Wednesday, 26 September 2018

Left wing over reach triggering it’s own demise.

Absent the violence required to bring about a revolution in society, we are seeing something occurring that is truly unexpected. One would normally expect that without physical resistance then the slow rot of our civilization would eat away at the foundations until there was nothing but dogs and beggars wandering in the ruins of what we once made.

But something strange is just noticeable on the horizon. We are in the midst of a culture war, we can all agree on that. The Right, standing for truth and nature faces the overwhelming power of the contrived lies and wishful thinking of the unhinged and deranged masses of a once forthright people. But could it be that the left are getting caught in the tightening coils of their own lies?

We understand that the peaceful separation of ethnic Racial groups is the natural condition of Man. We need it and we will have it. But social constraint and legal prohibitions on freedom of speech and expression,- which is always just a shorthand for thought crime,- has forced the urge of man to express itself in whatever other way it can.

So now in America the political Right and the drive for Ethno-Nationalism is degraded to support for Economic Nationalism or Civic nationalism.

So whites in America and beyond cling to Nationalism, which at its core is defined by Race but cloaked in economic principles or what is called Civic Nationalism, “united by ideology, if you support our ideals and our economic goals then you are part of our nation”. These are fraudulent ideals, and the truth will come out. And whites only cling to these policies because they still cannot come out openly in support of White Racial integrity.

But the left opposes these ideas because they see through the pretense and know just as well as we do that nationhood is shorthand for race. And that of course in unacceptable. They have to destroy nationhood because they have to destroy our Race.

The fly in the ointment is that they have destroyed us with people who they have not at first destroyed. The Blacks and Arabs and Asians they are using to destroy our civilization are highly ethnocentric, and they will pursue their ethnic interests because that is the natural state of Man. If they were what we are, i.e. a large mass of largely deracinated unpeople, then they would quietly flood into all sections of our community, dress like us, eat like us and perhaps even eventually think like us in so far as racial disposition allows. They would have no religion other than the pursuit of money and frivolity. The only thing that would distinguish them from us would be the colour of their skin, and of course the many other racial markers that ideology cannot hide.

Put another way. The unmitigated anti-white hatred of the Judaic plan to destroy Europe, has and will continue to over extend itself. They have already succeeded in destroying our people ideologically. But they had to go and try and destroy us Racially as well. Using people who if nothing else stand for Race and Nation, and they in their millions in our lands may force us finally to recognize what is and always has been right in front of our eyes. The fact that we exist as a racial and National group and we have legitimate ethnic needs that will not be met by continuing to support governments that are explicitly trying to wipe us out!

How will whites in different parts of the world respond to being displaced by multiple fiercely nationalistic groups who will vote as a block for the candidate and party that serves their needs? Will whites ever get the message that radical individualism put’s them at such a profound disadvantage in the new identitairian world that if they don’t vote as a block for their own needs then there will be nothing for them at all? The first and foremost ethnic need is territory, space. Man is more than economics and sex. Despite what the Jew tells you, you are more than that. And it seems the other Ethnic groups are well aware of this, but whites? No. We swallow on pain of being called Racist , every stupid and obvious lie they feed us.

Now as the Mexicans and Blacks group up and lobby for secession of various States to form their own Ethnic nations and in The UK the political parties compete for the vote of the various ethnic groups,- except for Whites of course, who in their foolish nativity still don’t get how politics actually works. Whites will find themselves actually forced by default into separate nationhood. The Left will die, even as it tries to be the vanguard protecting the interest of multiple competing so called minority groups against the presumed dominance of the White community. It’s homicidal drive for Multiculturalism and Diversity will finally be exposed for what it is. All that remains to be decided is weather the transition will be obtained in blood and violence or by negotiation and détente

The situation in the UK is worse than in the US, both psychologically and geographically. They are scared and timid, don’t recognize themselves as a group and don’t vote as a block. The reality will eventually bite however, and they will be forced to either recognize their identity and vote for their interests, or carry on in naivety and fear accepting only what crumbs fall from the table where decisions are made. Neither is there enough geographical area to make a viable new Ethno state a possibility in the European theater of operations. There are millions of none whites already there, and while it is not impossible to move millions of people out of an area, the political will to do so is not there.

In America under this scenario the Ethno state will develop as the default position. It is well known that many American whites are armed to the teeth, that fact alone may well be enough to bring about a negotiated breakup of the United States into distinct ethnic Nations.

Friday, 31 August 2018

Christchurch Rising

Transcript of Christchurch speech Saturday, May 5th, 2018

Good afternoon Christchurch

I am going to present some ideas today that many of you may have not heard before. Ideas you may find confronting or uncomfortable or even offensive. All I ask is that you hear me out and attempt to keep the carnage to manageable levels. As Jordan Peterson famously remarked, “In order to be able to think you have to risk being offensive” And thinking at this time in the political arena is something that is desperately needed, both here at home and even more so in the international arena.

Let's talk about Freedom of speech
First, off we should talk about Freedom of speech. We all like to think that we support the idea of Freedom of Speech. Many of us would hold that this is a basic tenet of western democracy. But just how far are we prepared to go in extending the franchise into the domain of people with whom you have fundamental disagreements?

