new zealand

The Three Castes Of Woke New Zealand

Many Kiwis look with astonishment on the caste system of the Hindus, thinking it a barbarism that should have been abolished long ago. The caste system of Imperial Spain, with its division into Peninsulares, Creoles, Mestizos, and Indigenous peoples and Africans, seems likewise bizarre to us. But few appreciate that the people of New Zealand are divided into their own caste system. This essay explains.

In the woke New Zealand of 2024, we have a tripartite caste system involving high, middle and low castes. The highest caste are the Tangata Whenua, the middle caste are the Tangata Moana and the lowest caste are the Tangata Tiriti.

The Tangata Whenua are the Maori people. As the highest caste, they are effectively the only full citizens in the Woke Regime. Tangata Whenua means ‘people of the land’, and in this context means those who are naturally here. The implication is that everyone else is here unnaturally, and thus at the pleasure of the Tangata Whenua. Only a Tangata Whenua can be a true resident of New Zealand; everyone else is a mere guest.

Because the Treaty of Waitangi is considered New Zealand’s founding document, and because the Te Reo Maori version of this is considered the true version, the power to interpret that document lies solely with those who can speak and read Te Reo Maori. This makes them the equivalent of the Brahman caste in the Vedic system.

Because everyone else in New Zealand is a mere visitor, only the Tangata Whenua may consider it a true homeland. Thus, when giving a pepeha, only Tangata Whenua are permitted to claim an association with local mountains and rivers. Tauiwi (a term that covers both Tangata Moana and Tangata Tiriti) are just passing through, even if their ancestors have lived in an area for two centuries. Thus they are categorically different to Tangata Whenua.

In Woke New Zealand, whatever Tangata Whenua says goes. They are openly acknowledged to have more rights than tauiwi, and must be consulted on all decisions.

Tangata Moana are the middle rank. This caste refers to other people of the Pacific Ocean: Samoans, Tongans, Fijians et al. (Fijian Indians count as Tangata Tiriti however, because this caste system is racial in nature). Tangata Moana are presumed to have “allyship” with Tangata Whenua, hence why Tangata Moana are a higher caste than Tangata Tiriti, who are the oppressors of Tangata Whenua.

Hence Tangata Moana can step off a plane and instantly qualify for benefits and scholarships that Tangata Tiriti don’t get, not even with eight generations of ancestry. It’s also why people can move to New Zealand from a Pacific Island and then immediately start crying about colonisers (see tweet above). Tangata Moana also have their own Super Rugby team (Moana Pasifika) in order to prevent contamination from associating with Tangata Tiriti.

There is an unspoken law in New Zealand that the protections of the Treaty of Waitangi also apply to Tangata Moana. Hence, conversations about the obligations of Tangata Tiriti to Tangata Whenua tend to drift into obligations to Tangata Moana. This is why Samoans and Tongans are considered victims of systemic racism, despite knowingly moving to a country where systemic racism existed instead of staying in one where it didn’t exist.

Working-class whites, even if their ancestors have been here since before New Zealand was fully civilised, are mere Tangata Tiriti. Tangata Moana, in other words, are people of the nearby region, unlike Tangata Tiriti, who are people of distant lands. Thus they occupy a higher caste status. This higher caste status explains why Pacific Islanders have their own dedicated government ministry, while working-class whites do not, despite similar levels of deprivation.

Tangata Tiriti are the lowest caste, roughly equivalent to shudras in the Vedic system. In this caste is everyone without any Maori or Pacific Island ancestry. It doesn’t matter if a person’s ancestors have been in New Zealand for 200 years: that person is still categorically lower than any Tangata Whenua or Tangata Moana.

The logic of the New Zealand caste system is that Tangata Tiriti are only allowed to be here thanks to the permission of Tangata Whenua. It was the Treaty of Waitangi itself which gave Tangata Tiriti the right to be in New Zealand, hence the name of the caste. Should that permission ever be revoked, Tangata Tiriti would no longer have any right to remain in New Zealand, and would presumably have to move overseas or be killed. So they better behave themselves.

The purpose of the Tangata Tiriti, in practice, is to labour for the benefit of the higher two castes. Thus, Tangata Tiriti have no right to complain that they are forced to pay heavy taxes on the income from their labour. Neither do they have the right to complain about anyone in the upper castes being on welfare. The upper castes simply have the right to be on welfare paid for by the Tangata Tiriti.

