If You Want An Alliance To Work, Leave Out The Christofascists

Suggestions did the rounds again this week that the minority parties unite under one banner. This has been a perennial suggestion since my first time in the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party in 2007. Now, as then, egos prevented the suggestion from getting anywhere. One thing would make forming an alliance to get over the 5% threshold much easier: leave out the Christofascists.

Ironically, the most recent suggestion to unite was made by Brian Tamaki. But few are willing to work alongside Tamaki on account of his toxic reputation. Tamaki is a classic example of a Christofascist, Christofascism being “the political direction of all attempts to place Christ at the center of social life and history.”

Tamaki, like his fellows Elliot Ikilei and Leighton Baker, wants to use the State to smash people he hates: drug users, homosexuals and prostitutes being the usual targets. The Christian fascist logic is that these people shouldn’t be tolerated. Like other fascists, the Christofascist has a massively overflated opinion of their own moral judgment.

Christian fascists don’t work well with others. Combining the ruthlessness of the authoritarian right with the arrogance of the authoritarian centre, these fascists are everything politics shouldn’t be: narcissistic, pompous fanatics who literally believe they’re appointed by God to rule over the rest of us.

Few others are as obnoxious as the Christofascist. Like their Abrahamic counterparts the jihadists, the Christofascist exists in a perpetual state of war against all outsiders. This puts him in a mindset of antagonistic, spiteful aggression, exemplified by their rejection of cannabis law reform.

As was observed at the Wellington protests earlier this year, co-operating with Christian fascists is extremely difficult. Not only do they want to hog the stage and the PA system, but they have no respect for other points of view, are happy to negotiate on behalf of everyone else without getting their consent for it, and are willing to jump in at the last minute to steal the limelight.

This level of arrogance is not as great as the arrogance that launched the Inquisition or murdered Hypatia, but it’s getting up there. It’s an arrogance that can only be submitted to, not co-operated with. So the proposal of this essay is that we don’t co-operate with them, i.e. we leave the Christofascists to form their own party and let the true freedom movement unite under a separate banner.

This arrangement would leave New Conservative, Advance NZ, ONE Party, Vision NZ and any Brian Tamaki, Elliot Ikilei or Leighton Baker-related vehicles to form their own Christofascist party. This party could then have the policy of banning all drugs, homosexuality, prostitution, music, dancing and levity. They can even freely propose to again make it legal to rape your wife.

The non-Christofascist parties outside of Parliament won 138,455 votes in 2020, or some 4.9% of the total (New Zealand First 75,021, or 2.6%; The Opportunities Party 43,449, or 1.5%; Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party 13,329, or 0.5%; NZ Outdoors Party 3,256, or 0.1%; Sustainable NZ Party 1,880, or 0.1%; Social Credit 1,520, or 0.1%). If these parties would combine under one non-Christofascist banner, they could seriously challenge the 5% threshold.

Possibly this would have to be a Winston Peters-led movement in order to get enough votes, and he might reason that he has a better chance by himself with New Zealand First (which is fair, considering that he’s been in Parliament with them before). Some might not think favourably of Peters, but he has one quality that contrasts him with the Establishment – he’s a nationalist.

An anti-Establishment, anti-Christofascist alliance would inevitably be nationalist in character. As such, it’s fitting for Winston Peters and his party to be at the centre of it. This might make it hard to integrate The Opportunities Party, who are led by – of all things – a foreign ex-Goldman Sachs banker. But integration of the others would not be too difficult.

The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party is already nationalist in the sense that the vast majority of their voters are New Zealand-born, and very few of their voters are immigrants. An alliance that explicitly rejected the War on Drugs could easily win the support of ALCP voters, and this would suit a nationalist vehicle, as the War on Drugs was an imported foreign concept from the beginning.

The Outdoors Party, Sustainable NZ and Social Credit have several quality candidates in (among others) Sue Grey, Vernon Tava, Chris Leitch and Amanda Vickers. If candidates like these could ally with the high-IQ Kiwis in The Opportunities Party (like Dr. Ben Peters), with a token representative from the ALCP, and under the paternal guidance of Winston Peters for one last crusade against the Establishment, they could do well.

If you enjoyed reading this essay/article, you can get a compilation of the Best VJMP Essays and Articles from 2021 from Amazon for Kindle or Amazon for CreateSpace (for international readers), or TradeMe (for Kiwis). A compilation 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!

Why The Government Lets Violent Criminals Run Rampant

Many were stunned by the news this week that Daniel Havili, who killed Fau Vake with a coward’s punch in Auckland, was sentenced to a mere 33 months’ imprisonment. Havili will, in all likelihood, be released after serving a little over a year. Considering the historical severity of sentences for killing people, this is very close to getting away scot free.

This incredibly light touch comes in the wake of other soft sentences for violent assaults. In one notorious recent case, Mongrel Mob chapter president Terry Berryman was sentenced to 23 months’ imprisonment for an 18-man gang home invasion that stomped on a man’s head in front of his children. Most of the gang members involved were not prosecuted.

