The Most Terrifying Statistics You've Ever Seen About New Zealand

The Most Terrifying Statistics You’ve Ever Seen About New Zealand

As a previous essay here has discussed, demography is destiny. The future belongs to those who show up for it. Unfortunately for us, it looks like the future will belong to the stupid. Dan McGlashan, demographer and author of Understanding New Zealand 3, explains the grim details.

The terrifying reality revealed within the correlation matrix above is that dumb people are massively outbreeding smart ones.

There is a very strong positive correlation between having any of the university degrees and having no children – at least 0.69. This means that the best-educated segment of the population and the childless segment of the population overlap to a major extent.

By contrast, the correlation between being in any of the three least-educated groups and having no children was -0.72 or even more strongly negative. This means that it’s very rare for someone with little education to abstain from reproduction. And when people with little education breed, they tend to do so without restraint.

Having no qualifications at all is significantly positively correlated with having three or more children. The strongest correlation in this table is between having no qualifications and having four children – this was a whopping 0.94. The correlations between having no qualifications and having five children (0.87) and between having no qualifications and having six children (0.72) were also very strong.

Having university qualifications is significantly negatively correlated with having three or more children. The strongest correlation in this regard was the -0.92 between having a Bachelor’s degree and having four children. The correlations between having an Honours or a Master’s degree and having four children were almost as strongly negative. Smart people simply aren’t breeding in New Zealand today.

Over the course of two or three generations, these trends will lead to significantly fewer people capable of completing higher education, and significantly more people incapable of doing so. On current demographic trends, therefore, it looks like New Zealand will become dumber and dumber. As it does, it will become poorer and poorer, and consequently more shitty and violent in most aspects.

The reasons why this is happening can be understood if one considers the schedule of social incentives that exist in the various classes.

In upper-class families, females are considered children until they are old enough to handle small responsibilities, at which point they’re given increasingly adult responsibilities, until such a point when they’re responsible enough to parent. Someone raised to think like this will have fewer children and will invest heavily into each one.

Females in lower-class families are considered children until they themselves have children, at which point they are accorded the respect due to an adult. It doesn’t matter if a female is 25 years old with a degree and a full-time job – they are children until they breed. Females without children get no respect, because they don’t know anything about anything important.

Mothers, on the other hand, are part of the inner circle. As soon as you’ve given birth, you’re on equal terms with every other woman who has. This encourages women to aspire to becoming mothers, and very little else. Someone raised to think like this will have more children, and sooner, and will invest less heavily into each one.

This distinction reflects the great division in the human species: between groups whose breeding strategy is to prepare the environment for the success of their offspring before reproducing, and groups whose breeding strategy is to shit out as many offspring as they can as quickly as possible and worry about the details later. These two strategies are known as the K-selected strategy and the r-selected strategy, respectively.

In a natural environment, the greater trust and solidarity of the K-selected allows their families and communities to survive and thrive. The co-operative networks that farsighted people build are more resilient than the “every man for himself” communities of the r-selected. As such, in a state of Nature, the populations of the K-selected tend to increase over time.

Unfortunately for the K-selected, today’s industrial society is one where farsighted hard workers are taxed into the ground to buy off the r-selected before they turn to crime. Anyone with the industriousness to become properly educated will then get taxed so heavily that they only have enough spare resources for a few children.

Meanwhile, the parents who don’t care about the poverty their children are forced to endure just keep shitting them out, knowing that the productive will pay for their survival.

A society with these demographic trends cannot escape going down the toilet. The inevitable long-term consequence of dumb people outbreeding smart ones is a reduction in overall intelligence. The inevitable consequence of that is more stupidity, violence, recklessness and crime.

Society has gone through times like these before. There is a point in every economic cycle when the productive are taxed to the maximum in order to provide bread and circuses for the hordes of unproductive. These productive are much like the character Boxer the horse in Animal Farm. Once they collapse from exhaustion from providing the labour needed to keep the whole system running, that system begins to fall apart.

The next step is for the K-selected to withdraw to easily-defendable fortresses, such as gated communities or island nations. From there it will be easier to weather the storm caused by the collapse of r-selected society, which will be a deluge of chaos that heralds a new age of the world.

All this might sound drastic, but it’s inevitable given the demographic trends outlined in this article.

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!

