Flat White

Japan is Australia’s third largest trading partner and is involved with India and America in the quad strategic dialogue. After the hoopla of the Aukus agreement, it is worth reminding ourselves of this country’s importance.

The signing of a defence pact in October 2022, leading to increased military interaction, should open our eyes to what the two countries have in common and what we can learn from our different histories.

As the Chinese Communist Party threat increases, concern is also growing in other countries around the Pacific; South Korea signed a defence deal in 2021, the Philippines is looking to enhance its military relationship, and Indonesia has a long-standing defence partnership with Australia which has recently updated.

In our era of declining Western self-confidence and increasing decadence, Japan stands out as a pillar of conviction and reminds us what we used to be like. It maintains its culture and traditions, whilst coping with modernity. Where is the West going wrong?

Unlike many nations obsessed by Indigenous rights, the question of who the original Japanese inhabitants were poses little interest, and has not consumed the country’s cognoscenti. Separate tribes were united under an emperor in the eighth century, with order maintained for several centuries until the rival Shogun clans led to civil war and diminished his power. The Tokugawa shogunate maintained control and cut off contact with the outside world.

When the US Navy, under Admiral Perry, visited in the 1850s, world contact was restored. With the overthrow of the Shogun, power returned to the emperor and, under the Meiji, feudalism was abolished. Hundreds of Western advisers were imported to manage the transition of all aspects of life to a modern society, including a democratic system of government. To balance this, the emperor remained the supreme power, Shinto religion was enforced, and nationalism was encouraged, whilst rapid industrialisation provided employment. Shinto, remains the main religion, with its rituals and ancestor worship focusing on shrines. Buddhism is also widespread and increasing, with many worshippers combining the two.

Part of the modernisation involved the military, resulting in its effective use in international conflict. It annexed Taiwan from China in 1895, a successful conflict with Russia resulted in the takeover of Korea, and its involvement on the side of the allies in the first world war further enhanced its reputation. Its subsequent invasion of Manchuria in 1931 and French Indo-China in 1940, following French surrender, proved its undoing. Ongoing conflict in China led to Western sanctions, and its subsequent alliance with Germany in 1940 led to its eventual downfall, especially with American involvement in the war. The nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, with over 100,000 deaths, brought war in the region to an end in 1945. They saved the lives of those who would have had to invade a country that does not believe in surrender. It was at this point that Taiwan (formerly known as Formosa) was removed from Japanese control.

America subsequently imposed martial law and re-organised government with greater democracy, handing power back in 1952. Post war recovery in Japan was rapid, aided by manufacturing and technology development and encouraged by investment during the Korean War (1950-53). With a non-unionised workforce and long hours, a dramatic recovery was achieved and by 1955, the economy had surpassed pre-war levels. 16 years later, by 1968, it had the world’s second largest economy, a situation paralleled only by the German post-war recovery – two countries with a combination of discipline and determination. Without immigration, the population has risen from a post-war 80 million, to 120 million 40 years later, twice that of UK.

Unlike most countries that have allowed immigration, population numbers have been in slow decline in recent years, with a drop of 1 million by 2016. As elsewhere, this seems to relate to a later age of marriage. The number of single women, aged 25-30, increased from 21 per cent in 1975, to 66 per cent by 2020. The institution of marriage, although more stable than in other countries, is still affected by rising divorce. One in 3 marriages do not last, a rate 4 times that of the 1950s. This compares with a 50 per cent divorce rate in America; the divorce rate is now falling as fewer couples marry. How this will affect the traditional way of life remains to be seen.

The inevitable result has been an ageing population, the most significant in the world. In 2022, nearly 30 per cent were over 65, and 15 per cent were over 75 with an overall life expectancy of 84; this compares with figures of 5 per cent and 1 per cent respectively in 1950, and a life expectancy around 60. A similar problem is developing in China as a result of its one-child policy. A different cultural approach, with greater esteem for family, means more are cared for and supported by their relatives than in Western countries, where ageism has become another feature. It is not unusual for one child to live with the grandparents to provide support. With over 80 per cent of elderly still living at home, residential care is a last resort and is viewed as neglect. Compare this with Australian culture, where elderly parents are dumped in nursing homes. Our traditions and family values are trashed, and activism prevails. This traditional approach is maintained by an education system that instils respect, with a more formal relationship with parents, teachers, and the elderly.

The early waves of immigration to Australia were mostly comprised of Europeans with similar cultural values. In 1973, this was cancelled by the Whitlam government, which embraced multiculturalism. Japan is one of the many nations in the world that rejected multiculturalism. For decades, right-wing politics in Japan encouraged ethnic homogeneity and closed the door to immigration to all except those with Japanese ancestry. There are an estimated 2.3 per cent of foreigners, mainly from China, Korea, and Vietnam, who do not have access to health or welfare benefits. The vast majority, Yamato, live in a monoculture.

Without attracting world opprobrium, refugee visas have been restricted, with only a handful accepted from the recent Middle East conflicts. In 2018, the Japanese government changed and with it a more liberal policy was introduced. The falling birth rate has necessitated this change, with labour shortages resulting in 5-year visas for certain occupations.

