Fanning The Flames Of Racial Division

If you want to make a quick buck off fuck-all effort, just encourage a lot of people to fight over nothing and get them to fund you for it.

Milk sniffer Chris Huriwai and a traumatised real-estate agent are embarking on a division-based theatre show for attention, and all of you are falling for it.

Attention; it is the most important currency in the world. Especially now, as social media and mainstream media have decided to substitute the pursuit of truth for the warping of reality. This has created an opportunity for the ostracized fringes to pursue the truth themselves. In the hope, that rhythm can be restored to a world-pendulum swinging society toward oblivion. That’s one option, the competent promotion of a centrist rhythm that builds a bridge between a nonsensical and growing divide. A divide between Masculine and Feminine. There’s another option; one that promises short-term gratification in the form of a large low-vibrational following, and plenty of foolish funding.

You could instead, take advantage of all the fighting and encourage that fighting to not only continue, but grow in intensity. Why would you do that? Because a war needs money to flow to both sides, and it has to come from somewhere. May as well come from the demoralised victims of government overreach, desperate for another false solution. As Extinction Rebellion has reiterated, fear works, and their extreme opposite tends to agree. To be clear, the divide is not Julian Batchelor’s fault, far from it. It is also not Chris Huriwai’s fault, but they are both at fault for tailoring their narratives in such a way that they encourage the divide between “Māori” and Pākehā to grow.

This is not what I said. I said that there are too many statutes that don’t align with law coming from one government, why would two of these governments be good for us? Why would they omit a key part of what I said? That’s ok, Julian recorded the whole thing.

Why would Julian not know who had the video recording of the Keri Keri Stop Co-Governance talk when he had it the whole time? Why would he delete proof of the media misrepresenting one of the speakers? Luckily other people recorded the event…

I’ve already written an article on Co-Government, Julian’s objections to it were no more relevant than Chris Huriwai’s claims that Julian is a racist. I don’t need to use this article to scold Julian for his inability to change his narrative to something that unites. He’s not going to listen, and I’d be wasting my time attempting to get him to listen. Everyone who has tried to get him to act as if the person he is listening to, might know something he does not, has failed. It’s often said that you can’t teach an old dog new tricks, and it is true that you can’t force an old traumatised dog to walk a better path. I am aware of Julian’s past and what he has been through so I comprehend his flawed approach. Yet, I don’t have to be part of it.

I knew that speaking at the Stop Co-Governance event in Keri Keri was likely a media trap. I’m not stupid, but I am an idiot in the legal sense. The media seem to think that my image can be tarnished through conventional defamatory means. They do not comprehend the maxim; equity knows no time, and they underestimate the changing societal climate. Less than half of the population trust them now, and as more get to know the me behind their defamation, the worse it gets for them. I didn’t go to “support” Julian Batchelor in Keri Keri, anyone who thinks that, clearly does not know me. I went to observe the theatre show these two sides have been acting out for decades. I wanted a front row seat to their ridiculous Shortland Street show. A scam they’ve been running on their own people. Two groups who are separated by little more than a failure to communicate. I believe it is a purposeful one, as clearly they are both capable of communicating, it’s the genuine content that’s missing.

The work of Jordan Peterson and Jonathan Haidt has destroyed the ridiculous nature of their “racism” sitcom. It’s not racism at all. It is the promotion of victimhood narratives for financial gain. Since when did making a martyr of yourself scream good idea? The problem isn’t their problems, its the problem. What’s the problem here? Persons who scam you with realities that don’t reflect the actual reality of society. If we realised that the racists are the ones that are talking about race instead of psychology, then we’d have a better handle on the problem. We’re dealing with accusatory victims, denialist victims, and those who manipulate them for financial gain. Most of all, and this is a big one, so repeat after me so this sinks in.

