Category: government

The Case For Cannabis: Cannabis Does Not Make People Impotent

Everyone by now has seen the propaganda image on the back of the tobacco packet that depicts a droopy cigarette, imitating erectile dysfunction. Cannabis has undergone a similar propaganda attack, with many people coming to believe that cannabis can make people impotent. This article shows that the truth, once again, is very different to what we have been told.

Like many things that the authorities want to forbid, cannabis has variously been blamed for pretty much everything that could go wrong in a person’s life. Cannabis causes psychosis, it causes cancer, it causes crime, and we’re also told that it makes people impotent.

Now, it’s certainly true that smoking things is not healthy. Smoking anything, cannabis or tobacco, leads to unhealthy lungs and worse circulation. It also leads to heart disease. All of this makes it much harder for smokers to get healthy erections, as this is a function of the health of the circulatory system.

It’s also true that not all cannabis users are healthy. Part of the reason for this is because they smoke things (as mentioned above), but most of the reason is that cannabis is a medicine, and medicines are not typically used by healthy people. People who aren’t healthy also tend to be sexually dysfunctional, for obvious reasons, so there’s a clear reason to expect the presence of a link between the two.

However, the simple facts are that cannabis does not make people impotent. In fact, like so many of the things that people have come to believe about cannabis on account of the propaganda, the truth is closer to the opposite of what we have been told. In fact, cannabis is an aphrodisiac, and has been employed as such for a very long time.

Indeed, cannabis has been known to be an aphrodisiac for millennia. There are references to it in Ayurvedic folk medicine from 2,500 years ago, and its use as an aphrodisiac may be as much as 3,000 years old. The efficacy of cannabis for such purposes is well-known among young and free-thinking people today.

There are several reasons for this, as any hippie could tell you. Most of the reasons are psychological, the most obvious being one that cannabis shares with alcohol: it’s an anxiolytic. People are often too physically anxious and wound up to be able to make love, because their bodies are in fight mode, and so being touched releases cortisol instead of oxytocin.

Cannabis can change that by putting a person into a calmer, more relaxed mood. It can have the effect of stopping runaway, neurotic or aggressive thoughts and replacing them with more placid and appreciative feelings. Cannabis has the ability to get people into the right mood for sex, probably a combination of its anxiolytic effects and the increased physical sensitivity it offers.

Another psychological obstacle to enjoying the sexual experience is deep religious brainwashing in childhood. Many people have been deeply conditioned, since early childhood, to believe that sex was evil and that enjoying the sexual impulse was an act of evil. For some of these people, it’s no longer possible to enjoy having sex while in a normal state of mind.

Yet another common psychological obstacle is previous sexual trauma. Many women who have been sexually molested or raped have difficulty letting go of the trauma enough to trust a man in bed. Likewise, many men find it difficult to achieve the desired level of responsiveness on account of previous humiliations. These kinds of prior traumas often make it difficult for a person to properly enjoy having sex.

Cannabis can help overcome all of these obstacles, thanks to the deconditioning effect that it has on the mind. Because cannabis is good for breaking down old thought patterns, it can break down the conditioned emotional response that occurs when a person is exposed to a stimulus that reminds them of a previous trauma.

One reason why cannabis has become associated with psychosis is because it makes people more open and more willing to explore. This is also one of the reasons why cannabis does the opposite of making people impotent. Sometimes a person is closed off to the idea of intimacy, and not because of trauma or any of the above reasons, but from sheer natural boringness. Cannabis can be what’s needed to open such a person up.

Of course, all this is part of the reason why cannabis was banned in the first place. It’s the basis for the “Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men” comment that led to the prohibition of cannabis. The deconditioning effect of cannabis is a danger to those who benefit from the initial conditioning. Those brainwashers have a profound influence on our lawmakers.

Again, the correct approach must be one that maximises freedom while minimising new danger and risk. The apparent paradox that daily cannabis use can decrease sexual function, while occasional cannabis use can increase it, needs to be recognised. This can only become possible if our current dishonest approach to cannabis is replaced with an honest one.

From there, it will be possible to both get medical treatment for those who use too much cannabis, and to get medical treatment for those who have problems with impotency and who could benefit from cannabis. The humane thing to do would be to legalise it so that people can get the help they need, when they need it, without interference from the law.

*

This article is an excerpt from The Case For Cannabis Law Reform, compiled by Vince McLeod and due for release by VJM Publishing in the summer of 2018/19.

Could Labour Win An Absolute Majority in 2020?