Spiritual Religions And Political Religions

Enormous confusion surrounds the discussion of religion. The term ‘religion’ seems to encompass some extremely different, even contradictory, attitudes and ideas. This essay argues that a major conceptual division needs to be made: between spiritual religions and political religions.

A spiritual religion is a doctrine that, if followed, will alleviate spiritual suffering. The alleviation of suffering is as close as this world gets to a universal moral good. As such, spiritual religions are seen as something holy. So both spiritual religions and political religions claim to be spiritual religions.

But in the same way that visiting a prostitute and having sex is not really making love, even though it appears similar, political religions are not really spiritual.

A genuine spiritual tradition is not concerned with the will for temporal and material power. A doctrine such as Buddhism teaches its adherents that gratifying such desires will not lead to happiness. And it is correct – once a person has met their basic physical needs, further happiness comes not from physical excess but from meeting social, intellectual and spiritual needs.

A political religion is a doctrine that is primarily concerned with temporal and material power. The authorities of a political religion are not concerned with alleviating suffering – they want power, money, fame, prestige. For them, suffering is a good thing, because it gives them a chance to portray their political enemies as the ones responsible, and themselves as the saviours.

The difference between a political religion and a political non-religion (such as Communism) is that the non-religion doesn’t attempt to cloak itself in the shroud of divine morality. Communism was happy enough teaching that consciousness is extinguished upon the death of the physical body. Political religions, by contrast, admit that consciousness survives the death of the physical body – but there’s a catch.

The catch is always this: your consciousness will reincarnate in a place of suffering in the next world unless you obey the political religion in this world. So the political religions demand that you give them money, time, labour and devotion in this world on the threat of suffering in the next.

The foremost examples of political religions are the Abrahamic cults, in particular Christianity, Islam and Judaism. Each of these has aped the spiritual wisdom of their age to create an ideological monster. Each of these teach that only by submitting to the priesthood can one achieve the cessation of suffering. The priesthood speaks for the divine – a power granted only to them. Therefore, obey or suffer.

The characteristic sign of a political religion is that they cause suffering in order to gain power. Relentless, grinding misery causes people to look to higher authorities for solace, which is why Abrahamism is doing so well in Africa and the Middle East. To this end, political religions usually support the persecution of women, homosexuals, prostitutes and drug users.

Also characteristic of political religions is that they drive out other authorities from cultural space, a kind of memetic brood parasitism.

All political religions decree that no other religion may co-exist with them. The Hebrew Bible states that “He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto Jehovah only, shall be utterly destroyed” (Exodus 22:20), and the Koran commands follows to destroy non-believers at numerous points (2:191-193), (3:56), (4:74), (4:89), (5:33), (8:12), (8:39), (9:5), (9:73), (9:123), (47:3-4), (47:35), (48:29), (66:9).

Following this imperative, political religions do everything they can to destroy spiritual religions in any territory they control. In much the same way that criminal gangs of narcoterrorists don’t allow outsiders to operate on their turf, neither do criminal gangs of spiritual terrorists. True spiritual religions don’t need to aggress against other religions, because they know that the falsehoods of other doctrines will reveal themselves.

All spiritual religions understand that accumulating earthly power and wealth, gratifying as it may be to the ego, doesn’t provide spiritual solace. As such, true spiritual religions never have a “prosperity gospel” in which it is taught that material wealth is granted by God as a reward for righteousness. Neither do they hearken back to past times of military dominance as golden ages.

Buddhism, for example, doesn’t care if people don’t follow it. Anyone is free to reject the Buddha’s doctrine and indulge in sensory pleasures. But when a person tires of such indulgence, and they feel that it’s time to strike a balance between indulgence and abstinence, then the Buddhists are there to explain their methodology.

Islam, by contrast, cares a lot. Thirteen countries impose the death penalty for apostasy, all of them Muslim ones. This means that children are considered to be Muslim when they are born, and if they don’t like it as adults, they are killed. At the time of writing this essay, almost 1,000 people had been killed in the past 30 days in Islamic terror attacks. All of the killers were following the admonition of their religion to expand its political influence.

The irony, of course, is that all this makes spiritual religions look spiritual, and political religions look material, and this pushes all genuinely spiritual people towards the former, and all genuinely base people towards the latter. This explains why hedonistic self-aggrandisers, when they discover religion in adulthood, tend to discover political ones.

