understood the value of freedom for its own sake.

Looking back at all of these battles, some patterns are evident.

First, the freedom movement is primarily a movement against government coercion. It’s not terrorism to understand that governments often have different interests to their citizens. When those interests clash, governments often use their monopoly on violence to force the citizens to do the governments’ bidding.

The freedom movement isn’t primarily a moral crusade. It isn’t primarily a temperance, chastity or Puritanical movement. It might contain elements of those things on occasion, but the number one enemy is government forcing the citizens to do things against their own interests (as determined by the citizens). The freedom movement is certainly not about using the power of government to coerce others to behave morally.

Second, the freedom movement is against the freedom to cause harm to others. We must observe Zechariah Chafee’s maxim that “Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins.” As such, no marital rapists, pedophiles, armed robbers, slavery advocates, hard drug traffickers, cheap labour importers or vaccine mandate supporters need be included.

These two points give us a much better idea of what we can agree freedom is, and therefore what the freedom movement is about.

Kelvyn Alp’s suggestion was to not worry about freedom so much, and to focus on truth instead. This means facts and evidence first and foremost. This makes sense as freedoms are usually downstream from perceptions of truth. Unfortunately there are many different ideas about what truth is, and many different ideas about how to determine truth from falsehood.

It seems that the freedom movement can’t make any progress until we develop a coherent fundamental philosophy. This will have to include the values and beliefs commonly agreed upon by those who genuinely desire freedom. Perhaps the model to follow is the American Constitutional Convention that took place after the American Revolution.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

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!

Possible Coalitions After The NZ General Election On October 14th 2023

It’s looking likely that the 2023 New Zealand General Election will be a close-run affair. It’s also looking likely that we won’t know who the next ruling power/coalition of powers will be for several weeks, as we must wait for negotiations to conclude. This article looks at who the next ruling coalition might be.

1. National, ACT, New Zealand First

Seemingly the most likely coalition at time of writing. The received wisdom seems to be that it’s National’s election to lose. This wisdom is the result of National’s relatively high polling – between 36% and 38% recently – and the fact that Winston Peters has previously promised to not work with Labour again.

If National gets 38% of the vote, ACT 9% and NZF 7%, that would give them enough Parliamentary seats to form a by-election proof majority. As of today this seems like the most likely outcome. It would make Chris Luxon the Prime Minister, and could very well collapse quickly on account of squabbling between the nationalist Peters and the globalist David Seymour.

1a. National, New Zealand First with confidence and supply from ACT

This would be the reverse of the 2017 Canterbury Government, with National replacing Labour and ACT replacing the Greens. It appears to be the second-most likely election outcome at time of writing, following the assumption that Peters will keep to his promise of not working with Labour.

This is David Seymour’s nightmare option, even though it appears to be much more stable than outcome 1. If New Zealand First goes past ACT over the next week, and wins more seats on election night, it becomes highly likely. Chris Luxon might prefer this option instead of option 1 in order to avoid the mess of a three-way coalition.

1b. National, ACT

Chris Luxon and David Seymour’s preferred option. A coalition between National and ACT would allow them to go full capitalist without any kind of nationalist handbrake. They could cut as much welfare and import as much cheap labour as they wanted. They could put interest deductability back on landlords’ mortgages and scrap the Fair Pay Agreements.

It seems that many are switching to New Zealand First in the hope that Peters might moderate some of this push towards soulless capitalism. Those switching appear to be coming from both National and Labour. Many centrists appear to now believe that voting for Peters is the only way to prevent Luxon and Seymour from running riot.

2. Labour, Greens, Maori Party

The dreaded “Coalition of Chaos”. The thought of Labour, Greens and the Maori Party working together without the calming reason of Winston Peters evokes all sorts of Communist horrors. Fears of capital gains taxes and wealth taxes – or possibly even private land confiscation – haunt the nightmares of wealthy people the country over.

That’s not all. A Labour, Greens, Maori Party coalition would make co-governance a reality for New Zealand. This could raise racial tensions in New Zealand to American levels. Already we have the Groundswell protests, the Stop Co-Governance tour and a variety of protest parties running for election. A coalition with the Maori Party in it could cause a boilover.

