Wishful Thinking

“the coronavirus pandemic has buried globalization ”- Alexander Dugin, ‘Coronavirus Horizons of a Multipolar World’

There are some people, perhaps many on the Nationalist Right who early on were rejoicing that the Coronavirus pandemic spelled the imminent end of globalism. I have my doubts. The wishful thinking that appeared when the pandemic forced the closing of borders will be proved in short order to be just that, naive wishful thinking.

There was the eternally optimistic Steve Turley who ecstatically pronounced the end of globalism and “the dawning of a new Nationalist Populist Age”. He was not alone in his joy at the presumed death of the left. Intellectuals such as Alexander Dugan and Greg Johnson also effused that globalism and its fellow travelers, multiculturalism, open borders and diversity are all propositions that have been proven bad and wrong.

Unfortunately just because something is wrong on so many levels does not mean that with energy, money and determined vested interest that the bad will not succeed. It happens all the time. I don't want to get caught in the long grass talking about the long list of bad ideas that have become common currency but some accepted norms come to mind, Keynesian economics is not the only way to run an economy, fractional reserve banking is not the only and certainly not the best way to run a banking system and obviously fiat currency was dodgy from the start. So there are many things that in an ideal world would be very different. But here we are.

Many in the US were shocked to discover that virtually all their medical supplies (the last US penicillin manufacturer closed in 2004) were “Made in China”. The hope amongst the nationalists is that this realization may be the catalyst we need to rekindle home manufacturing. If that happens then all well and good. Manufacturing autonomy and the re-industrialization of the west are absolutely necessary if we are to re-establish ourselves as legitimate Nations. But the globalization of manufacturing was always just a means to an end, the globalist ideologues don't much care where stuff is made. Power and control of a homogeneous and passive global population is the objective, if there is a confluence of interests between the economic profiteers and the political ideologues on the way to achieving their goal then all well and good. But it would be naive to think that a power play that has been a hundred years in the making will just give up at the moment of victory. However, if the return of large scale manufacturing to western countries were to translate into national identity and then worst of all into Racial identity, then we would see the Globalists really panic. It's unlikely though and they will continue to push for rapid and large scale mass immigration from 3rd world countries into the west to head off any possibility of that turn of events coming about.

China has worked for years with strategic organized energy to advance its interests around the globe. The main vehicle for gaining access and advantage in foreign countries has been the system of free trade agreements, and western countries have bought into this on the basis of access to the 1.4 billion people Chinese domestic market. Unfortunately, Free trade is not Free. Its extremely expensive, it means our officials accept bribes to allow sweetheart deals to Chinese companies. It means Chinese companies buy our New Zealand companies, they buy our farms, our houses, and our forestry. Yet our governments, both Labour and National disregard the loss of sovereignty and blithely go along with The Chinese Communist Parties claim to benign intentions. Naively believing the globalist buzzwords, of international trade and the biggest lie of all that we can help china to liberalize through closer economic relations. In retrospect, it is a staggering example of hubris and self-delusion, or outright treachery to suggest that by rewarding an oppressive dictatorial regime with free trade and sweetheart deals then you will encourage them to a more liberal democratic state of mind. But then this is the bisaro world of the modern liberal mind, so the inversion of common sense should be expected.

Even though much manufacturing may return to the US, we should not underestimate the determination of the globalist one-world government clique. They will still push ahead with demands for closer international coordination and cooperation - for the health and safety of the people of course “think of your children, for the children...”. Behind the globalist drive is the drive for global government and control. National Manufacturing self-sufficiency, is something they will be prepared to put up with, as long as they get the control. And as long as the long term goal of diluting the national identity of western countries through mass third-world immigration can continue uninterrupted. Every year brings a new excuse for why western countries should continue to open their borders, and the next one is predictable. “Where else are we going to get the labor from to man the factories”, excuses that are so transparently self-serving.

In New Zealand, as I write this we still have one more week of Level 4 lockdown to go. We have a general election coming up in September and the mainstream media is wall to wall liberals and can not be relied upon to ask even basic common sense questions. The bills are going to start to come due very soon and people are going to want some answers. It will be up to real conservatives and independent journalists, online and real-world activists to seize the moment, displace the ruling elites and reassert the rights of nations and peoples once more.

New Zealand Nanny State And The Virtue Signalling Establishment

The New Zealand nanny state has existed for a long time before the current crisis but has shown itself in all its Marxist glory in the current crisis. Based on normal human psychology taken to the national scale. If you treat a child like the hero in embryo; a man to be, treat him with respect and intelligence and expect him to respond in kind, then he is more likely to grow up to be just such a man. But if you treat him like a child, never expecting or encouraging growth or character, always acquiescing to childish demands and encouraging childlike dependence. Then that child and the nation so treated will respond in kind, with naivety, gullibility, and dependence.

