Rhodesia: Where New Zealand Is Headed

There exists a globalist plan to destroy New Zealand, and that plan is being executed on multiple fronts as this piece is being written. The plan is not unique to New Zealand (although some details are), and New Zealand is far from the first target. The globalist plan is to do to New Zealand what they once did to Rhodesia.

Had Marxists not destroyed Rhodesia, it would in all likelihood have become the first First World African country. In the mid 1970s, whites were some 8% of the population and as wealthy as Americans. The campaign to destroy it, led by Judeo-Communists like Joe Slovo, was launched for real in the 1960s, but was in fact a continuation of Communist efforts, best understood in the context of the Cold War.

As elsewhere, this campaign of destruction was externally financed by globalist interests, and its propaganda component involved the relentless demonisation of white settlers as colonial invaders, thieves and butchers. By stirring up anger and resentment among the black population, these globalist interests succeeded in first paralysing the country’s economy and then ethnically cleansing the whites.

In the mid 1970s, there were over 300,000 white Rhodesians; by today, there are fewer than 30,000. The white Rhodesian population has effectively been wiped out. The GDP per capita of Zimbabwe is now lower than in hellholes like Congo, Sudan and Syria. The globalist Eye of Sauron has then turned to South Africa, with similar results that are still ongoing.

Now that Rhodesia is gone and South Africa all but destroyed, the attention of the Marxists will turn to New Zealand. There’s only one thing Communists hate more than wealth: wealth produced by white colonials. New Zealand, like Rhodesia and South Africa, was desperately poor before white people settled it, and soon became wealthy. Its very existence is therefore regarded by Communists as a testament to white supremacy.

As far as those Communists are concerned, New Zealand delenda est.

The plot to destroy Rhodesia centred around Robert Mugabe. The plot to destroy New Zealand has no Mugabe as yet, but it has a likely candidate in Rawiri Waititi. Like Mugabe, Waititi gets his support chiefly from Brown Communists. Also like Mugabe, his modus operandi is to incite this racial proletariat into a frothing rage seeking revenge, and then to graciously accept some kind of donation from the Establishment in exchange for calling the dogs off.

Debbie Ngahere-Packer, Willie Jackson and Marama Davidson are all further examples of this established pattern of well-funded anti-white race grifters being pushed to the exclusion of more reasonable people. The globalist Marxist interests that want to destroy New Zealand plan to empower these grifters, primarily through platforming them in the mainstream media (which is owned by international banking and finance interests).

These race-baiters will then use their access to this audience to spew hate, weakening the chances of national co-operation.

The plan is to set the white and Maori populations against each other, like the white and black populations were set against each other in Africa. To this end, globalist interests are funding (and will continue to fund) a propaganda campaign designed to stir up resentment between the two populations. This propaganda campaign will have two prongs.

The first is stirring up Maori resentment. This is primarily achieved through blasting them with an ‘us and them’ narrative that claims all land in New Zealand is stolen, and that Maoris never benefitted in any way from white settlement. This narrative also suggests that ‘revenge oppression’ is entirely justified – that it’s fair to discriminate against white people for any arbitrary reason, because doing so rebalances the scales of historical oppression.

As in Rhodesia, popularising such narratives will mostly be achieved by external funding of malcontents like Waititi, Jackson et al., who will then incite hate among their followers. The globalists will prominently feature these malcontents and their slimy rhetoric in the mainstream media, leading other Maoris to adopt race consciousness and to abandon class consciousness.

The second is stirring up white resentment by relentlessly screaming ‘Racist!’ at them. If white people ever complain about Government largesse going to middle-class Maoris instead of to working-class white people, the mainstream media will howl them down with cries of racism. The narrative is that working-class whites have to suffer for the historical crimes of their ruling classes. If they don’t accept this, they’re racist.

This will split the white population down the centre, between a working-class half that struggles without any help, and a middle-class half that doesn’t give a shit. So, rather than focussing on the bigger picture, the working-class whites give into despair while the middle-class ones drift off into a haze of mindless consumerism akin to an opium session.