We are in ideologically unchartered waters when we attempt to extend this uniquely European invention to people and cultures who explicitly desire to dismantle or replace the very system that created the principle in the first place. The idea of Freedom of Speech as a system of conflict resolution and social development is a peculiarly European invention and it works well enough within a European Cultural framework.

The problem with our understanding of democracy and freedom of speech is that we arrogantly expect and assume that all other peoples and cultures have the same set of fundamental beliefs and moral norms as we do. We live in the post-Christian west, but it would be a mistake to assume our worldview has not been conditioned to a great extent by our Christian heritage.

The idea of Freedom of Speech is that you are free to say anything, and as a defender and promoter of freedom of speech I must accept that people are going to say things I disagree with.  And that of course is the point, it is the right to say things that are Not popular. It is the idea that all ideas are open to debate with the intention that by thrashing out ideas and concepts in an open and honest forum we can keep a check on government and move our society along in a direction that is in the interests of ourselves and our children.

A certain degree of implicit trust and honesty are underlying prerequisites to the working of Freedom of Speech; and those characteristics are bedrock norms that underpin our cultural makeup. These are foundational beliefs that are so basic to our people that no one ever thinks to even mention it. It goes without saying that everyone involved in our community is part of our group and is making an honest and sincere, even if on occasion misguided attempt to improve the lot of our people. However, the whole paradigm is thrown into disarray when an out-group is afforded the same level of trust when they take the podium. The situation is compounded if the out-group cannot be easily identified.

Uniquely Vulnerable

So the system is vulnerable to abuse by people who are not part of our “group” and seek to take advantage of our system in order to advance their own interests at our expense. In theory, the presentation of counter survival ideas should be picked up immediately and rebuffed by other speakers, but an underlying weakness of our high trust society seems to be that we are uniquely vulnerable to subtle deceit and miss-direction.

As a people, we are not used to making arbitrary exclusions of people and ideas on the basis of race or culture. We like to think of ourselves as helpful, trusting and inclusive. We pride ourselves as being rational, objective and considerate even going the extra mile to see things from the other person’s point of view. But group survival, in terms of a national/ethnic and cultural identity -dictates that we MUST discriminate in favor of ourselves, and against ideas that threaten our survival. But as a global Racial community, we simply won’t do it, and we are paying the price for our altruism.  European civilization worldwide is being progressively cowed into submission by an overwhelming terror of being called, “Racist”!

White European societies are high trust societies. And it is that trust along with intelligence and creativity that is the source of our strength and the secret to our prosperity. It is also our unique vulnerability. Everywhere in the world where Whites have settled, we have built incredibly successful first world countries that have produced food in quantities far in excess of our needs. And in almost all cases the decline of western countries coincides with an opening of the borders and an infusion into the once prosperous societies of non-European cultures.

All across the western world, in those parts of the world that were until only very recently regarded as “White Countries”, freedom of speech has been under attack. Either overtly by the direct intervention of the government arresting and deporting journalists and speakers,  Or by legislation, criminalizing dissent or criticism of ethnic replacement, or by the subtle power of self-censorship. It does not take long for people to realize what can and cannot be said or even thought.


What is the context of this sudden and dramatic curtailment of our right to be heard? You are not allowed to criticise Islam, you are allowed to criticise Christianity. You are not allowed to even mention the Jews but Whites and our history is to be demonized endlessly. Other Racial groups are encouraged to foster and protect their ethnic and Racial heritage, but Auckland University cannot have a European Student Association without threats of violence against its members. Other Races can have secure homogeneous homelands but whites must be quiet while we are displaced, replaced and genocided in our own homelands.

Closer to home, an article on Stuff from 2016 asks “Which is New Zealand’s Whitest region”  With absolutely no attempt to hide the Anti White bias and accusative tone the writer askes “But why is it still so white today?”  The writer of this article Laura McQuillan obviously feels at liberty to make openly racist statements against Whites. Just replace the word White with black or Asian, and the institutionalized racism becomes obvious.  If this sort of article had been published asking why a particular town was so Black or Maori with the clear implication that it needs to do more to reduce the percentage of those non-white people in a given community there would be international outrage; a political crisis would ensue, ambassadors would be recalled and political censure and sanctions would be imposed!

But rather than calling out the radical racist agenda, the Waimakariri District Council grovels apologetically for it’s 95% white town. And assures the reader that the council is doing all it can to discriminate against White applicants for council jobs. “Ayers said the council was actively encouraging ethnic diversity, both through its recruitment practices and in a programme specifically targeting the assimilation of newcomers to the district, especially those whose first language wasn't English.”

On the other hand, Wairoa in northern Hawkes Bay gets the prise for being New Zealand ’s most diverse spot. But of course it is not Diverse, it just has more Maori people than Whites, 62 to 51%   (2013) with a smattering of Pacific Islanders and Asians.

That is the context of the current hysteria whenever the rules of political correctness are broken.
Ladies and gentlemen we have to break those rules. Whether you believe it is all good fine fair and reasonable for the global powers to deliberately genocide my people or not, we owe it to ourselves to at least hear another side to the story.