2a. Labour, New Zealand First with confidence and supply from Greens and/or Maori Party

This option appears to be considered the third-most likely by election observers at time of writing. It’s what is likely to happen if Peters decides that he can’t trust the right-wing parties, which would rule out option 1. It’s likely that Labour and New Zealand First would both prefer this outcome to any other left-wing outcome.

It’s the property industry’s nightmare scenario. A repeat of 2017’s Canterbury Government would mean the property industry’s hope of tax deductions for mortgage interest on investments would be gone. It could even mean a mass house-building program, which would relieve the artificial scarcity of housing, destroying profits.

National voters would be outraged, again, if Peters went with Labour again. But just as they couldn’t do anything about it in 2017, they won’t be able to do anything about it if Labour gets 35 seats, the Greens 17 and New Zealand First 9 or more. That would be 61 seats, and that’s enough.

2b. Labour, Greens, Maori Party, New Zealand First

For all the talk about a National/ACT government vs. a National/ACT/NZF one, the 2023 General Election is far from a done deal. It seems to be assumed by the herd that this particular coalition choice is unworkable because Labour has plummeted in the polls and Peters has said that he won’t go into coalition with Labour.

2017 proved to all that elections are won by coalitions of 61 or more seats, not by the party with the most votes. National Party voters were livid in 2017 when Winston Peters chose to go into a coalition with the Labour Party. But Peters reasoned, understandably, that his heavily Maori and working-class white constituency would not be well served by a National government.

That same calculus applies in 2023. In fact, Chris Hipkins is so weak that Peters could even demand that he be the Prime Minister in such an arrangement, otherwise he would go with National. If Hipkins agreed, and National couldn’t match it, then this outcome becomes very likely. It might be a mess, but then again it might not.

3. National, Labour

The “Grand Coalition” has been written about before, and seems more likely with every day that passes. The Leaders’ Debates showed that there is very little difference between the two major parties. Many have asked, therefore: why don’t National and Labour just join forces, and keep the “extremists” in ACT and the Greens out?

This is more likely to happen the more difficult post-election negotiations are. If Peters holds the balance of power again, some will be worried about a repeat of 1996, when negotiations took several weeks. If NZ Loyal or TOP manage to win any seats, those negotiations will be even harder. Difficulties will make Luxon and Hipkins look at each other and see potential alllies.

4. National, Greens

This possibility is certainly unlikely. But if National wins 36% and the Greens win 13%, Luxon might decide that working with the Greens – and chucking them a few bones – could be more stable than a coalition where Peters and Seymour were expected to work together.

This outcome is probably the “Suicide Coalition” from the Greens’ point of view. Throwing their support behind a right-wing government would cause many of their members to abandon the party. Many, if not most, of their voters would be outraged to see Green MPs help the National Party back into power. Hence, this is one of the least likely outcomes.

5. A coalition with/without New Zealand Loyal or TOP

If an outsider party such as New Zealand Loyal or TOP won any seats, all the above calculations go out the window. Even three seats would be enough to have a good chance of holding the balance of power and therefore being able to force some concessions.

If New Zealand Loyal won the balance of power, the grand coalition will truly be on the cards, especially if New Zealand First wins a lot of seats. It’s unclear whether NZ Loyal, who appear to be alternative centrist, have a preferred coalition partner out of National or Labour. In all likelihood, they will expect to sit outside of government for at least their first term.

If TOP won the balance of power, however, it could be different. Understanding New Zealand 3 revealed the extent to which TOP voters are similar to Greens voters, and those TOP voters would surely be as outraged as the Greens ones to see their party support a right-wing government. A coalition of Labour, TOP, Greens and/or New Zealand First might be possible to keep the Maori Party out.

6. No coalition, new election

Luxon has threatened to take New Zealand back to the polls if he doesn’t get what he wants on October 14. In other words, if negotiations between National, ACT and New Zealand First don’t produce a workable coalition, then we might need to vote again, in the hope that the new vote tallies do produce such a coalition.

This can be comfortably said to be an empty threat, for several reasons. The first is that it would damage market confidence in New Zealand’s stability. The second is that the voters are likely to punish whoever they blame for having to vote again, and Luxon won’t want that to be him. Much more likely that a grand coalition forms in such an instance.