The clash between spiritual and political religions has defined much of the world’s history, and may define much of its future. There are many signs that suggest the Abrahamic cults are slowly uniting under one banner, and, when they do, they will inevitably try to conquer the world or be destroyed in the attempt.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, Abraham was probably the world’s first true psychopath. The cult he started developed into the greatest collective evil the world has ever known. This evil reflects Abraham’s sadistic desire for total control and dominance, something shared with all his followers. Indeed, Abraham could be said to be the father of political religion.

On the Mithraic ladder, Abrahamism is equivalent to the lead, the basest possible frequency. The spiritual religions, on the other hand, are equivalent to the gold. They are akin to divine radiance beaming down on us. Thus, although political and spiritual religions may appear very similar on the surface, it’s necessary to draw a sharp distinction between them. Ultimately, they reveal their true interests by their actions.

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!

The Ruling Class Is Manufacturing Consent For A War With China

Anyone following the zeitgeist will have noticed a sharp rise in anti-China rhetoric lately. Some will also have noticed that the mainstream media recently switched narrative on the origins of the Covid virus. Until recently, one could get banned from FaceBook for suggesting that the virus was made in a Chinese lab. Now FaceBook encourages the idea. Why? This essay explains.

This BBC article from March is typical of the new rhetoric. The British Government’s main propaganda organ is now openly declaring that China is committing a genocide against their Uighur population in Xinjiang. The American Government has followed the British lead, with the Biden Administration now formally stating that China is guilty of “genocide and crimes against humanity”.

Declaring China to be carrying out a genocide is a major step, because it means that many people will feel morally obliged to do something about it. It will also allow the Establishment to paint the Chinese Government as the moral successor to Nazism, and thereby to play on all the conditioned guilt around the Holocaust.

This sudden concern for the Uighurs seems extremely odd, as the Uighurs aren’t treated any worse than cannabis users are treated in most Western countries. Moreover, not even other Muslims care about the Uighurs, as demonstrated by the fact that Muslim trade delegations to China seldom raise the issue.

The plight of the Uighurs is being exploited for propaganda purposes. There will be a lot more mainstream media propaganda in this vein in coming years. The narrative will be Evil China. We will get daily reminders that China is oppressive and evil – because the Western Establishment is trying to manufacture popular consent for a war against them.

Although many Westerners consider their ruling classes to be omnipotent, the reality is that they still need popular consent for any major move. That popular consent lubricates the gears of the war machine; without it, those gears don’t turn. To that end, the ruling classes instruct their lackeys in the mainstream media to manufacture consent for those major moves in advance.

The next major move they wish to make is to smash China. The ruling class of the West intends to attack China now for the same reason it attacked Germany then: to stay on top of the pile.

Measured by PPP, the Chinese economy has already surpassed the American one. It’s apparent that China’s economic rise will soon give it the capacity to project power over Taiwan. The fear is that China will eventually gain the capacity to project power over Singapore, and thereby over the centre of the world.

Today, the Chinese economy is some 10% larger than the American one. By 2026, according to IMF estimates, the Chinese economy will be some 40% larger. It’s apparent to every Western military planner that, if they want to prevent China from becoming unmanagably powerful, they have to strike now. As Machiavelli wrote in The Prince: wars cannot be avoided, they can only be postponed to the benefit of one or the other party.

The ruling elites of the West have been faced with a stark choice. Either strike now, and put the rising challenger back in its place, or wait, and risk that China becomes too strong to deal with. Given that China has an average IQ of 105, and is not near as wealthy as other populations with similar IQs, logic suggests that they have the potential to become a lot more powerful yet. More logic suggests that, if all that is true, the time to strike is now.

The Western ruling classes followed that same logic to its inevitable conclusion a while ago. They have decided that war is preferable to falling further behind. To that end, they will do everything they can to stoke conflict. This explains the sudden intense increase in anti-China rhetoric from the mainstream media.

The war imperative is why Western powers are sending flotillas to patrol the South China Sea. Everyone understands that the attack on China will be a multinational affair, with America, Japan, Britain, Australia and India all involved at a minimum. The strategy now is to increase the provocation and intimidation, and wait for China to make a mistake.

The great risk is of a false flag attack similar to the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. It’s entirely plausible that the Western ruling class blows up one of its own warships and tells the plebs that the Chinese did it – this was how they successfully manufactured consent for the attack on Vietnam.