This has prompted many to ask: why such light sentences for such barbaric crimes?

These sentences seem incongruous with the fact that cannabis growers such as Harley Brown get a similar amount of time in prison for growing medicinal cannabis. Brown was sentenced to 27 months’ imprisonment for a piddling amount of cannabis – at most $100,000 worth. This is for an “offence” that not even 51% of the New Zealand population believes should be an offence.

Other working-class whites, like Philip Arps, don’t even have to grow cannabis. Arps was sentenced to 21 months’ imprisonment for sharing the Christchurch mosque shooting video.

So why do violent criminals almost get a free ride from the courts, when peaceful people get smashed? Why would sharing a video attract a similar sentence to a gang leader doing a home invasion in which children are subjected to the sight of their father getting his head stomped?

The answer lies in understanding the motivations, intentions and aspirations of the ruling class.

Everyone who knows anything about psychology knows that violent criminals cheer at such weak sentences as the ones listed above. For professional criminals, arrests and prison time are just part of the cost of doing business. The lighter the sentencing, the lower the expenses. Therefore, the lighter the sentencing, the more crime pays.

These weak sentences mean that criminals can freely intimidate other people with threats of violence, knowing that the judicial consequences will be minimal. When sentences are as weak as they are in the West today, violent criminals get to reign in terror over the vulnerable (usually working-class) communities in which they reside. Even if the Police deal to them, they’ll be out again soon enough, and in most cases barely inconvenienced.

This end result – widespread terror – is not accidental. It is, in fact, the entire goal of having a justice system in which violent criminals are left to run rampant. In a state of terror, both individuals and populations are unusually willing to forfeit their rights, needs and desires. As such, it’s easier to rule over a terrorised population than a free one.

The Government allows violent criminals to run rampant in New Zealand for one simple reason: to terrorise the rest of us into submission.

VJM Publishing wrote in a previous article why the Government lets in terrorists like the New Lynn supermarket stabber Ahamed Samsudeen. The reason is the same. They let violent criminals run loose for the same reason that they let terrorists run loose: to maximise the degree of fear the average person feels.

Widespread fear makes the population submissive, and is necessary for any authoritarian government to maintain control. Without the fear, the population would rise up against authoritarianism and overthrow it. The fear beats them down and makes them suspicious of their neighbours and workmates, so that no-one organises any resistance.

The control system has many ways of spreading fear through the populace – the foremost of which is the mainstream media – but violent criminals serve this purpose as well as terrorists do.

The surge of adrenaline people get from seeing a patched gang member in public, and the adrenaline fatigue that inevitably follows it, primes people’s minds to submit. Engendering this submission, as George Orwell showed us, is the end goal of all political action and is the ultimate aspiration of the control system.

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!

Most Westerners Are Now Slaves

New Zealand was appalled yesterday by the news that a Samoan chief named Joseph Matamata had been convicted of enslaving 13 of his fellow Samoans. Matamata had brought the slaves to New Zealand as cheap labour to work in vineyards and orchards, and had kept for himself the vast bulk of their wages. New Zealand may have been appalled, but the average Western worker is a slave anyway.

A slave is defined as a person “who is someone forbidden to quit their service for an enslaver, and who is treated by the enslaver as their property. Slavery typically involves the enslaved person being made to perform some form of work while also having their location dictated by the enslaver. Historically, when people were enslaved, it was often because they were indebted, broke the law, or suffered a military defeat.”

The position of the average worker in the current economic and political paradigm of the West fits this definition. We currently live in a system where the average worker can labour all week long and have all of their productivity taken off them so that they are left with nothing at the end of it all. They might, in theory, be able to choose their location, but in practice they either don’t have enough money to change location or the remuneration is no better anywhere else.

The chattel slavery of the American South before the Civil War is held up as one of history’s worst human rights abuses. We are told that slaves in America were treated so poorly that they had every moral right to kill their enslavers. This is a belief with potentially serious implications, given that chattel slaves weren’t treated significantly worse than the average Western worker, who also labours all week to be left with nothing.

Profits, taxes and rents are so high in New Zealand that even those earning above the median wage are left with almost nothing that they can put towards owning their own house one day. Not only is the average house price now close to a million dollars, and not only is saving any real money restricted to the very wealthiest of income-earners, but what little savings one can accrue is getting rapidly eaten up by interest.

According to the New Zealand Government’s own cost of living calculator, a general practitioner living in Auckland with a partner and two children and making $133,000 per year will run a $317 deficit every week if they want an average standard of living. So not even a qualified doctor can afford to save anything towards a house now.

If a qualified doctor, in the top 1% of the population by education, can’t afford a house, that effectively means that no worker can. The only people who can afford houses now are those who already have money and those who manage the workers on their behalf, and the rest of us are just slaves, doomed to labour our entire lives for a standard of living lower than that our ancestors enjoyed 100 years ago.