Another advantage of the traditional Japanese lifestyle is the diet. It is considered to be a healthier diet, with more fish and vegetables and less red meat. A reduced calorie intake has led to low obesity rates and longevity; Japan comes in at number 7 in the lowest rates in the world, behind several other Asian countries. Those Japanese who migrated to America confirm that this is not genetic-based, as their obesity rates rapidly approach that of the locals, increasing from 4 to 40 per cent. The obvious exceptions are the Sumo wrestlers, who typically eat around 7,000 Calories daily and weigh 3 times the average; the end result is their shortened life expectancy.

There is also a different attitude to work. In Australia, we boast of bringing down unemployment from the usual 5 per cent plus, to 3.5 per cent with the pandemic. Japan’s rate averages 2.5 per cent, and has been as low as 1 per cent. With lower unemployment, health, and education costs, these different attitudes result in a lower public social expenditure at 14 per cent of GDP, compared with an OECD and Australian average of 20 per cent. At the young end of the age spectrum, the buzzword for Japanese generation Z, is ‘taipa’, which means more efficient use of time; this compares with the Australian generation Z, where ‘quiet quitting’, to perform the bare minimum, is now admired.

The Japanese culture has also resulted in a low crime rate, with rates declining over the last 60 years, leading to it being one of the safest countries in the world. This has been attributed to a non-violent philosophy, but low poverty levels and drug use are also factors. The police force and justice system also seem remarkably efficient, with 98 per cent of murders solved, often by ‘confession’. The much-feared Yakuza criminal syndicates reached a peak in the 1960s, with 200,000 members; although still involved in drugs, human-trafficking, and extortion, much activity is now semi-legitimate. Compared with Japan, America has a 6 times greater drug use, 130 times the rate of cannabis use, 5 times the murder rate, and 150 times the gun crime rate.

Whilst manufacturing has been the main source of the country’s income, the lack of natural resources, has limited its economy. The country has little solar or wind capacity, but does have some hydro power. Energy generation has been problematic, with fossil fuel imports adding hugely to budget. Despite the country’s personal experience from nuclear attack, nuclear power has had to be a big part of electricity production. Aided by its cheaper electricity, Japan is still the world’s second largest car maker. Prior to the Fukushima event, a third of its power generation was nuclear, the rest coming from imported gas and coal. Following the disaster and shut down of nuclear power, the demand for coal and gas imports soared to provide 75 per cent of its energy needs. It plans to move to hydrogen when technology is matured, with contracts already signed with Australia.

The Fukushima event in 2011, only the third event in the 70 years of nuclear power generation, (before this, Chernobyl was in 1986) was used by activists to suggest these reactors are unsafe. The earthquake-induced tsunami which caused the damage was not related to unreliability, but a natural event caused by Japan being on a fault line, resulting in regular earthquakes. The event caused no recorded radiation deaths, but 20,000 died from the tsunami and 4,000 subsequently from cold due to lack of electricity. The country’s 50 nuclear reactors were closed down, resulting in a 40 per cent increase in Japan’s CO2 emissions; currently 9 reactors have been re-opened. The re-opening of these facilities is a belated acceptance of reality that this is currently the only option to deal with rising CO2 levels. There are already nuclear 440 plants worldwide, including all OECD countries except Australia, with another 60 under construction and 150 planned.

Unlike Australia, Japan has had the benefit of a culturally stable population, free of imported conflicts from far-away nations. Author Douglas Murray stated: ‘A country which imports the world’s peoples will also import the world’s problems.’ It has family, tradition, and religion at its centre. Its economy has thrived because of a strong work ethic. Despite having few of the resource advantages of this country, advantages which are being squandered by us, Japan has a more stable society, one more ready to face adversity. They are, however, increasingly concerned as Australia’s Labor government programs threaten the future supplies of oil and gas they will continue to need, by restricting new exploration. The unexpected departure of Japan’s Ambassador, Yamagami, perhaps because of his outspoken comments on fossil fuels, is something we can ill afford.

For those few remaining Australian survivors of maltreatment in the second world war, antagonisms will not change, but the increasing threat from China makes us appreciate our common goals and brings us closer together. Japanese history also reminds us of its own connection to similarly threatened Taiwan; a thriving democracy of comparable population size to Australia, but on an Island 215 times smaller, and much closer to its adversary. Of necessity, Japan has moved from its post-war pacifist stance, and plans to double its defence spending. In the 21st Century, there are perhaps many lessons we could learn. An ancient proverb comes to mind, ‘The enemy, of my enemy is my friend.’

Source

There were around 50 of us standing in a car park and waiting for something but we didn’t know what. Most of the other people were speaking Russian and I assumed they were diplomats of some sort. I had guides with me and I asked what was going on, but they wouldn’t say anything.

After an hour, a few army trucks pulled up and a dozen soldiers stepped out of the back.

‘Line up over there with the others,’ my guide said to me.

I stood there and watched as the soldiers searched the vehicles. There were around ten cars and they went over each one meticulously. Every face was very serious.