A new Reid Research poll has put the Labour Party on 49.6% support, with the National Party languishing well back on 41.3%. Although this no doubt reflects a polling boost from the Christchurch mosque attacks, it raises an interesting question: could Labour govern alone after 2020? Dan McGlashan, author of Understanding New Zealand, examines.

No party has won an absolute majority since the introduction of MMP in 1996. The closest any one party has come was the 59 seats won by John Key’s National in 2011. But yesterday’s Reid Research poll suggests that there’s a very good chance that Labour could win one after the 2020 General Election.

We can see a clear pattern over the last two electoral cycles. The Fifth Labour Government came into power in 1999 on a promise to repeal the cruel welfare reforms of Jim Bolger’s Fourth National Government, winning 38% of the vote. This they increased to 41% by the 2002 General Election, as people still remembered what it was like having Ruth Richardson and Jenny Shipley in charge. From there, it fell away until National defeated them in 2008.

The Fifth National Government, likewise, came into power in 2008 on a promise to repeal the excessive pandering and taxation of the Clark Government. They won 45% of the vote in 2008, which increased to 47% in 2011, as people still remembered the suffocating nanny state culture of Helengrad. From there, it fell away until Labour defeated them in 2017.

So there’s every reason to think that the Sixth Labour Government will get a boost of some kind in 2020, as people still remember the grinning indifference of their National Party predecessors. The swing of the electoral pendulum suggests that Labour should hit its peak support next year or shortly thereafter, before the public inevitably gets sick of them and National wins again in either 2023 or 2026.

All this might mean that they can stay up in the high 40s (in terms of support), but there are other indicators that suggest they could govern alone after the 2020 General Election with as little as 45% of the vote.

Labour’s support parties, New Zealand First and the Greens, have fallen well below the 5% threshold, and there are good reasons to think that both will crash out of Parliament in 2020. The Greens are only polling at 3.9%, and New Zealand First are doing even worse, at 2.3%.

The New Zealand First Party might as well have pissed in the faces of their supporters, such is the contempt they have shown them since taking power after 2017. Every New Zealand First MP voted against Chloe Swarbrick’s medicinal cannabis bill, despite the passionate support for it among their heavily Maori voting base. Then they signed the country up to the TPPA, despite campaigning against it when in opposition.

The Green Party are not doing much better. Far from presenting an educated, intelligent, left-wing alternative, the face of their party is now anti-white racists like Marama Davidson and Golriz Ghahraman. The Greens lost ground in 2017 among people of European descent, and the sharp increase in authoritarian and anti-white rhetoric appears to have driven the centrist Greens back to Labour.

The Greens also have the double problem of defending their educated urban elite votes against The Opportunities Party, which looks set to run again, and Vernon Tava’s potential blue-green movement. Both of these latter vehicles will try to appeal to the same educated, urban 20-39 year old demographic as the Greens, meaning that competition will be extreme.

If both the New Zealand First and Green parties fail to get over 5% of the vote, then the composition of the next Parliament might be simply Labour, National and David Seymour. If this is the case, then 49% of the total electorate vote would likely entitle Labour to 65 seats or so, out of a 120-member Parliament.

Of course, the curious thing here is that if the Greens and New Zealand First do fall under the 5% threshold, and no other new party manages to get over it, one of either Labour or National is all but guaranteed to end up with an absolute majority. The only way it could not happen would be for David Seymour’s ACT, currently languishing at below one percent in the polls, to act as the tiebreaker.

This will be good news to some, and terrible news to others. As we have been reminded in recent years, we Kiwis have no absolute human rights, and Parliament is sovereign. Therefore, a party with an absolute Parliamentary majority can do absolutely whatever it wants to the New Zealand people, with no oversight. The only recourse the New Zealand people will have is the chance to vote them out again in 2023.

Considering that the Labour Government has already been very weak on protecting our rights to own firearms and our rights to free speech, there is good reason to be afraid of an absolute Labour majority. Andrew Little has already used the Christchurch mosque shootings to “fast-track” every piece of legislation he can think of, so who knows how far a Labour Party with an absolute majority in Parliament could go to reshape the world in their image?

*

Understanding New Zealand, by Dan McGlashan and published by VJM Publishing, is the comprehensive guide to the demographics and voting patterns of the New Zealand people. It is available on TradeMe (for Kiwis) and on Amazon (for international readers).

The Case For Cannabis: A Criminal Record is A Disproportionate Punishment

Cannabis possession or cultivation are currently crimes, which means that a criminal record is a common result from being arrested for a cannabis offence. Our justice system, however, is supposed to operate on the principle that “the punishment fits the crime”. This article will argue that getting a criminal record for anything to do with cannabis is grossly disproportionate, considering the severity of the crime.