The net result of these two prongs is that Maoris and whites, instead of seeing each other as the yin and the yang of a healthy nation (as per Esoteric Aotearoanism), see each other as the enemy. This makes supraracial organisation impossible. Maoris may organise as the Maori Party, and whites may not organise at all. The country is left crippled.

With resistance neutralised, the globalists can then swoop in and sweep the whites out. This was the plan used to destroy Rhodesia, it is the plan being used to destroy South Africa, and it will be the plan used to destroy New Zealand.

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!

Explaining The ‘Young Couple Buys House’ Propaganda

Observant Kiwis will have noticed a recent deluge of articles featuring young couples who have just bought a house. These are presented as heart-warming tales of plucky young people overcoming the odds, but they’re actually very insidious works of propaganda. This essay explains.

The New Zealand housing crisis is now so bad that, if it was half as bad, houses in Auckland would still be considered “severely unaffordable”. The Demographia international housing affordability survey (link goes to .pdf) considers a country’s housing to be unaffordable if it is three times the median household income, and severely unaffordable if it is more than 5.1 times the median household income.

According to the housing affordability calculator at interest.co.nz, the average New Zealand house price was 8.43 times the median household income in July 2021. The average Auckland metro house price was 11.32 times the median household income. These figures mean that even second-tier cities like Nelson and Dunedin are severely unaffordable. The thought of owning one’s own home, once considered a standard part of life, is now just a distant dream to most Kiwi workers.

This housing crisis is having severe consequences. It has meant that great numbers of young Kiwis have seen their dreams evaporate. Their hopes – if not expectations – of raising a family that they could be happy with are gone. Raising a happy family is a function of many things, but one of the most important ones is security of housing. Security of housing is only for the rich when the median house price is ten times the median household income.

Without a hope of raising a happy family, many people give up. The prospect of genetic immortality through one’s offspring appears to be the fundamental drive keeping great numbers of people going. Without it, a deep sense of anomie sets in, usually followed by nihilism. This latter condition can lead to all manner of atrocities, as the 20th Century demonstrated beyond doubt.

The obvious risk facing Western society in coming years is, by now, apparent to most. The widespread anomie and nihilism brought about by the housing crisis could lead, in short order, to equally widespread chaos and destruction. In other times and places, an entire generation getting locked out of housing would lead to civil unrest. The ruling class knows history, so they know that mass violence is potentially not far away.

Kiwis are a gutless slave race, as shown by our current wretched state, but even we will protest if we’re all made homeless. It’s to pre-empt these potentially riotous emotions that the mainstream media runs so many “Young couple buys a house!” stories. Their intention is to normalise the idea that a typical young couple can easily buy a home in today’s market.

If it was widely believed that a young couple could easily buy a home in New Zealand today, much of the discontent from the way the country is being run would be neutralised. Any young person complaining about how much easier the Boomers had it could simply be referred to the young couple in the NewsHub article linked in the first paragraph.

“If they can do it, why can’t you?” the Boomers will cry. You just need to get off your arse etc.

At times like these, it has to be borne in mind that the mainstream media is owned by international banking and finance interests, and so the media only runs stories that serve those interests. Banks want the highest possible house prices, because that means the maximum possible mortgage profits. To that end, they want to normalise mass immigration and million-dollar mortgages, and to abnormalise multi-generational housing.

Ultimately, the reason for all the “Young couple buys house” propaganda is to stop young people from getting angry at the intergenerational rape being committed against them by the Boomers. Pre-empting this anger will allow those Boomers to ride the gravy train for as long as possible.

The mainstream media will do everything it can to create the impression that homeownership is still normal for young people, and to deny the grim reality that even families with two working adults have trouble owning the roof over their heads. If they would admit the latter, they would run the risk of powerful revolutionary sentiments taking hold.

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!

VJMP Reads: Gaddafi’s Green Book III (fin)

This reading carries on from here.