‘Give us your phones.’ One of the soldiers said. ‘You will get them back after.’

I still didn’t know what ‘after’ meant but I handed my phone over. I trusted my guides completely so I didn’t feel like anything bad would happen. I was also used to the way they were secretive about everything until it happened. They never really explained what we were doing until we were just about to do it.

We waited in the car park for another 30 minutes and then my guide told me it was okay to get back in the car. We began leaving in a single procession. One car after the other. The military trucks were in front and behind us. I looked out the window and realised every single traffic light was green and all the other cars had stopped moving while waiting for us to pass. The whole city was at a standstill.

‘I’m in a motorcade…’ I realised, after 10 minutes. It made me feel special in a weird way. Almost important. The whole city stopped while we made our way through.

We drove for half an hour and then reached a giant stadium. Tens of thousands of people were flooding every entrance. It was for an event called the Mass Games and it’s arguably the most important celebration in North Korea. The purpose is to showcase the glory and incredible feats of the nation.

We made our way inside and found our seats. I was with the other white people. There wasn’t a lot of us, but we had our own special section. Most of them were the Russians I’d seen earlier in the car park. Russia has a fairly good relationship with North Korea so a lot of their officials and diplomats were in attendance.

Directly across from us were around 30,000 teenagers holding giant cards they flipped repeatedly to give the illusion of a moving picture. They were creating the most incredible scenes by flipping the cards in unison and it almost seemed like magic. It was like watching cartoon animation the size of a stadium move before you in real life. One of the scenes involved a soccer ball being kicked by a young boy into a goal. This was just the warm to keep the crowd entertained while the seats filled up.

An old man was sitting next to me and he smelt like an old man… Kinda like pee, but not quite. I think he said he was German, Austrian, or Dutch and his brother was the mayor of a town in one of those countries. He was very friendly and invited me to the town which I can’t remember the name of, but its English translation was something like ‘windmill’. The seats were tight in the stadium and his leg was right next to mine. Occasionally, I would move my leg away from his but he quickly put it back up against mine. I think he liked the contact. A strange old man but nice enough.

When the show began it was too jaw-dropping to focus on the smell or the touch of the old man. It was incredible. It was a combination of acrobatics, drones, flipping cards, and one unbelievable performance after another. It was impossible to know where to look because something incredible was happening everywhere.

There’s no real way to describe it accurately. None of it seemed possible and I was stunned for most of it. I didn’t realise human beings were capable of something like this.

One of the most interesting things about believing your leader is a God is you become capable of incredible feats to please him. The pyramids, the Sistine chapel… The greatest achievements throughout history are all attempts to please a God. The average person is considered unworthy, but if they devote their entire life to pleasing their God they might come up with something that gives him the slightest pleasure and be able to die happy. The feats the North Koreans came up with to please their God were the greatest things I had ever seen. To this day I know that show will never be beaten. My whole body was in disbelief for the entire time.

Halfway through the show, I felt a great gust of wind almost lift me out of my seat. Almost propel me upwards. I look around and notice 100,000 people had risen all at once, sucking all the air out of the stadium. I immediately rise as well and all the performers in the stadium begin running as fast as they can in my direction. Everyone is waving their arms frantically in joy and love.

I look to my left and there he is. Their God. Kim Jong-Un. He emerges from a sort of corporate box and stands along a podium. I can clearly see the details of the fat, chubby face that was always on the news. His expression is one of mild amusement with only the slightest smile.

The spectators cheer and shout. There’s around 20,000 high-ranking military on one side of the stadium and they are shouting like wild. Only the most important people in the country were there that night. Apart from the military, there were another 20 or 30 thousand high-ranking officials from the communist party. We were divided into sections throughout the stadium so you could clearly see who was who.

The performers down below are ecstatic. They are running and jostling to get as close to the position of Kim as possible. Looking up and waving, crying, screaming with love. Their souls all pleading to be noticed.

‘See what we have created for you. Look at what we are capable of because of our love for you. Does it please you?’ This sentiment was written on the face of every performer.

Kim stands and soaks it in for a few minutes before walking back into the box and disappearing from view.

The spell wears off and we all sit down again. I begin to wonder if I had been frantically cheering and I realise I had. My hands had been clapping too. I remember looking around at the white foreign faces and seeing they were in the grips of hysteria as well. Foreigners with no allegiance to this God were clapping and cheering like they believed in his greatness. Mania had come over them because it was impossible for it not to. How could one man elicit such love and ecstasy and not be a God? It didn’t make sense to me.

Only a few weeks earlier I read all about the atrocities of his regime. The killing, the enslavement, the harsh punishments. I was convinced he was a monster who surrounded himself with riches while his people starved. A man who tortured and imprisoned anyone who spoke a single word that was against him or the party. I would never clap or cheer for him. I was better than that.

Despite all this, my mind had gone along with everyone else’s and I was convinced of his greatness while I’d been clapping. Only a truly great man could inspire such incredible acts from 100,000 people at once. When 100,000 people throw themselves at the feet of God in devotion and love it almost becomes impossible not to feel it as well. I was under the trap and the spell like everyone else.