The current catastrophe occurring in South Africa is the worst example of the results of political correctness, but the slaughters across Europe and the systematic rape of up to a million British girls all result from the same malaise.  We must overcome this self-imposed ban on noticing if we ever intend to preserve the communities we grew up in.

So Let’s talk about Racism.  It seems that almost the entirety of western civilization is going down in paralyzed terror of being called that one simple word “Racist”. I do not believe anyone is actually born “Racist”, and by that I mean prone to oppressive discrimination against a person or group on the basis of race alone. Whites are, perhaps the most un-racist Racial group on the planet. Probably due to the fact that we have far more phylogenic diversity within our own race than any other Race on Earth.

Racial awareness in Whites tends to come about more as a result of noticing.  Noticing particular trends in the Media, or particular not so subtle trends in advertising, and then the movies. And then most ominously what is happening in our own towns and cities.  And for those paying attention to events in the rest of the White world, the trend is irrefutable.

The fact is, the deliberate denigration of White culture and history has done more to create a sense of racial awareness and brotherhood in White people around the world in the last few years than could ever have been hoped for by what the media likes to refer to as right-wing extremism.

It has been said that political correctness is simply a ban on noticing. The ability to notice what is occurring in the White world does not mean you have a pathological hatred of all things beige or slightly off-white. That’s ridiculous, but in essence, that is what we are expected to believe.
In truth, the fact that normal people notice the obvious simply means that you are not so shallow and gullible as to accept without question the ridiculous lies and obfuscations put forward by our governments.

Race is an extension of family, the people we have known and experienced life with for thousands of years. A shared racial bond established over millennia and encoded deeply genetically and spiritually in the people we have become today.

New Zealanders are generous people; forbearing to a fault. When I was in Wellington last year I was confronted as an independent citizen. In one instance a young Indian man used a megaphone to scream in my face that I was a racist.  Imagine that, New Zealand has a predominantly White European culture, settled predominantly by White people from the British Isles. We let a man from a foreign race and culture into our country who then screams his demands and accusations at White citizens that We are racist for not allowing more people like him into our country.

New Zealanders are forbearing to a fault. Forbearing means “an abstaining from the enforcement of a right”. That right is to live in peace, in our country, with our own people unmolested.  A fairly reasonable expectation I think. We like to feel good about ourselves in our generosity and hospitality. We have been led to believe that ALL people are the same no matter where they come from or what their background is.  So we bow our heads, fail to complain and pretend not to notice what has happened to our country.

I’ll bring it down to the personal level to make the point
It’s somewhat like having visitors come to stay, who at first you welcome with open arms, it’s all smiles and laughter as you feed them, ply them with liqueur, give them a room and a bed and tell them to make themselves at home. Which they do.  And all is well, but they stay longer than expected, they bring their children and their parents and take another room. They use the kitchen at all hours and leave the cooking smells of a foreign land lingering in the air. The delightful novelty of another culture in your home soon loses it’s shine.  You come home from work one day to find your family outnumbered your couch unavailable, your fridge empty and bills on the table.  Upstairs their son is making himself known to your teenage daughter.  They are doing what you said, making themselves at home, only now, by becoming their home, it is no longer yours.

New Zealanders have found themselves after years of altruistic generosity, in the completely intolerable position of having to say to the visitors “Well actually this is our house! This is the home we made for us, you have come in here and behaved as if our land is vacant, as if we do not exist, as if our country is a vacant piece of land that is freely available for you to come and claim as you see fit and to build your culture here as if there was nothing here to begin with. Everything we had we took for granted, while it was not under threat, but now that you have taken our peace we see what we had and we want it back.”

Mass none white immigration is a problem occurring in all white countries and only white countries.  In each country, the characteristics of this replacement are slightly different and the process may be further along in some places than others.  But the demographic change is occurring at breakneck speed and the justifications used are always the same; it’s either the moral obligation or the economic imperative. These decisions have always been made in private by politicians, bureaucrats and business leaders who only see the wonderful benefits of mass immigration to suppress wages and lift profits.  We have young men working in New Zealand trying to support a wife and child on 17, and 18 dollars an hour. They would like to have more children, but they simply can't’ afford it.  This is a demographic catastrophe in the making, in a few years time you can imagine the government declaring in great surprise “gosh there’s not enough people, what a surprise! I know; let's open the borders!”   To Asia, China, to India, to Pakistan, Africa and its teeming millions, to the middle east.

But will these same people think about helping our racial brothers and sisters escape crushing poverty and ethnocide in South Africa or help our European people escape the broken cities of Europe, I seriously doubt it… Because that is not “diversity”.

How has this situation come about where our young people simply cannot afford to have children, when for decades upon decades through every election cycle all we ever hear about is the economy?
Even now the government has backed itself into a corner, we have an Immigration based economy, with real GDP of zero or close to it.  This is a situation that, if allowed to continue will be disastrous for everyone, new foreign immigrants, New Zealand Whites and Maori alike.