Having a criminal record makes a person’s life a lot harder. Many employers will filter out applicants with criminal records before they even seriously consider them. This is true of almost every job that requires any real responsibility. This means that a future of poverty, or at least severely limited economic opportunities, is a common consequence of getting a criminal conviction.

Of course, having a criminal record is supposed to make people’s lives harder. A criminal is a person who has declared that they are unable or unwilling to abide by the rules of decent society, and it’s fair that they’re marked as such for the safety of other people. We’re not allowed to chop people’s hands off anymore, so there’s no other way to clearly mark a person as a member of the criminal class other than to give them a record.

The problem is that cannabis use isn’t a crime like a real crime is. Real crimes have victims. It’s fair that a criminal record marks a person who has acted with gross disregard or malice towards life and towards suffering. But a person who grew some medicinal cannabis plants has not shown any callousness or ill will. If anything, they should be rewarded for taking actions to alleviate suffering in the face of discouragement from the law.

Becoming unemployable because of a criminal record is one thing if you are a murderer, rapist or fraudster. In cases like these, it’s probably fair for the vast majority of employers to rule such people out from the beginning. But a person who used cannabis, even if they grew it, has not done anything to warrant being placed in the same class as those who have callously brought harm to others.

In any case, that’s not where the punishment ends. Most fair people can agree that it’s unnecessarily brutal for a person with a cannabis conviction to have trouble finding work for the rest of their lives, but it’s also extremely hard to travel with a criminal conviction. Many countries – Canada and America among the most notorious – regularly refuse to let people in if they have a criminal record, reasoning that they have failed to demonstrate sufficient good character.

These two punishments tie in with each other. Many jobs nowadays involve international travel, and this pattern looks set to continue as the world continues to globalise and integrate. This means that, in order to be able to perform an increasing number of jobs, one needs to be free to travel internationally. A person with a criminal conviction preventing them from travel is effectively disqualified from all of these jobs.

Forty years ago, when the War on Drugs was just ramping up, the sort of person who got a cannabis conviction probably wasn’t likely to travel overseas anyway. But in 2019, being restricted from overseas travel for life is a heavy punishment indeed.

It’s worth noting here that a criminal record also affects the wider family. An adult whose employment and travel opportunities are restricted will have trouble providing not only for themselves, but also for their families. So the children of people who grow up with cannabis convictions are also punished.

All of this constitutes obscene cruelty, especially when it is considered that cannabis is a medicine, and that most people who grow it do so to alleviate suffering.

It was once – falsely – believed that cannabis caused a lot of harm. When it was thought that cannabis was a dangerously addictive drug that destroyed peoples minds, then giving someone a criminal record for cannabis may have made some vague kind of sense. Now that we know that cannabis prohibition was built on false premises, it is apparent that giving someone a criminal record for dealing with it is unfair.

In this case, the correct thing to do is to formalise this state of affairs, and as soon as possible, by repealing cannabis prohibition. We can no longer, in good faith, argue that giving someone a criminal conviction is a punishment that fits the suffering caused by the supposed crime.

*

This article is an excerpt from The Case For Cannabis Law Reform, compiled by Vince McLeod and due for release by VJM Publishing in the summer of 2018/19.

A Former Black Magician Provides a Magical Analysis of the Christchurch Mosque Shootings

Mass killings almost always have the effect of spreading terror throughout the population that was slaughtered. Most of the time, this terror is the intent of the act. When it is, the killings could be said to be black magic rituals, acts of Greater Magic intended to force the will of the perpetrator onto all the people who observed it. The Christchurch mosque shootings of March 15 can be considered such a deed.

According to one perspective, there are three elementary kinds of magic. The kind that I am interested in here is black magic. This uses the power of fear to cause change in others according to the will of the magician. The other kinds are white magic, which takes fear away, and grey magic, which causes confusion.

The easy way to understand black magic is to understand it as intimidation. It’s why the Police wear uniforms, and caps with black and white chequered bands, and why security guards wear black t-shirts and shoes with thick soles. It’s why the Undertaker wears black, why the Waffen-SS wore black, and why it was said by Gareth Edwards of the All Blacks jersey that “There is something about the blackness of their jersey that strikes fear into your heart.”

Black magic could also be understood as the art of domination. A successful black magician is dominant because of the fear that other people have for them. The best way to intimidate and dominate a person, of course, is to cause them direct physical and personal injury, or credibly threaten to. If they are not able to retaliate to this then they will be forced to submit.