I felt all this for a few minutes before eventually snapping out of it. The thing that woke me up was the site of a group of children around 7 years crying at the sight of such an incredible being. It’s okay to see adults crying and cheering for evil men. I’d been around the world enough to understand how quickly we can become evil and I’d learnt to accept it most of the time. If a man wants to reduce himself to a slave and cheer for evil then so be it. He has made the decision, as much a slave is capable of making a decision. But the children hardly even knew what it was they cheered and yet it still came naturally to them. They were full of the same blind, loving devotion and something about the sight of them had sobered me up quickly.

I realised how easily people can go along with something and there was no point blaming any of them. We are not a smart species. We do as we’re told. The children would never know any better and the only thing worth feeling was pity.

Source

Starvation has ended more than one political empire. The pages of human history are frequently chaptered by acute moments of hunger which defined the story of civilisation in the same way that cataclysms divide the geological record.

The West has been caught up in the decadence of culinary success for over a century, meaning that both citizens and politicians have forgotten that failure on their part to provide good governance doesn’t end in election defeat. A true failure of political thought ends in violence, poverty, social predation, and famine.

The reason that the leaders of the ancient world appeared more skilled and savvy than today’s cardboard cut-outs is because they were. They lived closer to the line and had to be more careful.

It would be a mistake for the Duttons and Albaneses of the world to imagine themselves lording over a bubble-wrapped empire. There are two political mistakes on their plate poised to drag Australia into the depths of catastrophic failure.

The first is Net Zero and the very real energy fail point that we are hurtling toward with every closed coal-fired plant. Unlike Europe, we cannot prod a few nuclear reactors into life and fudge the numbers on renewables. Our lights will go out. It is a political failure that will be visible from space, accented by a blank hole on a Nasa photograph. Running out of power isn’t just a problem – it’s a disaster.

The second issue is the infestation of collectivist identity politics, particularly the variety that has given rise to a new generation of racial supremacists who genuinely believe that people of a certain original ethnicity deserve enshrined political power. Calls for a ‘Pay the Rent’ system of reparations is quite simply the establishment of a race tax. Extorting money out of innocent people because of the colour of their skin is exactly how you start a civil war. It’s the sort of politics running rampant in the Marxist-saturated nightmare of failed African states. What kind of depraved Parliamentarian wants to see that here? Quite a few, actually.

There is a third tool of coercion lingering around the political menu. It keeps itself to the edges of the conversation, occasionally draping itself in virtue to steal a headline or two before slinking off to a quiet corner. The world isn’t ready for it to unfurl its limbs and strut around, but when it does, we’re all going to regret letting the ideology survive unquestioned as a curiosity instead of a threat.

Ancient empires used to know that if you controlled the food supply – you controlled the nation.

Morons like China’s Chairman Mao attempted to micromanage food production from a centralised government authority in the name of efficiency. There are a number of complex and long-understood reasons why you cannot collectivise agriculture but suffice to say, Mao’s vision was to keep his communist empire obedient via the stomachs of its citizens. His failure to do this – and the subsequent deaths of 60 million people – ended his regime.

Presumably it’s better to learn from Mao’s failure than repeat the experiment.

Not so, according to the United Nations and the World Economic Forum, whose collaboration in the area of Sustainability and Climate has led to ‘bright ideas’ like ending synthetic fertiliser in favour of ‘organic’ farming. It was an idea that collapsed their project poster child, Sri Lanka, in less than six months. With the failure of agriculture – which in some cases lost 80 per cent of its output – came the unimaginable destruction of the nation’s social structure. With no food, there was no money. With no money, there was no energy or fuel. People were left starving and desperate in the streets. A media blackout followed the very literal blackout and god knows what really happened as Sri Lanka crumbled under the failed politics of one bad idea.

Did we learn from Sri Lanka?

No. Both Canada and the Netherlands – two of the most important food growing regions in the world – are being forced into the same monstrous ‘organic’ legislation as Sir Lanka. Instead of having a discussion about the failure of its ideology, the World Economic Forum deleted the gushing post from Sri Lanka’s (now ex) Prime Minister, This is how I will make my country rich by 2025 after he fled the country in fear for his life. As for the United Nations, they are pushing their Sustainability Goals on the promise of apocalypse (whose arrival date is as inconsistent as a Gen Z gender identity).

In the case of the Netherlands, the politics being enforced goes further than what decimated Sri Lanka. The government is using environmentalism as an excuse to enact land grabs and re-structure the food growing hierarchy, taking the power and profit off individual farmers and transferring it to large agricultural businesses. Europeans are more difficult to oppress, as they have practice dealing with fascistic politicians. The recent election of the Farmer Citizen Movement (BBB) is now one of the largest political forces in Dutch politics and is facing off against a coalition of hard greens. It is the decadent brain-washed city slickers against the people who feed them. The greens do not seem to understand that if they succeed in silencing the farmers, everyone loses.