Now, before I am shouted down with the usual tirade of racist abuse let me say I have nothing against the people who come here. They are for the most part only doing the very best they can for themselves and their families. And if the situation were reversed, I’m sure I would do all I could, to get myself and the rest of my family into India for example, so that I might take advantage of the wonderful society that the Indian people had created for themselves. So that I might be able to take advantage of all kinds of benefits the Indian people receive, like for example, free education, or free health care, or unemployment benefits, or a sickness benefit, or if I have an accident, then compensation for injury. Or cheap government funded housing. Obviously, I would have to be a complete idiot to not try and get into India in any way I could, if the situation were reversed.

However the situation is not reversed, and it is our small nation of New Zealand that is being force fed an indigestible diet of people from parts of the world that have absolutely nothing in common with the European cultural heritage of New Zealand.

White survival
White survival is completely unacceptable to the global elites.  Our survival as a distinct racial and cultural group undermines the foundations of what has been called the “New World Order”.  What is required for this globalist dream to work is the transformation of a diverse multicultural world of nations and peoples into a global mass of faceless units of consumption and production.

For us to survive would mean a complete about-face, an absolute rejection and refutation of everything we have been taught to believe about our people for a hundred years.
We must love what we have been taught to hate. Up until now, we have been taught to tolerate, that which will destroy us, to love those that hate us and to disregard our own Ethnic interests. We have been taught to pretend that we have no group interests at all because we don’t exist. All of these concepts are false and fatal to our prospects.

We are now at a point as a civilization where we can no longer afford to silently tolerate those amongst us that explicitly preach our death or enslavement, viz Islam, or even the subtle replacement of our people on the basis of some imposed moral obligation.  When we accept that it is wrong or evil and suppress the natural desire to protect our own people we corrupt ourselves and make a meaningful cultural self-defense impossible.  Ideas precede action, as it would seem the designers of our psychological architecture are well aware.

Once we recognize the global agenda and our brotherhood with the international community of European peoples we will realize that it is perfectly right, normal, healthy and proper that we should defend our right to a homeland of our own. In the same way that the Chinese are not called Racists because they are almost 100 percent homogenous, or the Japanese or the Indians or indeed the entire African continent. We too must reject these worn out epithets and slurs and be proud of who we are and what we have achieved in the World as well as right here in New Zealand.

So let me reiterate. The desire to preserve what we already have here in our New Zealand should not be construed as a negative comment on people from other lands. I have no intention to impugn the character or race of foreign peoples. But this is our place, that we built for ourselves. And just because we built something great does not mean we have any moral obligation to open our borders to the rest of the world.  Quite the reverse, we need to protect what we have, and if we can help other peoples to better themselves in their own lands then as a humanitarian gesture we should do all we can to help. But not at the expense of our own cultural identity.

Maori Activism  
I believe the situation for the New Zealand Maori people is also extremely grim unless they can bring themselves to embrace a nationalistic point of view.  My point of view is that Maori interests are best served by supporting the only party in New Zealand, that explicitly seeks to preserve the traditional ethnic and cultural makeup of New Zealand.

It is extremely disheartening to see Maori activists siding with left-wing groups whose aims will directly undermine Maori prospects.  The left uses the seductive language of “Human rights” to pit one group against the other.  Whether it is Human Rights, Maori Rights or Land Rights, none of these “Rights” are going to be of any use to you if you have no job, and no benefit and are left to stand in line as just another member of just another minority group in a fractured and broken society. In this dystopian prediction of a not too distant future, New Zealand will have a population of say 7 million, and baring a sudden and dramatic increase in Maori birth rates, Maori will fall to perhaps 8% of the population.  European New Zealanders could be 48% with 44% of our population made up of Asians and Indians.  At this point New Zealand is not “Our” country anymore, it is only “A” country. Nothing more than an economic region, a corporate profit center if you will.  And of course, that has been the objective all along.

I believe the Maori Establishment and leadership need to stop looking backward to historical grievances, real or contrived and the government needs to ensure that happens by curtailing the gravy train of the grievance industry.  Not that I blame any Maori group or individual for taking advantage of the gravy train thus made available. Anyone would do that. But until the government removes the incentive for looking backward we will not be able to live in the present or face the problems of the future together.   While we are distracted and bickering over grievances of the past our collective future is being stolen from under our noses.  It’s like driving down the road constantly looking in the rear vision mirror all the time, you’re going to have an accident doing that. We need to work together, pay attention to what’s happening on the road ahead and secure a future for both of our peoples in the land we all call home, our New Zealand.


Wednesday, 29 August 2018

Letter To A Liberal

21 August 2018

This is a fairly long document, please use the links below to jump to the section headings.
Hello Liberal

You, dear Liberal see the world through rose-tinted and blinkered glasses. Some of you are true believers and some merely useful idiots.  Let’s have a look at some of the presuppositions you hold so dear.

On the question of New Zeeland having been stolen from the Maori people.

You take it as a given that “We took this country” from the Maori people. This is an important questing for New Zealander’s that bears a closer look.

The notion that New Zealand was stolen from the Maori people is untrue in the sense that it simplifies and misrepresents the historical facts of the settlement of these islands. No doubt wrongs and injustices were committed.  And it is very easy from our standpoint to make moralistic judgments on events that occurred over a hundred and fifty years ago.