Some might argue that the situation of the New Zealand worker is different today because, although the New Zealand worker is left with nothing after their workweek, at least they don’t have to endure the physical abuse that chattel slaves did.

But physical abuse has simply been replaced with psychological abuse. The New Zealand worker isn’t hit with whips, but they are told every day in the media that they are racist, sexist, hate speakers, wrongthinkers and generally a river of filth. This psychological abuse has a similar end effect to physical abuse: it depresses the spirit into a state of abject submission.

Moreover, at least a slave in the American South could rely on the solidarity of his fellow slaves. The New Zealand worker can’t even rely on that. Should the New Zealand worker complain of their poor situation, they’ll be told to “suck it up” or “just work harder”. As if how hard one works means anything when all one’s productivity is taken away!

Although workers have an easier time of it in other Western countries (Europe, North America and Australia), these countries are all also trapped in the low wage/high house prices and inflation death spiral.

Goethe once said that “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” Workers of the West don’t have physical shackles around their ankles, but they have psychological shackles around their minds. These shackles have made them submit to a system where the vast majority of workers are left with no surplus for even the most physically or psychologically challenging work.

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!

A System That We Can All Be Proud Of

In a fiery exchange between a mainstream media lackey and CounterSpin Media host Kelvyn Alp, Alp summarised the desire of the Wellington protesters and the freedom movement more generally: a system that we can all be proud of. In the absence of any better suggestion, this essay outlines what such a system might look like.

There is one big problem with the current New Zealand system: the vast majority of the benefits from all the work performed go to a very small number of people. Under our current economic arrangement, the benefits of labour don’t go to the labourer but to the owner of the land upon which the labour was performed. This is called capitalism, and if you don’t like it you’re responsible for tens of millions of deaths by starvation in Russia and China.

It’s an ugly system. It’s not much different to medieval feudalism, in which the vast majority of people were serfs beholden to a lord. The serfs worked all day, and then the lord came in and took their productivity away for his own purposes, leaving the serfs with barely enough to get through to the next tax day (if they were lucky).

Being a New Zealander is a constant humiliation.

Not only must one deal with the fact that one’s wages hardly go anywhere, but one must also deal with the pettiness of average New Zealanders. This pettiness follows from being a small, isolated country infested with the slave morality of Christianity. There’s nothing we love more than ripping our neighbours down once they make something of themselves. Anyone with any self-esteem has to be destroyed.

Nothing about the way our system is run engenders pride. We have to aim higher.

A system that we can all be proud of would entail change from the ground up. It would require a total paradigm shift from a mentality of profit before all, to a mentality of alleviating the suffering of the New Zealand nation. It would require raising solidarity between the various communities of New Zealand, rather than setting them against each other.

The first step in bringing this about is to restore basic dignity to the average worker by making it possible for them to get ahead.

As of right now, the average New Zealand worker has no chance of ever owning their own home. Wages are so low in comparison to house prices and rents that the average house now costs over 25,000 hours of labour at the average wage. This contrasts rudely with the average house price in 1992: 7,000 hours of labour at the average wage. Not only does the average worker have trouble buying a house, they have trouble saving at all.

It’s impossible for the average worker to be proud of a system that exploits them to such an extent. It’s like asking a plantation slave to be proud of the plantation system. Our economy must be completely redesigned, so that it once again becomes possible for the average worker to buy a house and raise a family on their wage.

To this end, the Reserve Bank of New Zealand ought to be given an entirely new remit: to alleviate the suffering of the New Zealand people. This new remit would replace the existing focus on inflation and unemployment. The problem with this existing focus is that it inclines the Reserve Bank to drop interest rates to the floor for the sake of encouraging borrowing (and thereby spending), but these low interest rates just lead to ballooning house prices.

Also to this end, the mass importation of cheap labour must stop immediately. There is nothing that has lowered the standard of living of the average Kiwi worker more than having been forced to compete with imported cheap labour. Increasing the supply of cheap labour inevitably lowers the price of that labour, and New Zealand’s historical addiction to it is one of the prime reasons why our wages are in the toilet. We have to go clean.

A final step is that tax incentives must be used to attract investment in productive capital. A land tax must be introduced to shift investment from land banking to business. New Zealand’s productivity is infamously low, the result of many things, but foremost among them is the lack of capital investment. Because New Zealand employers have historically always been able to import cheap labour, they have not been incentivised to invest in productive capital.

None of these suggestions require jingoism, supremacy or xenophobia. New Zealand doesn’t need to denigrate other nations in order to create a system that we can all be proud of. But we have to give our own people a fair deal. And this starts with giving the everyday Kiwi a fair standard of living for full-time work. That a full-time worker can afford a decent house that they can raise a family in could be the basis of a system that we could all be proud of.

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!