The Christchurch mosque shootings were black magic rituals intended to strike fear into the hearts of certain populations in New Zealand. In this sense, they were much like the John F Kennedy assassination and 9/11. The hope was that the killings would incite submission. This is the most effective way to understand them, and to explain both the actions of the shooter and the response of the nation. Furthermore, it allows us to predict the future.

Jacinda Ardern, and the New Zealand mainstream media, being atheists and non-believers in magic, made a number of grave errors in the aftermath of those shootings. They made these errors because they did not account for being in the domain of magic. Some decisions, although they may have made sense from the perspective of being nice and soothing tensions, didn’t make much sense from the perspective of countering black magic.

When Ardern decided that the name of Branton Tarrant shall not be spoken in polite company, she raised his black magic power to the level of Voldemort from the Harry Potter series. Oddly, there’s a scene from Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone in which Harry is told: “Call him Voldemort, Harry. Always use the proper name for things. Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself.”

This is advice that Ardern should really have heeded. When she spoke to Parliament and made a particular effort not to mention Tarrant’s name, she demonstrated that the nation had collectively shit itself in response to the shootings. We showed that they had affected us very deeply and that we were greatly shaken. Tarrant was living rent-free in our heads.

The problem with this, from a black magic perspective, is that is shows vulnerability, and vulnerability attracts more cruelty. I’ll repeat that again: vulnerability attracts cruelty. A lot of people don’t like to accept this, on account of that it is so cruel, but it’s nevertheless how things work. Black magicians like to seek out vulnerability because it means that their magic will have a greater impact.

So any budding black magicians out there, thinking of a way to make their actions as powerful as possible, may have observed Ardern’s response, and taken note of the vulnerability displayed. This is a very bad sign, because it predicts a high likelihood of future attacks, whether follow-up moves by white nationalists or reprisals by Islamists.

After all, Tarrant himself was the victim of a previous act of black magic: the Drottninggatan truck attack in Stockholm in 2015 that left three dead, including an eight-year old girl named Ebba Åkerlund. Images of Åkerlund’s body torn into several pieces left a powerful impression on many Internet dwellers, in particular those on the chans. Tarrant was affected so heavily that he mentioned it in his manifesto.

The downside of black magic, of course, is that if the intended victims of it do not submit then their fear will turn naturally to hatred. When it does, it’s possible for cycles of revenge attacks to arise, and even to become normalised. The horror of the Drottninggatan truck attack was insufficient to cause Tarrant to submit, and as such it turned to the hatred that we saw expressed on March 15.

The way to counter black magic is with fearlessness. London’s response to the 7/7 bus attacks of 2005, which killed 56 people, is the model to follow. Instead of the response that Vince McLeod dubbed “The Great New Zealand Chimpout“, the British response made a point of being business as usual, thereby denying the perpetrators the emotional impact that they desired.

It was noted by all that various criminal gangs, in particular the Mongrel Mob, took a front and centre role in the community response to the shootings. The most visible response involved leading a public haka. The haka needs to be understood, in this context, as a black magic ritual. Its purpose is to demonstrate to the enemy your vigour, determination and unity of purpose. In this, a haka is little different to any other war dance.

The point of performing a haka after such a mass shooting was to demonstrate to the unseen “bad guys” out there that we are strong, we are ready and we are willing to fight. We will not be cowed. This is often the context in which a haka was performed in pre-contact New Zealand: someone would spot a member of an enemy war party in the bush, alert the others, and a haka would be performed to show that enemy that they were going to die if they continued to intrude. This was understood as black magic and called mākutu.

Certainly the New Zealand nation is currently in a state of extreme fear. Acts of national unity are necessary, but they have to be carefully considered owing to the extreme circumstances. In that regard, Tarrant’s actions have to be considered one of the, if not the single most, powerful acts of black magic ever performed in New Zealand. The only real comparison in recent history would be the Rainbow Warrior bombing, which only killed one person.

If the New Zealand nation wants to go forward without attracting further black magicians, and further ritual sacrifices (no matter who conducts them), they need to demonstrate that they are not afraid of death. This is chiefly done by enjoying life, and continuing to enjoy life as we had done before the shootings. Full attendance of Super Rugby games is one example. This will demonstrate to all the black magicians out there that we are not weak and not to waste their efforts on us.

*

Viktor Hellman is a regular contributor to VJM Publishing and author of the upcoming Anarcho-Homicidalist Manifesto.