The Government is not obliged to consult with Tangata Tiriti or to take the interests of Tangata Tiriti into account when making decisions, ever. It is understood that Tangata Tiriti already have it good by being permitted to live here. Political rights over and above that are considered egregious.

Tangata Tiriti are not permitted any pride. Even saying ‘It’s Okay To Be White’ is not allowed. It is permitted, however, to identify as Tangata Tiriti, because this is considered to be an acceptance of lowest-caste status. Distinguishing oneself within that caste, however, is verboten. All Tangata Tiriti are the same, whether white, Asian, Indian or African.

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 piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!

Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2023
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2022
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2021
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2020
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2019
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2018
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2017

If you would like to support our work in other ways, make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!

Why Oliver Jull Was Censored By New Plymouth Boys’ High School

The ongoing saga around New Plymouth Boys’ High School student Oliver Jull has depressed freedom-lovers all over New Zealand. Jull’s speech contained nothing objectionable enough to warrant censorship. But that doesn’t matter to the New Zealand school system, for reasons this essay will elaborate.

Jull wrote a speech for a school competition, but was barred from speaking in the finals of that competition on the grounds that his speech was likely to “upset” some listeners. This then became a drama involving The Platform and the Free Speech Union.

It transpires that NPBHS authorities then lied when they denied that Jull had been banned from speaking on the grounds of the content of his speech. According to the Free Speech Union, Jull recorded conversations with those authorities in which they explicitly stated that he would be permitted to continue to the finals if he changed the content of the speech.

Many observers find it incredible that a high school would go to the extent of censoring one of their own students and then lying about it. These observers are operating under the common, but naive and mistaken, assumption that schools are there to educate.

The role of the school, in reality, is to induce submission and obedience. The school system was created by the ruling class for a specific purpose: to churn out submissive, obedient workers and soldiers. The ruling class want to be obeyed when they order someone to work their whole life for a wage they can never buy a home on, or to charge a machinegun nest and kill everyone inside.

Central to the obedience-inducing process is brainwashing the student to believe that their ruling class is perfect.

One simply must believe that one’s rulers are the greatest rulers in history: the most just, the most wise, the most knowledgable, the most perfect in every way. As such, to doubt or to question them is outrageously antisocial. One simply must believe that one’s society is eternally and inexorably marching upwards. To suggest otherwise is to question the omnipotence and omnibenevolence of the ruling class.

The problem is that Jull’s speech criticised the ruling class.

Schools regiment the thinking of their students such that those students come to accept everything the ruling class tells them to think. This is why teachers love to assert that everything is better now than it ever has been. This is especially why educators love materialist science, which has marched ever-forward for a few centuries now, and why they don’t like classical studies, which dispel the myth of progress.

The last thing the ruling class want is a generation of young men who think for themselves. From the perspective of the ruling class, letting young men think for themselves is inherently a license for destabilisation. ‘Ignorance is Strength’, ran one of the three mottos of Big Brother, and it’s as true for us in Clown World today as it was for Winston Smith in Airstrip One.

Hence, Jull is not allowed to give a speech about the decline of Western civilisation.

A sentence such as “Mass immigration and multiculturalism have disrupted the very fabric of Western societies,” is outright forbidden. The globalists in charge of the West want all the cheap labour they can stuff in. To manufacture consent for doing this, they take measures to stifle any and all anti-immigration sentiment that arises. Immigration is how the rich get richer, thus it’s beyond criticism.

It’s also verboten to state, as Jull did, that “mass immigration has disrupted cultural continuity [and] increased violent crime.” The NZ Police monitor VJM Publishing social media for making comments exactly like that (see screenshot below). The fact that certain immigrant groups commit enormous amounts of crime, and others don’t, is a very touchy subject in the eyes of our ruling classes. If it were more widely known, there would be more opposition to mass immigration, and less immigration means less profit.

The ruling class, by contrast, has no such speech restrictions – they’re not even restricted to the truth. We lowly peasants don’t have the right to question our rulers: not regarding World War conscription, not regarding the War on Drugs, not regarding permission to give speeches. As the ruling class lied about the World Wars and the War on Drugs, without facing any sanction, they can lie to us about our rights too. Hence they lied about why Jull was not permitted to give his speech in the competition finals.

None of the NPBHS staff who lied to Jull will face any consequences – because they lied on behalf of the interests of the ruling class. As this column has previously written, everything is acceptable if it serves the interests of the ruling class.