1. The problem has nothing to do with race.

2. The problem has nothing to do with race.

3. The problem has nothing to do with race.

In the above debate Chris/Pere and Samah claim that the right to protest gives them the right to shout down a private presentation. All the while, this pair support the Green party, who only support the right to violently protest if it’s about Neofeminist values. Yet, they don’t support the right to peacefully protest over government overreach if a Neofeminist is using that overreach to gain power. Where were these guys when the government were implementing millimetre by millimetre advances in service to intensifying human slavery? They oppose animal slavery, yet don’t lift a finger when it comes to human slavery being advocated as an environmental solution. It’s like listening to two modern sophists argue over whose to blame for doing the same thing as the other.

Everything is dual; Everything has poles; Everything has its pair of opposites; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; Extremes meet, the pendulum swing manifests in everything; the measure of the swing to the left is the measure of the swing to the right; rhythm compensates.

These extremes on the psychological pendulum don’t comprehend the law and make a mockery of a legal system that currently, makes a mockery of itself. Of which, they claim binds them both. Both groups have next to no grasp on accuracy and empathy. Yet, both claim to be the flag bearers for both. They both claim to be victims of imaginary concepts when really, they are both victims of their own psychological construct; disgust. One side demonstrates their contradictory mental state with constant victim-based accusations of historical and present day “racism”. While the other denies their own arrogance and resentment that is seeded throughout their inflammatory and inaccurate rhetoric.

The Feminine values empathy while the Neofeminine hypothetically values empathy. The Masculine values accuracy while the Neomasculine values hypothetical accuracy.

Julian Batchelor claims to be the flag bearer for accuracy, yet claims to know what a document he can’t interpret means. Worse still, as languages go, Te Reo is very interpretative, the same word can have a different meaning depending on the context. It’s a language of chaos that flows from right to left. English is a language of order that flows from left to right. Attempting to bind these two language documents into joinder was always going to be next to impossible. It’s why Neofeminist women prefer feminine male partners, and Neomasculine men prefer masculine female partners. They can’t be bothered meeting in the middle and respecting each other’s differences, they’d rather dominate their partner psychologically. That way, they can claim to make up for their historical trauma through a subconscious eye for an eye process.

The now rebranded Pere Huriwai-Seger claims to be the flag bearer for empathy, but craps all over the principle of accuracy whilst virtue-signaling context. Pere is a walking talking contradiction of a boy who has signed up to Neofeminine slavery as a solution to Neomasculine slavery. He’s contradictory, but that’s what you would expect from a child who wants to be a leading political voice before he’s done his due diligence. Imagine if I had moved from an urban area to a rural area, and before I had got to know the lay of the land and the diverse views of the people here, I decided to start diagnosing the problem as being white colonialist farmers. All because I went to a universal city of ideology indoctrination, otherwise known as a university.

You can’t take someone who claims to advocate for science seriously if he wore that pointless piece of fabric on his face.

Furthermore, imagine that I now have low regard for my Pākehā name, and decide to rebrand myself to appear more authentic to the people I want to manipulate into victimhood narratives. Imagine that my solution to Feminine and Masculine conflict, is to inflame it with misrepresentation and absolutist statements. All while I sew my partner’s last name onto the seam of the crotch part of the dress I now wear, while she sews my last name into the seam of the pants she now wears. I am now a cross-dressing contradiction of a man who can’t understand why regular men and women don’t want to listen to me anymore.

Pere doth protest, “I have done a huge amount of work on my communication skills! I have immersed myself in Thelemite rituals that emphasize non-violent communication amongst those who subscribe to our echo chamber ideologies”. Sure you have, but you’ve also neglected the values of the Masculine by engaging in passive-aggressive innuendos, dishonest gossiping, and misrepresentation to hide your propensity for psychological warfare. You’re not kind, you’re nice and those two words do not mean the same thing. You’re full of it, there’s nothing non-violent about your mind. You are addicted to creating psychological war. However, those who can only create psychological war should be wary. When people start to figure you out, and align your behaviour with the harm, injury, and loss that killed our family members and friends. Psychological warfare, no matter how advanced, will not save you from the warfare form of the Masculine; physical war.

My advice? Cut it out before it’s too late.