Things could have been done better, but they could also have been done a whole lot worse. The Maori people were not massacred or enslaved; they were not corralled into reservations or shipped off to foreign lands. A fate that could well have occurred had New Zealand been initially colonized by other powers. Fortunately, that did not happen, from first contact to the Treaty the relationship had been one of mutually beneficial trade. Extremely profitable trade in fact to the extent that some northern Maori had become wealthy international traders with their own ships.  (Source)   And it was for the purpose of safeguarding that trade that the northern Maori chiefs wrote to King William IV explicitly seeking his intervention and protection (from a perceived threat from the French).

It could have been a whole lot worse, they benefitted and they sought out and instigated closer ties with the British government themselves.

Prior to European settlement Maori economic life consisted of subsistence farming and gathering, they had no written language and no technology and life expectancy was only 30 years.  Intertribal relationships were characterized by slaughter slavery and ritual cannibalism, the Musket Wars would rage into the 1830's killing over twenty thousand Maori. By comparison, the land wars of the 1860’s killed about 2000 (Source). So the chief benefit that colonization finally brought to the Maori people was peace.

The idea that we Whites “took” or stole New Zealand from the Maoris first implies that there was a country to take and that there was a monolithic Maori nation to take it from.   At the time of the signing of the Treaty the total Maori population is estimated at 90,000 persons, most densely populated in the Northland region, in a country of 264000 Km2.  The White population at the time was only about 2000 persons.

The treaty was signed by about 530 Maori chiefs representing most of the Maori population at the time.  The only move towards Nationhood on the part of the Maori people was the 13 confederated tribes of the north that first approached the King and worked with Busby to create the 1835 declaration of independence.

There are other issues around the concept of land ownership and sovereignty that really need to be looked at more closely to get around the problem of applying contemporary norms to a situation that existed 178 years ago.

In terms of the ownership of bare land or untouched pristine forest, the English conception of ownership can be found in Adam Smiths; The Wealth of Nations (pp80)  “The property which every man has in his own labour, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable”

In that sense, it would be difficult for the English mind to respect a prior claim to ownership of vast tracts of untouched forest.  Whereas if I stake a claim, clear the land, fence it off, till the soil and tend my crops it is understood that by virtue of the labour and effort I have put into it, the land owes me a return and to that extent I claim ownership of the land.  Indeed, the Maori people may have understood this principle a little more than they let on.

In 1880 Te Whiti o Rongomai realized the principle that Payment for land Justified claims of prior ownership, even though from the government point of view they were just payments to keep the peace. He told his followers that all they needed to do to stake their claim was to possess the land and till the soil.

The Maori people had no equivalent to the European concept of sovereignty.  Instead, they had 540 chiefs representing 90,000 people.  Other than the United Tribes of NZ representing the 35 northern chiefs there was no united body representing Maori interests as a whole.

This is backed up by Governor George Grey’s advice to the Colonial Office in 1863 that there were only 3355 Māori living on 200,000 hectares of fertile land in the Waikato, and of this they had cultivated just 6000 hectares.

The Crown prior to the Treaty settlement did not appear to be much interested in New Zealand at all. And far from wanting to come out here and steel the country, the Crown seems to have been more motivated by a desire to protect the interests of the Maori people against unscrupulous land speculators.  The Crown’s hand was somewhat forced into greater involvement by the continuing demands of settlers and the actions of the New Zealand Company.

Whatever the reason, it is clear that a military operation was not necessary; the locals were smart, peaceful and willing to trade with the newcomers for western products.  The Crown response was pragmatic, far cheaper to sign a treaty than send an invading force of thousands of infantry.

Claims of Maori land theft rest on the deliberate intentions of The Maori Land Court 1865, and the New Zealand Settlements act 1863 to free up Maori land for settlement.  Maori holdings were deliberately broken up and confiscations of huge areas were made from Tribes in rebellion and apparently even some who were not.

It’s very easy from 153 years down the track to pass moralistic judgment on the deeds of the past.  Things could have been handled better and in a more equitable way. A very small number of Maori claiming exclusive rights to huge tracts of unused land was never going to gibe with the arrival of a highly advanced and vigorous European culture that needed somewhere to go. And that had an entirely different understanding of the ownership and use of land. The cultural clash between an advanced, technical and industrializing European civilization and what was a relatively primitive hunter-gatherer civilization was never going to be easy. The country we enjoy today would never have come into being without the acquisition of that land. Certainly, you can argue that the purpose of the Maori Land court in seeking the rapid individualization of ancestral Maori land ownership was “immoral” or “wrong”. But this is a case of your damned if you do and you’re damned if you don’t.  The government believed the land was needed; the Maori tribes could not and would not move into closer proximity to one another, - they would slaughter each other if they did, - and they claimed vast holdings of land – as required by their subsistence hunter-gatherer lifestyle.   As it turned out many of the towns and settlements that were planned never eventuated, and eventually some land was sold back to the Maori.