In summary, Oliver Jull was silenced for the same reasons that VJM Publishing has been silenced over the years: speaking the truth in defiance of the interests of the ruling class.

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 piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!

If you would like to support our work in other ways, make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!

‘California Sober’: Could It Catch On In New Zealand?

Many lifestyle trends that originate in California then spread to the rest of the world. This is because California is where the Spear of Destiny is: the focal point of world cultural influence. The West Coast of America has more soft power than anywhere else on Earth. The latest trend that might spread from there to the rest of the world is called California Sober.

Many people say that life is best with no drugs at all. But for many others, this isn’t realistic. Billions of people feel the need to use chemical assistance to take the edge off the intensity of life on this planet. For those living outside the Abrahamic moral paradigm, using recreational drugs is no more immoral than seasoning one’s food.

The term ‘California Sober’ refers to a lifestyle in which one still uses drugs, but in such a manner that one does very little harm. In fact, one does roughly as little harm as a sober person. The main aspect of the lifestyle is to abstain from the typical drugs of destruction, in particular large amounts of alcohol. In this lifestyle, cannabis replaces alcohol as the go-to everyday social lubricant.

In contrast to the puritanical forms of sobriety so common to the West, in which all psychoactive substances are considered from the devil, California Sober usually involves indulgent cannabis use, with the occasional use of alcohol or psychedelics. Alcohol is still used, but sparingly, such as for celebrations. Psychedelics are also used sparingly, but more for spiritual or mental health reasons.

This arrangement is not merely a fashion. It reflects actual psychological and medical science. Professor David Nutt, perhaps the world’s foremost expert on relative drug harms, conducted a study that found alcohol to be the most harmful drug of all. Figure 3 in this paper (link goes to .pdf) suggests that alcohol is twice as harmful to other people as heroin, and about as harmful to the user as heroin, crack cocaine or methamphetamine.

According to Prof. Nutt’s research, cannabis is less harmful than tobacco, and much, much less harmful than alcohol. Magic mushrooms are considered by this research to be the least harmful of all those surveyed.

The logic of the California Sober lifestyle is to take this modern science into account when making recreational drug choices. As such, the use of alcohol is much less common in comparison to wider Western society. The use of cannabis and psychedelics, by contrast, is much more common.

The lifestyle hasn’t been designed by the dispassionate scientific analysis of a few elites, though. It is, for the most part, an organic development.

Many people have found that they like to use alcohol to take the edge off the stress of daily life, but they really don’t like the side-effects of alcohol: the sickness, the bloating, the hangovers, the mental dullness. For them, cannabis does the job of taking the edge off without the physical suffering.

For these people, replacing alcohol with cannabis seems like an obvious idea.

Some Kiwis, your author among them, have been living California Sober for a while already. I worked as a barman for several years to help pay for university, but by the time I graduated I had come to realise that cannabis was a better lifestyle choice than alcohol for many reasons. Foremost among these reasons: cannabis users seemed much less prone to violence and sluttery.

Using more cannabis, I found that I felt a lot better physically than I did using alcohol. So phasing out the alcohol seemed like a natural choice. Occasional psychedelic use, usually to mark a solstice or equinox, also seems like a natural choice. I believe that many people, if given the freedom to do so, would live a lifestyle similar to this.

The main difficulty with leading this lifestyle in New Zealand, of course, is the law.

Cannabis has been fully legal in California since 2016, the year 57% of Californians voted to legalise it at referendum. New Zealand, unfortunately, voted away our chance at cannabis freedom in 2020. As such, we are now eight years behind California, and counting. It’s not likely that the Sixth National Government will change the cannabis laws, and they might not lose power until 2029 (assuming they win three terms, as National governments tend to do). So New Zealand probably won’t get legal cannabis until 15 or 16 years after California.

Despite this, cannabis is easy to get in New Zealand – Kiwis are some of the world’s heaviest users of it. Thus it’s possible to live a California Sober lifestyle here, but not with the same level of acceptance as in North America. Moreover, medicinal cannabis is now very easy to access in New Zealand.

Most of the reasons that caused the California Sober lifestyle to become popular in North America also apply to New Zealand. We also have severe problems with physical, mental and social damage caused by alcohol, and would benefit from a shift to lower-harm substances. It may be that natural adoption of this lifestyle among Kiwis is what eventually forces a change to the cannabis laws.

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 piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!