The emotional intelligence
of contemporary New Zealand.

It's like living in Teletubby land! The attitude is expressed in the delivery of the TV News every night and continued in the current affairs programs Seven Sharp and The Project.  Everybody is happy and the government is lovely and were all having a wonderful time knowing that mummy is taking care of us.

We now have a situation where the Ardern government believes it is within its purview to direct the population on what emotions to experience and when to experience them. Hate, of course, is not an emotion that White people are allowed to experience, a fact soon to be enforceable by Law. And in this time of coronavirus hysteria, we are instructed to be kind, and told when to Love.

We now have huge cut-outs of the word "Love" stationed at key intersections in our town, so that anyone entering the village knows exactly what is required of them on an emotional level when the arrive. It is kind of curious and a little embarrassing that this sort of soppy emotionalism should take pride of place at the busiest intersections in our village. But this is the ethos of the age certainly here in New Zealand. The Nanny state, the telly Tubby rendition of the New Zealand that we now inhabit.

Is this the result of the infantilization of the nation? The complete lack of emotional intelligence that is promoted and accepted as a moral good. To be week is good, to be non-threatening in any way is good. To not have any objection to anything that seeks to encroach on your liberties or usurp what a lesser person might consider their own exclusive domain, this is a moral good.

After the Christchurch mosque attacks our Marxist PM Ardern donned a hijab and with a gaunt forced look of sadness, grief and sympathy on her face declared that this easily identified group of foreigners were “us”. “They are us” we were told. This could only be a moral consideration, with a strong hint of bribery. If these people actually were part of the Racial/cultural milieu that comprises the New Zealand tradition then there would be no “they” to identify. However, the bribery worked and many otherwise intelligent New Zealanders went along with the governments typically Marxian attempt to dilute the cultural identity of New Zealand.

The left has a continuing and overriding obsession with virtue signaling. Moral posturing is sacrosanct and far more important than practical details like housing, the economy or social cohesion. It's a tactic, no less a political tactic than open warfare, and the target is the domestic population. That is why the hijab-wearing Adern is not concerned about how her validation of Islam is perceived by another oppressed group, Muslim women, not just in the middle east and Africa but now all over the European homelands as well. Millions of Muslim women in these countries suffer forced child marriage, endemic sex, and physical abuse as well as the grotesque barbarity of Female Genital Mutilation. The efforts of Muslims in the west to highlight these issues and do something about it are seriously undermined when a western Prime Minister openly welcomes and accepts this barbaric religion into the western tradition.

Perhaps I'm just old, but I have noticed that in days gone by this institutional virtue signaling and these legislative forays into the emotions of the people did not occur. No one ever even considered that these things were any business of the government. If they had considered it at all they would have been seen as ridiculous, unnecessary and none of their damned business!

In a viable and natural homogeneous community directives of this sort are not only not required, but would be taken as an insult if they were given.

If Churchill had gone into the East end after the blitz of 1940 and told the devastated locals to be kind and to love one another, how would that have been received? It would have been seen as condescending and empty rhetoric. “Of course we are going to be kind to each other!” They were a tight-knit, long-standing ethnically homogeneous population.

The implication behind this sort of rhetoric is like a parent telling a 7-year-old son to love his sister, the implication being that his behavior indicates that he does not. It's a telling off and he knows it.

So why do they do it? Is it because if they did not, society would descend into anarchy, infighting, and tribalism? Is it because the people are so neutered that they genuinely don't know what to think or feel next?

I can't help thinking that as society becomes ever more fractured and individualized then these attempts to keep the lid on things in times of crisis will only increase. I mentioned Marxists earlier on, Our PM Jacinda Ardern was president of the International Union of Socialist Youth, the motto of which is “All over the world to change it”, what exactly are you going to change Jacinda?

To the committed communist, ideas are everything, they are consumed by an astonishing hubris that makes any change or modification, reversal or redirection impossible. Only by war, revolution, or complete economic and state collapse will any change of direction be possible.

We may be surprised to learn just how quickly the motherly exhortation to “There there, they are us, love each other” can become the Stazi boot on your balls. And that is not not a metaphor.

Covid19 Hysteria

Entering week three of our lockdown. In the evenings it's eerie, in any normal time you would never be able to just wander all over the roads and intersections of the small town in which I live. In the early evening, I can dawdle over the roundabout in the middle of town. No one tells me to get off the flower beds and I don't have to dodge the traffic on the other side of the roundabout. It's like a scene from some disaster movie, no cars, no people, no sound at all. The power's still on though, just no signs of life as I make my way home through the damp and deserted streets.

New Zealand went into Level 4 Lockdown on the 26th March 2020 after a 48 hour preparation period. After the usual binge of panic buying emptying the shelves of toilet rolls and hand sanitizer, the spooked public moved on to the presumably less essential things like food, canned beans and potatoes.