We will soon see the same politics unfold in Australia, with all major parties lining up behind imported ‘Sustainability’ policies. These involve outrageous demands made by the European Union as part of our continued trade arrangement. Frankly, Australia should tell the EU to ‘go starve’ rather than allow a foreign bureaucracy to dictate our farming practices.

Printed on the European Union website is the following: ‘Australia has deep political, economic and cultural ties with the European Union, working closely to meet shared global responsibilities such as promoting sustainable development, tackling climate change and respect for international law.’

And as reported in the Sydney Morning Herald:

‘Australian farmers must boost environmental credentials and cut greenhouse emissions if they want to maintain access to the $72 billion export market, Agriculture Minister Murray Watt warns as he jets off for crucial trade talks with the United Kingdom and the European Union.’

Sorry but no. Australia has been in a Net Zero deficit for its entire existence – unlike Europe, which is once again at war. We don’t owe the European Union, or the ‘climate’, a damn thing and we should have told them so a very long time ago – the arrogant, autocratic, sods.

The problem is that our politicians measure their egos against how often European their counterparts exploit them. Australia’s federal ministers are like the cows that show up to the feed lots for milking – giving Australia’s self respect away in exchange for a bucket of hay. Most of them hope to retire into cushy European posts, making their fortunes far away from the mess they leave at home.

Australians need to understand that the unholy collaboration between the United Nations and the World Economic Forum is moving to control the production of food globally and – of far more concern – regulate practices which are set to create a severe artificial shortage also known as a famine.

Whether the famine is a consequence of arrogance, idiocy, or design, it does not matter. Hungry people are politically dependent on their leaders. They are slaves to their stomachs and loyal to their negligent masters.

Instead of allowing Net Zero ‘I’m such a wonderful saviour!!!’ politics to divide the nation between farmers and city dwellers, those who live within the privileged confines of Australia’s major cities need to pay attention to the dark side of climate alarmism.

Politicians are never going to blame the pending food shortages on Net Zero – not when their political careers and financial interests are hitched to its virtue. They’ll pretend that empty supermarket shelves and ridiculous price hikes are because of ‘climate change’. Look to any communist regime and you’ll find the same empty shelves. Lying about the cause means their proposed solutions will never work.

Climate activists understand that their politics is headed toward famine – it is why they have started floating the idea at various COP festivals that we need to lower the ‘carbon footprint of our diets’ and that ‘going hungry’ is virtuous. Starvation is a good thing in the progressive world of Net Zero. Never mind. If you don’t want to starve, you can always eat the bugs crawling over the trash of human civilisation.

Imagine a generation being so stupid that they were born eating the best, cheapest food in human history and yet long for a diet of lab-grown garbage and soy-fried cockroaches so they can attain a higher social status on TikTok. Only a cult could damage people’s minds so badly.

Closely linked to the politics of our carbon footprint hunger is the parallel movement of modern veganism which has evolved from a personal desire to avoid eating other creatures into a quest for ideological purity. Veganism has become a status symbol – a declaration that goes into people’s social media profiles alongside their syringes, flags, and pronouns.

The truth is that if humanity switched to veganism we’d starve due to the basic mathematics of calorie production. Essentially, veganism is the diet of the privileged who can not only afford to be exceptionally picky about the source of their calories, but don’t mind the excess wasted energy that goes into their puritanical ‘organic’ diets. (This excludes the handful of vegans who grow their own food.)

Derived from vegetarianism, the veganism of Donald Watson and his fundamental opposition to speciesism is a distant memory. Now we have the early movement of veganarchism – those who want a stateless society with a vegan lifestyle (although it hasn’t occurred to them that without a state they won’t be able to enforce veganism on their hungry peers). This movement is the source of those overtly destructive activists that soak themselves in blood and get in the way when you’re trying to buy milk.

The environmental vegans are a more insufferable group as their belief in veganism is linked to the extremely powerful climate change movement. To be an environmental vegan is to be a more virtuous member of the climate cult. Altering one’s diet is a common part of religious devotion and it is no different with this apocalyptic belief system. Being vegan is a daily reminder of the pending brimstone and a way for environmental movements to keep themselves present in the minds (and on the plates) of converts.

Things get really weird when you slip into sub categories such as feminist veganism, which insists that there is a ‘relationship’ between meat eating and feminism. Mind you, not many are convinced by the arguments in, The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory. I’ll let you make up your own mind:

‘While self-interest arising from the enjoyment of meat eating is obviously one reason for its entrenchment, and inertia another, a process of language usage engulfs discussions about meat by constructing the discourse in such a way that these issues need never be addressed. Language distances us from the reality of meat eating, thus reinforcing the symbolic meaning of meat eating, a symbolic meaning that is intrinsically patriarchal and male-oriented. Meat becomes a symbol for what is not seen but is always there – patriarchal control of animals and of language.’

‘Just as feminists proclaimed that ‘rape is violence, not sex,’ vegetarians wish to name the violence of meat eating.’

‘Manhood is constructed in our culture, in part, by access to meat eating and control of other bodies.’

– The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist Vegetarian Critical Theory.