If you would like to support our work in other ways, make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!

What El Salvador Could Teach New Zealand About Solving The Gang Problem

Nayib Bukele is the President of El Salvador, having won re-election earlier this year with almost 85% of the popular vote. Most of his popularity is a result of his security strategy, which has transformed El Salvador from an extremely dangerous country to a safe one. On X, Bukele describes himself as a “philosopher king”. His security philosophy might be applicable to other places plagued by gangs.

Bukele’s approval rating today is some 89%, making him arguably the most popular leader of any country. Understanding why he is so popular requires understanding the difference between the El Salvador before Bukele took power, and the El Salvador now.

El Salvador used to be the most violent country in the Western hemisphere. The MS-13 and Barrio 18 gangs had reduced the country to a battleground. With everyday life under gang control, El Salvador was in danger in collapsing into Haiti-style anarchy. The homicide rate in 2015 was over 100 per 100,000 people.

Bukele came to power in 2019. The homicide rate had fallen from its peak since then, but was still extremely high. In March 2022 there was a spike in homicides due to MS-13, wherein 87 people were randomly murdered by the gang over a three-day period. This was apparently an attempt by MS-13 to intimidate the people of El Salvador into submission.

The response was a ‘War Against the Gangs‘, launched by Bukele that same month. He had described gangs as the metastases of a cancer that is killing Salvadorean society.

The crackdown saw the arrest of around 2% of the Salvadoran population and the construction of a 40,000-person maximum security prison, known as the “Terrorism Confinement Centre”. Since these measures were taken, El Salvador’s homicide rate has plummeted. In 2023 it was a mere 2.4 per 100,000 (c.f. Canada at 2.3).

Could a similar strategy work here?

For one thing, New Zealand gangs don’t cause as much damage as the gangs in El Salvador. The homicide rate in New Zealand is lower than even the 2023 rate there. New Zealand gangs might be feral by New Zealand standards, but by Latin American standards they’re standard-bearers of civilisation.

However, the general cancer metaphor is apt. As family members of gang members can tell you, the damage caused by gang members is not limited to crime. Immeasurable quality of life damage is caused by the constant threats, intimidation and antisocial behaviour that comes with the presence of gang culture.

Moreover, existing gangs could cause extreme damage in the future. The example of El Salvador shows that the homicide rate can increase manyfold in a short period if the economic and social environment permits. Given the ongoing economic collapse of the Anglosphere, anyone could confidently predict a rise in both volume and intensity of gang activity in coming years.

Bukele’s Terrorism Confinement Centre has room for 40,000 people. New Zealand was known to have 8,300 gang members nationwide near the end of 2022. We could, therefore, build a much smaller prison – one that fit 10,000 people – and still have enough room to put every single gang member in it for life.

Other anti-gang measures could readily be adopted from El Salvador.

One of these is the reduction of the age of criminal responsibility, from 16 to 12. Having the age at 16 makes sense in a high-trust, high-social capital environment where most people want to do good. In a low-trust environment, however, tolerance and kindness just gets taken advantage of. Gangs exploit that tolerance and kindness by getting younger teenagers – too young to be charged – to commit crimes. This phenomenon also exists in the New Zealand gang scene, so we might benefit from a similar reduction in the age of criminal responsibility.

Of note is that one element of Bukele’s crackdown was banning media from expressing pro-gang sentiments. If implemented in New Zealand, this would prevent The New Zealand Herald offering a column to former Black Power pack rapist Denis O’Reilly. It would also prevent the numerous hagiographies about gang leaders doing community work.

Unfortunately, no measures will be taken to protect the New Zealand people from the gang menace as long as globalists are in power.

What New Zealand needs is a leader that cares about the New Zealand nation first and foremost.

Also of note is that the political philosophy of Bukele’s movement is explicitly anti-democratic. Bukele’s Vice-President, Felix Ulloa, has said “The democratic system that existed for years in El Salvador only benefited crooked politicians.” The system that exists in New Zealand also only benefits crooked politicians. That suggests that solving our leadership problems might require also solving the democracy problem.

All this might be too much for New Zealand for now – we are yet to see the Mongrel Mob, the Headhunters, Black Power or the Hell’s Angels murder random civilians in New Zealand to intimidate the Government. But the worse our gang problem becomes, the more we will need to consider the need for a Nayib Bukele-style crackdown.

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 piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!

If you would like to support our work in other ways, make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!