There may not be an equivalent in Maori for “sovereignty” but they certainly knew who owned what and they were more than willing to sell off huge swathes of territory to the English settlers. Are we to assume now that they did not know they were selling their land? What did they believe they were exchanging for the money and goods they received? Was the money or goods they received just rent or a lease? I believe the Maori chiefs new exactly what they were doing and they were more than happy to take advantage of the British offer of money for land, which conveniently confirmed their status as prior owners.

In Balance
  1. Maori initiated and sought British intervention for protection and trade.
  2. Initially, the Maori benefited in lifestyle and wealth, and militarily over other tribes.
  3. The British acceptance of Maori ownership and sovereignty over New Zealand seemed to suit both sides, even though there is no equivalent word for sovereignty in Maori. They could sell the land for highly valued European products and the British could acquire the land in peace.
  4. The crown saw the acquisition for settlement of virtually all of New Zealand as essential to the development of the country.
  5. The recognition of initial Maori sovereignty, the treaty and confiscations and dubious land sales under the Maori Land Court have enabled years of litigation right up to the present day.
The fact that the British at the time were willing to pay the Maoris anything at all for the land is quite remarkable.  The British Empire held sovereignty in Africa from Cairo to Cape Town, all of it by conquest.  The British respected the intelligence of the Maori and presumably felt they were a people they could negotiate with. It’s clear that there was a strong impetus to look out for Maori interests in the settlement of the islands whilst at the same time facilitate the colonization of the country.

I believe the obligation to see that things were done in an equitable fashion rests with the colonizing power. However, to a certain extent, they were in a no-win situation. Round them all up and put them on a reservation and there would have been a bloodbath, they hated each other far more than any of them hated the British.  The equitable setting aside of lands for the respective tribes may have worked, but there were hundreds of them! Each claiming ownership to vast tracts of untouched primordial forest.

So now with the question of reparations and the putting right of past injustices. I had mentioned to you in your interview “how far do you go” because this is a slippery slope. These reparations are only sought from the crown, not from other tribes who inflicted far more brutal and homicidal crimes against their own people.  Surely this is an object lesson in how not to colonize a new territory; generations later we are now left to pick up the tab for the altruistic generosity of our imperial forebears.

And how does one calculate the value of a wrong, a hundred and fifty years after the fact? You could ask “what could they have done with the land they lost?” Or more likely “what would they have done with the land they had already possessed for 500 years”.   I think this is a valid point for the anti-white liberal’s to consider. You may talk about opportunity cost, fair enough; what is it?   It is likely that had the treaty been signed in 1940 instead of 1840. Those same Maori chiefs would have been confronted by a George Grey supported by Battleships, planes, cars, tanks, Radio communications and the whole thing would have been filmed and recorded for posterity.

The Maori were regarded as an intelligent people, but culturally, they were a culture experiencing stasis. I do not believe there is any reason to assume that Maori tribes who may have lost lands through wrongful confiscation or dubious land deals would have created for themselves the level of wealth that is being handed to them today as settlements.    To apply European expectations of development to the Maori people is to misunderstand the Maori intent.  The subsistence farming, hunter-gatherer type of existence of the traditional way of life required considerable lands. A type of existence that is incompatible with intensive European farming techniques.  So how much should the crown compensate the Maori tribes for the loss of land with which they were going to do nothing?

The settlements in this context are not a compensation but rather a self-inflicted fine.  But OK, fair enough, if the crown determines that it has broken its own contractual obligations, then what is a fair remedy. Current market value?  The return of the land if possible or other lands?

The various tribes are now being financially compensated for land that was both legally and illegally confiscated, and being paid out multiple times for the same so-called settlement.

Total settlements are now 2.24 billion dollars and counting with Ngāi Tahu and Tainui-Waikato recently receiving an additional 370 million dollar “top-up”! (source). There is no end in sight to this process. ($466 for every man woman and child in the country)

The modern Maori population (or those that identify as Maori) today is about 800,000.  A truly spectacular population recovery from the low point of 42000 in 1896.

The Maori people are grownups, we don’t need to beat around the bush and they don’t need affirmative action appointments to help them up the economic ladder.

Reparations are one thing; attempting to put right prior wrongs and showing good faith for the benefit of the community is fair enough.  But we know that achieving simple equity is not always the goal.  And the longer the government continues to play along with Maori activists who seek to exploit the otherwise good intentions of the government, the more they will continue to feed into the on-going industry of grievance and claims.  This is not good for Maori and it certainly isn’t good for the country as a whole.   I believe the Maori ruling elites have trapped themselves into what is fast becoming an outdated paradigm.  They talk about “partnership” but that is a ruse, they are out to get what they can from a government that is also trapped in a liberal ideological straight jacket that it cannot break free from.  Both sides need to man up, stop looking backwards and start moving forward together.

Moving on.
You may ask “How have we been disenfranchised”?
Rather than fully document and flesh out every example, I’m just going to state the case and provide a link to a YouTube video or other documentation.