If you’re not happy with feminist veganism, you can sign yourself up for ‘capitalism and feminist veganism’ which views ‘meat eating as the ultimate capitalist product, because it takes so much to make the product, it uses up so many resources’. How does that related to pre-civilisation humanity? Were our cave-dwelling, mammoth-slaying ancestors capitalists as they sat around their campfires, chewing prehistoric steaks? Capitalism is an economic system – of which veganism is a thriving part. The nonsense of festering diet-based politics is surely giving us a glimpse of how bizarre ‘carbon footprint counting’ is going to get?

The most outlandish version of veganism might be ‘black veganism’ which brands itself as a political philosophy as well as a diet (although that is true of veganism from the start). It views the eating of non-human animals as a form of slavery. As quoted in Wikipedia:

‘…the movement is about the Black community reclaiming its food sovereignty and ‘decolonising’ the diet of Black Americans … the area where most vegans of colour feel the greatest rift with mainstream veganism is in mainstream veganism’s failure to recognise the intersectionality with other social justice issues such as food access.’

Only the most bored and privileged of societies has time for this kind of nonsense. Truly oppressed people aren’t theorising about the philosophy of their food, they’re out hunting and gathering dinner.

The story of veganism matters – not only because its absurdity is worth a meander through on a Saturday morning – but because it gives us a glimpse of the political manipulation of human diets.

Net Zero and the United Nation’s Sustainability Goals – to which Australia is a signatory – involve demands to change what we eat. Most of our corporations have signed ESG contracts that include requirements to lower calories, change production processes, exclude traditional farming practices, switch to Big Ag businesses products, and to substantially decrease our consumption of dairy and meat products by 2030.

Does anyone remember giving these people control over our shopping cart?

Did anyone genuinely imagine that their vote to ‘save the planet’ is likely to result in the loss of their favourite BBQ lunch?

How many proud Australian carnivores are ready for the cockroach revolution?

Those who control our diet control the nation. Virtue-signalling, carbon-counting menus are not going to remain an obscure idea like veganism. They will become politicised, enforced, and implemented without our consent by businesses seeking to profit from the Net Zero gravy train.

Those who resist, will starve.

Alexandra Marshall is an independent writer. If you would like to support her work, shout her a coffee over at donor-box.

Source

Speccie Editor Rowan Dean has already described the New South Wales election perfectly in this morning’s leading article. His remarks must be true, because they whipped the Left up into a frenzy on social media when he uttered them during his Sunday morning program, Outsiders.

I accept his conclusions and add that the Liberals have not only vacated the field, they have been annihilated from the political landscape except for the microcosm of Tasmania. Moderate Liberals, wherever they may be, are the walking dead. Their species of politics has no future except to flip seats red, Teal, and green. They stand for nothing in the hope that everyone will love them, but when was the last time you saw someone fall in love with a blank sheet of A4 paper? Exactly.

For a while, blue-ribbon Liberals were faced with the stomach-turning probability that Matt Kean might assume the leadership after Dominic Perrottet announced he was going to fall awkwardly onto his blunt sword.

‘As leader of the parliamentary Liberal Party, I take full responsibility for the loss this evening,’ said Perrottet, with his usual mantis-like demeanour.

Perrottet is a man who never sat comfortably in power. It was as if he understood the responsibility of his position, but couldn’t scratch his way out of the box built around him by powerful shadowy forces. All he managed to do was sit there like an insect, bobbing slightly, doing his best impression of a stick in the hope that nothing would come along and eat him.

‘And as a result, I will be standing down as leader. It is very clear that we need a fresh start, we need a fresh start. We need a fresh start for the Liberal Party.’

What does a ‘fresh start’ look like? At least we can breathe easy that it won’t include Matt Kean as leader after he was smacked extremely hard by the conservative electorate of Hornsby. The only time Kean enjoyed popularity was when no one had the faintest clue who he was. It’s the sort of area where you could put a stray cat in a Liberal shirt and it would still win.

Kean’s excuse for departing (not that anyone asked) was to cite ‘family reasons’. It’s the ‘get out of jail free’ option for a man whose political career should have ended with the sexting scandal of 2018. Some have speculated that he has his eye on federal politics. Maybe we can put him in an Auspost express package and ship him to the moderate Liberals of Western Australia? That seems to be more his speed.

The only interesting thing that Matt Kean said was, ‘This is not an easy portfolio (energy) – full of culture wars, vested interests, and different viewpoints.’

The material point is that Labor, the Greens, and Teals are dominating politics by waging culture wars. They are running around setting the edges of the electorate on fire. It is through those culture wars – which have merged into a single firestorm – that Labor has changed the political landscape for the worse. We are becoming a socialist country – a nation of simpletons, cowards, weak men, radicalised children, and fearful sheep.

Racial supremacy is a virtue. Misogyny is celebrated, as long as it wraps itself in a rainbow. Segregation is ‘safety’. Privacy is selfish. Diet is an expression of politics. Our history must be destroyed. Tax is love. And capitalism is bad. Oh, and if you want to absolve yourself of the original sin of colonialism, your best bet is to identify as a gender-confused animal shape-shifter with multiple ‘alters’. If you didn’t understand that last comment – good. Stay off TikTok. I wish I had.