Part III is titled ‘The Social Basis of The Third Universal Theory’. This is divided into eleven chapters.

In the first, ‘The Social Basis of The Third Universal Theory’, Gaddafi declares that the social bond is the basis for the movement of history. Each group has common social needs which must be collectively satisfied. The national struggle is the basis of history. “…just as community is the basis for survival of all groups within the animal kingdom, so nationalism is the basis for the survival of nations”.

“Nations whose nationalism is destroyed are subject to ruin.” The destruction of nations leads to minorities. National unity is the basis of survival – Gaddafi compares it to gravity. Gaddafi channels Edward O Wilson at one point, stating that the social bond works automatically towards the goal of national survival. Nationalism is the secret of group survival and it’s harmful to go against this. He observes that marriage within a group strengthens its unity.

In the second, ‘The Family’, Gaddafi compares the family to a plant, both being an expression of Nature. Any “dispersion, decline or loss of the family” is unnatural and could be compared to the destruction of a plant. Gaddafi compares society to a garden. The ideal form is one in which the individual can flourish within the family and the family within society. A society in which individuals lived without their families would be artificial.

In the third, ‘The Tribe’, Gaddafi notes that a tribe is just an extended family, and a nation is just an extended tribe. This same point was noted in Aristotle’s Politics. “The relationship which binds the family also binds the tribe, the nation, and the world.” Feelings of kinship decrease the larger the kinship group is. Gaddafi ridicules those who think otherwise.

In the fourth, ‘The Merits Of The Tribe’, Gaddafi describes the tribe as a secondary family. It raises and educates those within it. It also allows more freedom than the family, which supervises closely. Blood is the prime factor in its formation, but a person or family can be part of the tribe by affiliation and then later part of the tribe by blood.

In the fifth, ‘The Nation’, Gaddafi notes that loyalty to any one of family, tribe, nation and humanity weakens loyalty to the other three. Selfishness is harmful to the wider group, but self-respect is beneficial to it. A shared destiny is essential to nationhood. “The national state is the only political form which is consistent with the natural social structure.” The nation-state will naturally endure unless attacked from the outside or unless it collapses into tribal mentality.

All states composed of multiple nations will eventually destroy themselves, because the social factor of national bonds will inevitably triumph over the political factor. The tribe develops individuals at the post-family stage, and the nation develops individuals at the post-tribe stage.

In the sixth, ‘Woman’, Gaddafi opens by declaring it self-evident that men and women are equal as human beings. However, the fact that both exist and not just one shows that they occupy different roles. Men and women cannot replace each other in those natural roles. Nurseries are unnatural and should not exist, save for the case of orphans, where nurseries are better than foster homes.

“In need, freedom is latent.” Therefore, women should not be forced to work to provide the necessities of life. Belief in gender equality deprives women of their freedom. Gaddafi notes, with disapproval, that societies everywhere seek to turn women into men. “Men and women must be creative within their respective roles.” Women should not be forced to carry out men’s duties to gain equality with men.

In the seventh, ‘Minorities’, Gaddafi outlines two kinds of minorities. One belongs to the nation, which provides its social framework, whereas the other must form its own social framework. He suggests that the problems of minorities have to be solved at the national level, in a society controlled by the masses. Minorities should not be seen as substrata.

In the eighth, ‘Black People Will Prevail In The World’, Gaddafi claims that black people are motivated to vengeance by slavery. Much as Asians and white people had eras of dominance over history, so too will the blacks. He notes that the backwardness of blacks has led directly to their numerical superiority. The populations of other races are declining because of their obsession with work, but this hasn’t affected the blacks.

In the ninth, ‘Education’, Gaddafi speaks against rote learning. He notes that the style of education that is typical in the world goes against human freedom. Forcing a human to learn according to a curriculum is dictatorship. State-controlled and standardised education stultifies the masses. Education of all kinds of subjects should be available. “Knowledge is a natural right of every human being.”