You insist that whites are not under threat anywhere or in any way, that Whites control everything and have all the best jobs and make the most money, and that demographic displacement of Whites is only something to be celebrated. Let’s See…

Information presented under the following five headings; Population, Race mixing agenda, Mass Immigration, Anti White Bias in Media, Affirmative action.
  1. Population
Total world population 7.6 Billion
White population; 760 million
Women of childbearing age; 2.5% or 190 million women.
The White population figure is contentious. Many Demographers over count, including many people in their calculations who would not normally be considered White. I have used a number developed by Chris Woodberry
In 1950 Whites represented 28% of the world’s population. Now, depending on the source you use whites are 10 to 17% . YouTube   GooglePost
  1. Race mixing agenda.
Promoted through Movies, TV soaps and Advertising. See Aaron Kasparov  YouTube.
  1. Mass Immigration.
Mass third world immigration Into White countries and only white countries. See the following YouTubes;
The Great Replacement. Fantastic overview of the whole programme of White Replacement by Lauren Southern. YouTube
Using the Refugee Migration Crisis to Build the New World Order. The John Birch Society. YouTube.
The UN seriously considers the massive immigration of none European people as a solution to the demographic decline of the European people. UN document on Replacement Migration (Source). One scenario seriously suggests the importation of 235 million third worlders as a “solution” to Europe’s demographic problem. No suggestion is ever made to encourage stable families and the birth of more children. Only the importation of Non-whites.  See the Kalergi Plan here and also this YouTube
  1. Anti White Bias in Media, Entertainment, Academia and education.
Why Is The Media So Liberal? Here's Your Answer! Dr. Steve Turley looks at Media in the US context, however the same applies here in NZ. YouTube
Event Canceled: New Zealand Is Hostile To Free Speech. Stefan Molyneux. Both of these commentators deal with issues that directly affect the prospects for White cultural and indeed physical survival, yet they are shut down for “Hate Speach”. YouTube
No Free Speech at Auckland University. Response to the Banning of the Auckland University European Students Association.  The vitriol and outright lies spewed by the mainstream media against the slightest hint of White identity betrays a coordinated and organized attack. YouTube.
Hollywood's Anti White Agenda - Beauty & the Beast. Mark Collett.  YouTube.
  1. Affirmative action
Political correctness demands that diversity be forced into all government departments and educational institutions. It’s a problem because the Liberal wishful thinking that all humans are exactly the same is simply wrong…
Stefan Molyneux on Race and IQ  YouTube
Race & IQ - Demographic Effects on National High IQ. Very in-depth theoretical study of race and IQ.  YouTube.

Morality and Ethnicity
I have been told “There are far more modern examples of how White people have disenfranchised other cultures”. It's difficult to respond to this without knowing what you are talking about, perhaps Blacks in America, or South Africa, or maybe Colonial India or perhaps British colonial Africa. There are also numerous examples of how other people disenfranchised other people, Arabs enslaving many millions of blacks over a thousand years. Or Blacks enslaving Blacks, or Arabs enslaving Whites for hundreds of years right up to the early eighteen hundreds. Yet all we ever hear about is the incessant whining from the liberal left about “slavery” as if this were a uniquely White European institution.

Understand that we are done with apologies. We do not apologize for the deeds or misdeeds of our forefathers.  We accept the natural world as given, and whilst not wanting to speak for everyone on the political right I believe in a spiritual sense that Nature has become sentient in US; that the crux of the problem facing western man is a spiritual one.   We do not entertain the vain imaginings of the Marxist liberal left which we consider to be anti-human and anti-nature.  All natural groups, Races and species have interests, and we stand against the contrived morality that is used as a weapon by the political Left to corrupt the natural instincts of the European peoples to defend their own.

You will complain that white people have the “best jobs and the best opportunities”, but you are quite unable to consider the possibility that just maybe that is because they are the pest people for the job or that they worked hard with intelligence, energy and creativity to create the best opportunities for themselves, and that they are fully entitled to the rewards they earn for their efforts.

I have been told by Liberals that “We created the society in which we thrive under, of course that is a form of discrimination”.  This is a particularly revealing statement.  Why wouldn’t White people create societies in which we thrive?  It's quite ridiculous to suggest that whites or indeed any homogenous group would not create the best conditions they can for their people, anything else is simply unhinged!  And you call this discrimination?  When you are developing a society for your own people, to suit your own social standards and cultural mores, it is I suppose discriminating by default, obviously and why not? This is completely normal yet your Liberal Anti-White mind has a problem with it!

European peoples wherever they have settled around the globe have produced peaceful highly successful societies.  Rhodesia under white rule was the breadbasket of Africa, feeding millions and providing peace and prosperity for their own citizens both Black and White.  Similar situation in South Africa, where Blacks under apartheid lived under better conditions and had better health care than they do today (Source)

Your Liberal attitude seems to deny that White people have a right to live in their own sovereign countries unmolested in peace.
To expand on the idea of Race and Nation.

There are many aspects or factors of a social Culture. Culture is everything you see around you and take for granted; your Language, the clothes you wear, the food you eat, Architecture, Art, Poetry, Philosophy and Music. It is the knowledge of your history and the heroes of your past. We maintain that Race is foundational to that culture. As we know that average intelligence, character and creativity vary between the Races, so the texture of culture the different Racial groups produce will differ to reflect the racial character of the people from whom the culture came.