The word came down to “shop normally”, the panic disappeared and sedate queuing began. Interesting how in the absence of clear direction, group dynamics and mob rule will fill the vacuum left by an absent authority.  When direction re-appears with the trappings of authority, the people are satisfied and find comfort and familiarity in obedience and conformity.

Things have now settled down into a pattern of semi normality; people stay at home, they go to the supermarket once a week or less and queue at the prescribed distance for an hour or more before they are allowed to snake through the isles in an orderly fashion. Packing their shopping back into the trolley at the checkout,- no re-usable bags allowed, and taking the trolley to the car. Only when at a safe distance from the supermarket are they allowed to pack their shopping into bags for the trip directly home. No deviations allowed.

"Don't Panic!"

As of this writing, NZ has had 9 fatalities Related to Covid19.  (Or “Associated” with Covid 19 as is the preferred euphemism). Seldom do you ever see it written that anyone has actually died of Covid19. Which is weird. Or that Covid19 has “killed” a number of people.

The question at hand is weather the strict economy destroying measures employed by most western governments are really necessary. From the New Zealand experience to date it's hard to argue that the lockdown has not been effective in "flattening the curve".

Peter Hitchens in a number of  YouTube interviews has pointed out that the current Lockdown prescription to cure the malaise is akin to the person who goes to the doctor with a cold and the doctor promises to fix it by cutting off his leg!  The leg is cut off and the cold disappears, and although one may not be related to the other the doctor is pleased to announce he has found a highly effective cure for the common cold!

The pint being, is the cure worse than the disease?

For the sake of context, historical mortality rates in NZ for influenza have been steadily reducing over the years from a high of 1551 in 1985 to 712 in 2016. Link . So hundreds of people die each and every year in NZ from the flu, even with vaccines and established heath care provisions.

Of the 9 fatalities in NZ to date, six have been from the same rest home outbreak in Christchurch, five men and one woman in their 80's and 90's and three other persons of advanced years with underlying age related conditions. This seems to be a pattern in most countries.

The government has spent 20 Billion dollars so far, including 9 Billion on Wage subsidies alone and another 3.2 billion announced today (15-4-20) in tax breaks for struggling businesses. That's 4640 dollars for every man woman and child in a country with an economy projected to contract by 7.2%. Stuff.co.nz The money printing presses are humming again with the quantitative easing program expected to reach 40 billion by May this year.

Lockdown is not the only way of dealing with Covid19. Sweden, for example, has issued only recommendations and advisories. They have a docile and obedient population of 10 million, and so far 1033 deaths. By comparison, if you look at Ireland and correct for population size then the Irish have only slightly lower fatalities, whilst enduring a severe lockdown.

The difficulty in getting a handle on exactly how dangerous and how widespread Coved19 is, is exacerbated by the very different approaches used to testing and recording in different countries. Combined with rampant fear-mongering by the media, a fear on the part of elected governments who cannot afford politically to appear to be not doing enough, as well as the political convenience that forcibly clearing the streets can present to an embattled president Macron, it is possible to explain, if not excuse the implementation of an ultimately unnecessary and economically disastrous shut-down of the world economy.

The stark contrast between the Netherlands and Belgium is a case in point. If the establishment narrative is to be believed then the Dutch authorities are cold heartless bureaucrats without a care for the health of the people. Yet over the border, Belgium, with a smaller population has even more deaths even with a severe lockdown.

The living of life is a series of cost-benefit analysis. We are discriminating and making judgment calls all the time in virtually all areas of life. Whilst it is tragic to lose a family member, the facts remain that in a country of five million people this virus has “been associated” with or “related” to the deaths of only 9 people in their 80's and 90's.

The government and supporters of the lockdown will insist that the reason for the low number of fatalities is the severe Level 4 lockdown and had we not taken these measures then we could have seen many thousands of deaths.

Predictions from Auckland University projected up to 80,000 deaths in a worst-case scenario if nothing is done, while Otago University research projected over 14000 deaths if our efforts failed to contain the virus. Link

Uniquely we have also adopted the goal of  attempting to completely eliminate the virus as opposed to managing and controlling its effects. So the fear-mongering was there, maliciously or not, the effect on the public was to accept any and all measures without thought to the cost.

It will likely become clear as time goes by that our efforts to stamp out the virus are totally disproportionate to the threat posed. In the last 20 years we have had SARS, MERS, Ebola, Swine Flue and the Zika virus, in all these cases the predictions of catastrophic loss of life were outrageously overblown. Yet we did not shut down and deliberately destroy our economies?  Link

With the knowledge of previous pandemic hysteria, and the well established knowledge of the behavior of pandemics (Farr's Law of Epidemics). Should we not, and would it not have been sensible to consider a different strategy? The one we have followed is going to cause large scale social damage for years to come. And the government, having taken this route will be unable politically to backtrack, or to re-assess its options.