In the tenth, ‘Music And Art’, Gaddafi laments that there is no common human language. He makes the startling claim that the stylistic sentiments of earlier generations are passed down to later ones in the genes. “People are only harmonious with their own arts and heritage”. Eventually, Gaddafi claims, all people will speak one language, or society will collapse.

In the eleventh, ‘Sport, Horsemanship And The Stage’, Gaddafi equates spectator sport with watching someone pray or eat at a restaurant. Much of this chapter has no real Western context, as our participatory sports are organised in a different way. He agrees with the general Western sentiment that sports should be for the masses. But he makes some odd claims, such as that the grandstand was invented to deny popular access to the sporting field.

In summary, Gaddafi’s The Green Book is a wide-ranging summary of his political and social beliefs. It is penetratingly insightful at places, and bafflingly vague at others. His criticisms of democracy, as it is practiced, are brilliant, but the book is light on practical detail regarding the alternative. Far from coming across as a dictator, Gaddafi seems intelligent and reasonable in this book. There is no focus on destroying his enemies, but rather on how a great country could be built on nationalist and socialist principles.

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!

VJMP Reads: Gaddafi’s Green Book II

This reading carries on from here.

Part II is titled ‘The Solution of the Economic Problem: Socialism’. This is divided into seven chapters.

In the first, ‘The Economic Basis Of The Third Universal Theory’, Gaddafi calls for the abolition of the wage system. He states that “Wage-earners are but slaves to the masters who hire them.” The producer has a right to that which they produce – a secondary benefit through the improvement of society or through wages is inadequate. Inequality cannot be tolerated as it leads to exploitation.

Gaddafi repeats Adam Smith’s rule that economic production is the result of raw materials, capital input and human labour. He claims that all three of these components are necessary to produce anything, and therefore all three should get an equal share. Gaddafi also notes that the working class is declining owing to scientific and technological advancement. People are, however, the basic component in any production process.

In the second, ‘Need’, Gaddafi notes that a person cannot be free if their needs are controlled by others. Need leads to the enslavement and exploitation of those who need. Conflict is caused by one group controlling the needs of a second, giving that second an incentive to rebel. Need is a problem inherent to life.

In the third, ‘Housing’, Gaddafi opens with “Housing is an essential need for both the individual and the family and should not be owned by others”. A person cannot be free while living in a home owned by someone else, whether or not they’re paying rent. Fiddling with rents won’t help – the important thing is ownership. People won’t have the right to own multiple houses, because to do so is to control the needs of others, which is exploitation and cannot be permitted.

In the fourth, ‘Income’, Gaddafi declares that income is an imperative need. In a socialist system, there are no wage-earners, only partners in the production process. Income should not be a wage in exchange for having one’s production taken away.

In the fifth, ‘Means Of Transportation’, Gaddafi declares that transportation is also a necessity. Therefore, it’s subject to the same restrictions from being controlled as housing and income. Like housing, transportation may not be owned for the sake of renting it out.

In the sixth, ‘Land’, Gaddafi begins by stating that “Land is the private property of none.” He believes that the land ought to belong to whoever works it. Gaddafi’s aspiration is to create a society that is happy because it is free. This comes about via the liberation of people’s material and spiritual needs from the control of others.

Gaddafi is aware that wage-earners have little incentive to work. Neither do poeple who work for the common good. The self-employed, however, have plenty of incentive to do so. Gaddafi sees the economy as a zero-sum game, because, for him, there is no reason to produce beyond one’s needs. The industrious and skillful have no right to lever this advantage to take from the shares of others.

An especially diligent or intelligent person may meet their needs with less effort, but they may not acquire more than they need. Happiness is a matter of material and spiritual freedom. Profit itself must be eliminated, as it inevitably will be as the socialist process continues to evolve.

In the seventh, ‘Domestic Servants’, Gaddafi states that domestic servants are a type of slave. The Third Universal Theory offers freedom to both wage-earners and domestic servants. Household services should be carried out by employees, not by domestic servants. He concedes that it isn’t easy to assign a share of production to service workers.

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!