Did the NSW Liberal Party fight any of these culture wars? Yes – by standing should-to-shoulder with Labor and the Greens as the axes fell on Western Civilisation. The state of NSW has been butchered and now, under Chris Minns, it will be ransacked.

The Liberals have tried to pin some of the blame on minor parties, but I remind those MPs that the minor parties exist because the Liberal Party has failed. Minor parties are a direct consequence of a political vacuum on the centre-right. Not everyone wants to be a Greta-worshipping climate zealot eating bugs in a 15-minute open-air prison cell with vaccine passports, digital ID, and a carbon credit score tattooed on their forehead. Normal people need someone to vote for – preferably a party that doesn’t want to ‘re-imagine capitalism’ or sell off the state assets to the Chinese. There’s got to be a middle ground.

And yes, while we laugh at Kean copping a swing, Perrottet also suffered a swing against him in the seat of Epping which no doubt had something to do with the five or so minutes he managed to maintain his Liberal values. During Covid, the bloke went from, ‘we respect the rights of citizens to choose’ straight to ‘we’re gonna lock you all up until you take the vaccine’ almost overnight. That was when the people of NSW knew that he was a spineless dud. His fanboy-ing over Chris Minns has finished most people off. It’s almost as if Perrottet is relieved to hand the leadership over.

If we’re to have a ‘fresh start’ for the Liberal Party – who is left?

Wahroonga’s Alister Henskens has been discussed, but there are two problems with that.

The first is I was born in Wahroonga – I grew up there and I still live nearby. The place is infested with Teal-culture as the religious private schools birth thousands of climate warriors every year. They have convinced their affluent parents that voting for eco-fascism is the only way to atone for their wealth and enter the gates of social heaven. It is a blue-ribbon suburb in the process of sampling champagne socialism – miles and miles from the Howard years when it was dominated by proud small business owners. The people of Wahroonga won’t see the light until their wallets are empty and their European holidays are punished with negative carbon credits.

Henskens’ second problem stems from what he said on Sunday. ‘I think what we need is a proper analysis of what we could have done better. And I just don’t think that we have the hard data to be able to make judgments like that. And so that the party needs to be a party which can appeal to a broad spectrum of voters, because that’s what’s necessary in order to form government.’

Broad church, baby! The failed ideology of every Woke Liberal government. No, Henskens. Governments do not win by appealing to everyone, they win with strong, charismatic leadership and clear policies. People who appeal to everyone are supported by no one. Have you ever heard of a religion with no rules, no moral code, and no divine word? No. It doesn’t work for politics either.

It’s worth noting that if the Labor Party is out in force begging the Liberals to go even further to left, it’s probably not a good idea. You don’t take leadership advice from your political opponent.

Henskens is also on record cheering the Net Zero insanity on, proudly declaring that, ‘NSW is well placed to lead the nation when it comes to the Net Zero economy and this new Decarbonisation Hub will drive investment, jobs, and economic growth.’

If you want your power bill to go down, he is not the man.

All I can say is thank heck Stuart Ayres is no longer in the mix. His comments during the pandemic were some of the nastiest and most authoritarian. He deserves no future in conservative politics and I cannot muster an ounce of sympathy for his defeat.

With no natural successor to Perrottet in the wings, it’s obvious that Liberal Party politics isn’t working internally. That’s what happens when you let power brokers move MPs around instead of leaving it to the rigour of merit.

The truth is, the Liberal Party, at all levels, has shown a preference for members that can whip up funds rather than inspire public support.

But expensive ads, signage, and swanky soirees do not impress voters in the middle of a financial crisis. You either have to be the people’s champion or an irresponsible showman promising free lunches. Granted, Chris Minns has all the poise of a cockroach after walking across a patch of Surface Spray, but Kean’s soulless gaze and Perrottet’s apathy inspired a similar level of revulsion.

The Liberals are the half-pregnant craven of the climate apocalypse. They are the side that shouts, ‘The world is about to end!!!’ and follows it with ‘but we’re going to approach this situation slowly.’

You cannot mix fear porn with responsible governance. The Liberals are standing next to the bloodthirsty mob lobbing dead rats into the flames, while Labor chucks virgins and children into the volcano to appease the climate gods.

No wonder Millennials are hissing at them.

There is a madness taking over Australian politics and it was the Liberal Party that unlocked the door and gave it a measure of social acceptance within conservative minds.

A true Liberal leader would pull the plug on the fake volcano until it’s as dead as Chris Minns’ ebus, save the virgins, and set about slaying the false prophets. While ever there is a collectivist cult festering at the heart of NSW politics, there will be no sensible politics.

At the moment it doesn’t matter who the next Liberal leader is, because NSW no longer has a conservative party. What we have instead is a steady diet of political insects masquerading as politicians, some poisonous and some acting as nothing but fodder for the birds.

Source

In 2021, under the cover of Covid, scientists from China, Spain, and America created embryos that shared human and macaque monkey DNA. They were kept alive in the lab for 20 days before being terminated. By this stage, the embryos had progressed to the point of forming ‘cavities and layers’ but the bulk had already started dying off.