In summary, the 2023 New Zealand General Election appears in foresight to have a greater variety of realistic outcomes than any previous election. A great number of people will be dismayed and appalled by the results.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms! https://linktr.ee/vjmpublishing
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books! https://www.amazon.com/author/vincemcleod

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!

Xu Xiaodong’s Cautionary Tale, Or What A Social Credit System Could Mean For New Zealand

Xu Xiaodong is a Chinese MMA fighter and wind-up merchant who has gained fame for making fools out of bullshit artists. This has made him a target for the ire of the CCP, who have punished him through use of the Chinese social credit system. Xu’s example provides a cautionary tale about what might be coming the way of New Zealand dissidents.

In particular, Xu has made a fool out out of several supposed martial artists, who claimed to be teaching useful martial skills but who were really just fraudsters. He has challenged several of them to bouts, which he invariably wins within 30 seconds.

This has upset the CCP because they consider the promotion of kung fu and tai chi to be in China’s cultural interests, and therefore that Xu’s actions are harming those interests by making people take kung fu and tai chi less seriously. Xu echoes the master morality of preferring the painful truth to the comfortable lie, in contrast to the slave morality of the CCP.

The most egregious thing about the CCP’s actions here is that Xu is revealing and destroying falsehood. He isn’t telling lies or making outrageous moral pronouncements. He isn’t going around saying that the CCP are evil and should be overthrown. He’s just telling the truth about the ineffective nature of certain traditional martial arts.

Xu Xiaodong is of the same spirit as the men who said that the Earth rotates around the Sun, and who were persecuted for it.

Simply for exposing the truth, Xu is suffering social credit penalties that have a significant impact on his life. One story holds that Xu had to travel for 36 hours without rest to get to the location of one of his fights, because he had been banned from planes and trains. He has also been forbidden from renting rooms in certain hotels.

If New Zealand ever introduces a central bank digital currency (a.k.a. a CBDC), they will have a similar power to suppress dissenters.

The Chinese system already allows the CCP to, for example, switch off a person’s ability to buy alcohol. A New Zealand social credit system based on a CBDC could easily achieve the same ends. Criticise the Government? No alcohol, tobacco or flights for you. No renting a room outside of your delegated containment zone.

A CBDC-based social credit system in New Zealand would also mean that, in the case of a repeat of last year’s Parliament Lawn protests, the New Zealand Government could simply shut off the bank accounts of anyone observed protesting. They could also pre-empt protests from starting by blocking known protesters from accessing the transport necessary to take them to Wellington.

It could mean that the people running alternative media channels like CounterSpin and VJM Publishing could be prevented from owning property, as is currently the case in China for people with the lowest ratings. We could even be prevented from legally accessing the Internet.

New Zealand is already getting close to a situation where a Kiwi cannot hold a government office unless they parrot known lies about the Treaty of Waitangi being a partnership agreement. A social credit system in New Zealand would mean that you have to agree with the Government, even when it’s wrong, or face a penalty.

Imagine not being allowed to take domestic flights because you disagreed with co-governance, or the mass importation of cheap labour, or cannabis prohibition, or any one of the numerous evils that the New Zealand Government inflicts upon its long-suffering people.

The control freaks that forced the Covid mandates on us would love nothing more than to have another go. We already know that they’re planning a CBDC that central governments could use as a social credit system to silence dissenters. Some likely proposals are based on carbon credits, such that each person is allocated a set number of credits per set time period and can lose credits for displeasing the Government.

There are two major ways that freedom-lovers can fight against this.

The first is to raise awareness that it is happening. It’s not schizophrenia to say that powerful ruling-class interests are conspiring to strip rights and freedoms away form the masses. Ruling classes have always done that, all throughout history. The CBDC is just another step towards a Chinese-style social credit system. Make people aware of this.

The second is to explore alternative economies. Sometimes (but not always) this includes criminal ones. The black market has always existed to meet the needs of those who have been ostracised by tyrants. As entheogen users could tell you today, it still does. In any case, people can practice barter or trade for silver bullion without needing to become criminal.

What the case of Xu Xiaodong teaches us is that the tyrannical impulse on the part of the world’s ruling classes never goes away – it simply takes new forms depending on the technology available to it. The Covid mandates showed that the will to totalitarianism still exists among our ruling class. Letting them control us through a social credit system is the last thing the New Zealand nation needs.

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!