We affirm the primacy of territory to the expression of cultural identity. Both in terms of how cultural norms and practices initially develop and latter to provide an exclusive environment where cultural identity can be fully expressed.  The more highly developed a culture is, the more insistent the requirement for exclusive territory will be.

This has to be so, to allow space for art, architecture community events and activities etc. and room for the population to expand.

Despite the modern attempt to separate Ethnic identity from Race (source), the fact remains that Ethnicity and Nation has always been associated with Race.  So that as a White Ethnic European I may also consider myself a member of the ethnic White Nation. This is a relatively new idea that is developing as European Whites find they have more in common with their disenfranchised kin in other previously European countries, and less in common with the millions of third world immigrants invading their homelands.

Living Webster.
nation; (Latin nation, born) An aggregation of persons speaking the same or a cognate language and usu. sharing a common ethnic origin.
nation.  a community of persons not constituting a state but bound by common descent language history etc.

So when we allow large numbers of a foreign ethnic group to settle in NZ it is perfectly natural for them to want to stick together and create their own ethnic enclave. These groups will do this, and in a so-called Multicultural society, you will inevitably get the fracturing and balkanization of once homogenous lands into what are by definition, multiple small nations.  The prior homogenous cultural landscape will by default cede territory and sovereignty to the new ethnic enclaves.

Now when the liberal mind, so completely deracinated and unable to recognize his own racial, ethnic and cultural identity is confronted by a multiplicity of Racial groups in society, he sees no threat to his own identity at all because he doesn’t have one.   He sees only an amusing array of restaurants and churches and temples.  You have surrendered your inheritance, and are left as a pedestrian in your own country observing disinterestedly the rise of fiercely ethnocentric groups with whom you have nothing to share.

So the regular average Liberal is suffering from a psycho-spiritual malaise that the rest of the world finds curious and tragic.  When other peoples who have a healthy attitude to their own people and cultural identity, see that white countries have negated our own identity in favour of the “other”, they are more than happy to take advantage of our suicidal naiveté. And you, like most other deracinated liberals like to assume you occupy some kind of moral high ground (re Maslow’s hierarchy of needs) and in your delusion completely fail to notice what is going on around you while your own country is being steadily dismembered.

This kind of Liberalism is considered by many on the right to be an actual mental disorder.  One of the most powerful Videos I have seen on this subject is this one by “Way of The World”. It is an interview with Yuri Besmenov, former KGB agent. He outline’s what he calls Ideological subversion, also called Cultural Marxism, and how it is used to completely destroy the west.

I have met Liberals who admit to being familiar with Cultural Marxism. That being the case, you can no longer hide behind the facade of liberalism or feign some kind of moral superiority.  If you are aware of Herbert Marcuse, Theodore Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Gramsci etc. and the other members of the Institute for Social Research, Frankfurt, then you must also be aware of “critical theory” and the long march through the institutions of the West, and their long-term goal to destroy the West from the inside.

There are I’m sure many on the left who are too young, arrogant and naïve to know any better, they are the useful idiots. There are also many who know exactly what they are doing but will hide their intentions behind whatever social justice cause is fashionable, they are the ones who are one step away from the insanity that is Antifa.  Wrecking and brawling on the street knowingly tearing down what remains of the best of our society to make room for the eventual creation of their naïve Communist dream (you know this is true if you know about Cultural Marxism).  They can engage in the cultural War to destroy everything we hold deer if they will, but what is unforgivable is the deliberate deception and manipulation of so many well-meaning but uninformed fools who believe they are just “helping the refugees” or “fighting racism” or “women’s rights”.  Facing the Left on the ramparts, we on the conservative Right are doing our best to inform, alert and encourage our people to stand up against the creeping nullification of traditional New Zealand values.

I have been asked by you liberals “so what is a traditional New Zealander?” in a deliberately derisive tone, and you seemed genuinely not to know.  A traditional New Zealander is a White European, and it is not “racist” to say that.  The Maori people are obviously New Zealanders by default. But this country was built by white Europeans and it is that cultural balance that we are fighting to preserve.   Multiculturalism and Diversity are frauds, part of the power of the left rests in the simplicity of the lie.  To right-thinking people, the phrase “diversity is our strength” is such an obvious barefaced lie that we are astonished that anyone would give it a second thought.  Yet here we are with thousands of people apparently believing something that could never be true – ever!   Many I’m sure allow themselves to believe these incongruences because to speak against it would make them feel bad; feel guilty or uncomfortable.  But feelings are no argument and your feelings are no defense.

In closing, here is a new video I have found that fairly comprehensively covers the Right wing view of the Left and provides some kind of explanation for why we fight.  The Left’s beef with White people Explained.

This very short Video Presentation succinctly summarises the position of the general Alt-Right. I personally, and I believe most right-wing groups as a whole can fully back the 12 points made in this presentation. The 12-Point Manifesto of the Alt-Right YouTube

Finally, the world is changing fast and the culture War is brutal. Hopefully my people – the ones you deny the very existence of – will be able to preserve for our children a New Zealand worth keeping.