If such a thing did happen, the mainstream media would scream 24/7 about the need for revenge against murderous Chinese aggression before it was too late. The narrative would be that anyone unwilling to destroy China is dishonouring the victims of the false flag attack, is endangering the rest of us and is therefore a traitor to the West.

Westerners be warned: if the mainstream media informs us about a sudden and inexplicable act of deadly violence carried out by the Chinese against Western targets, we need to steadfastly remain sceptical. Freethinking people might not be able to stop the herd stampede to war, but we might be able to limit the carnage.

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 You Should Join A Gang Instead Of Working

New Zealand now has over 7,000 gang members, an increase of some 13% from a year previous. Many theories have been put forward to explain this sudden rise, but none of them are adequately grounded in economic psychology. This essay makes a seemingly preposterous argument: that it makes more sense to join a gang nowadays than to work.

According to the Real Estate Institute of New Zealand, the average New Zealand house price is now $810,000, up 19% from a year earlier. According to interest.co.nz, the ratio of this average house price to the median household income is now 8.43.

This ratio was 5.87 as recently as July 2016. Even back then, it meant that a working couple able to save 25% of their total wage could expect to take over 23 years to pay for the average house. That was considered “severely unaffordable” by all honest commentators. But it’s now almost 50% worse than even that.

These are terrifying statistics for anyone at, or near, the bottom of the educational ladder. The average household income, according to the stats mentioned above, is $96,114. That means over 33 years for the average couple, saving 25% of their total wage, to pay for the average house. Any household with a minimum wage earner will likely have it much harder than this.

This means it’s now realistically impossible for a significant, and growing, proportion of New Zealand workers to ever own a home on their wage. It’s even more difficult for those who aren’t part of a steady couple.

Historically speaking, those at the bottom of society have always had one universal method of radically improving their position: crime. And the bigger the crime, the better. Many people say that crime doesn’t pay, but this is only true for the lower classes. Pull off a big enough heist and you can go up an entire league.

As Chuang Tzu once observed: “The petty thief is imprisoned but the big thief becomes a feudal lord.” Petty thievery won’t get you into a house that you can raise a family in, but full-time drug running is another story.

A young New Zealander without an education might have no chance of ever owning a house by working for one, but there’s a ready alternative: to join a gang, and get $810,000 through crime.

It’s common for dedicated meth users to go through $1,000 of meth in a week. Someone supplying it need only have a dozen customers with this level of demand and they could sell $600,000 worth of meth in a single year. Assuming $400,000 of expenses in precursor/bulk wholesale costs, rip-offs and fees to one’s own gang so as to keep covering for your operations, this means an income of $200,000 per year – tax free.

The only major downside is a small risk of getting killed or imprisoned.

Gangbanging is relatively dangerous, but the vast majority of gang members manage to conduct their affairs without getting killed. In recent years, New Zealand has averaged about 61 homicides a year. Even assuming that the majority of those were gang-related, it means that a person in a gang has little more than a 0.5% chance of being killed in any given year.

Even if this risk is 50 times higher than the risk of being murdered if one isn’t in a gang, it’s still a fairly low risk. It means that, after four years of selling meth and saving $4,000 a week, one would have earned enough to buy the average house, with a mere 2% chance of getting killed (approximately).

The risk of being imprisoned is also relatively minor. Furthermore, as shit as prison might be, it’s not a whole lot worse than busting a gut for 40 hours a week and being left with nothing after taxes, bills and rents are paid. At least rent is free in prison, and while there you can easily make the contacts that will help you sell meth more discreetly once you get out.

In the cold light of day, a young New Zealand man, one with ambitions to own a home so that he can raise a family in it, is better off joining a gang and getting taxed at 0% than getting educated, earning a professional wage and getting taxed at 39%. He can actually own a house the first way, whereas the second demands decades of work for partial equity in one. Even if he does manage to own a house the second way, he likely won’t have enough spare energy to raise a family in it.

What many middle-class people – especially those who inherit wealth – don’t realise is that few people join gangs purely out of malice and spite. Some of them join gangs because, on balance, they can have a better life in one. The prospect of working for 50 years to merely own some equity in a cold, damp house is a miserable one. It’s not surprising that the more daring of the country’s young men are tempted to gamble for a better life.

The solution to New Zealand’s rising gang problem will inevitably be a multifaceted one, but the basis of it must be enabling even poorly-educated workers to own their own home and raise a family. As long as workers aren’t getting paid enough for this to be possible, they’re better off joining gangs.

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!