Still, it was a proof of concept that caused a flurry of panic regarding the ethics of genetic experimentation. Disturbing medical research regarding mice and other lower-order animals routinely sneaks by in the shadows of science, but both monkeys and humans are regarded as sentient creatures – brothers in the tree of life.

What these scientists created – for 20 days, at least – were true chimeras.

Previously mythical, human-animal hybrids have long been the source of horror and awe within the world of gods and monsters. Chimeras can also include the muddling of animal forms with terrifying powers, but by all accounts, they are creatures of the unreal. The Greeks, in particular, adorned their adventures with chimeras guarding various realms and treasures.

In the modern world, scientists believe that chimeras are guarding the secrets of medical knowledge. Crossing humans and monkeys promises to unlock vital medical information about the early stages of physical development that could help us grow spare organs within other animals.

There have been an alarming number of these combinations. In addition to our human-monkey creation, scientists attempted to cross humans and pigs in California with 186 reaching 28 days. We have had sheep-goat chimeras and those derived from bovine species. Japan has proposed merging humans and mice, hoping to grow a human pancreas inside the host animal. In this case, Japan changed its legislation to allow the research to proceed, including the previously banned practice of allowing ‘a brain with human cells’.

As summarised in PubMed Central, ‘Japanese researches are now authorised to create HNH chimeras with human brain cells, to transfer the product into a uterus, and to let it develop for a period of time that can surpass 14 days, in order to obtain human organs.’

In 2013, human brain cells were inserted into neonatal mice – who lived – and gave superior performances in cognitive tests. ‘Upon maturation, the recipient brains exhibited large numbers and high proportions of both human glial progenitors and astrocytes … Long-term potentiation was sharply enhanced in the human glial chimeric mice, as was their learning, as assessed by Barnes maze navigation, object-location memory, and both contextual and tone fear conditioning.’

We’ll never know what went through the minds of those poor creatures.

So far, the ethical debate has quietened. The scientists did not create living, breathing creatures capable of thought. Not yet, anyway. But for those that believe life starts at conception, the unforgivable line has already been crossed.

And what if one of these embryos were to survive? What if a creature of confused origin could live long enough to look its creators in the eye?

‘When we observed human cells were alive in monkey embryos, that was amazing,’ said a researcher from the State Key Laboratory of Primate Biomedical Research and Kunming University of Science and Technology in Yunnan, China.

Researchers around the world have not had much luck incorporating human genetic material into other embryos in the past. Mouse cells, for example, often seek out and destroy foreign human cells, but with monkeys being a more recent relative, human DNA is playing along and contributing to the new organism.

While not illegal, these sorts of experiments are likely to be unpopular if put to a vote in Western democracies. Even some scientific bodies have their reservations. The point of chimeras is to avoid performing certain tests on human beings – which are protected by extensive laws – but in making human-animal hybrids, aren’t scientists creating a greater crime against conscience?

What worries me is the amount of ‘excitement’ surrounding projects like this, where you can hear the sense of wonder in ‘what might be possible’ clawing at the more important ‘what should be done’.

Not only are chimeras considered ‘vital’ to biomedical progress, we have researchers salivating over the idea of ‘cross-talk’ between human and monkey cells which has not been seen in previous animal hybrids.

‘We do think understanding inter-specific cross-talk could be the key for generating more successful chimeras,’ said one researcher.

How far does this research need to be pushed to claim the Holy Grail of growing human organs inside other animals – and does that end result pass our basic test of ethics?

As one stem cell scientist rightly remarked, ‘Is there a point at which a chimera is “too human”? For instance, what if a monkey-human chimera ended up being more human than monkey, should special rules apply? What if there are many human cells in the developing brain of a chimera?’

The answer is, we shouldn’t need to ask the question because man-made chimeras shouldn’t exist.

Humans have long been having nightmares about hybrid creatures and humans fused into the bodies of animals. Perhaps these fever dreams were premonitions of our future cruelty as unworthy creators. While life exploits evolutionary gaps, humans are creating life to exploit its spare parts. As we evolve into more powerful beings, we are fashioning future laboratory slaughterhouses in the full knowledge that there might be human minds on the chopping block.

While it is unlikely that the genetic rules of nature will allow us to create the more fanciful creatures of ancient folklore, Mark Steyn – who discussed this issue in several of his recent shows – was right in assuming that our future may look more like H.G. Wells’ The Island of Doctor Moreau, crawling with ape-human chimeras. The conversation arose because the Dutch are entertaining changes to their embryo act to allow the creation of life for purposes other than pregnancy – in other words – experimentation including with animal-human hybrids.

If we are gods creating life, what sort of gods are we? The kind that seeks to birth new forms into the world in order to grow our organs and harvest them. Humans make monstrous gods.

Alexandra Marshall is an independent writer. If you would like to support her work, shout her a coffee over at donor-box.

Source

On my morning walk with the dog I passed through a family gathering. The path I was on goes right along the foreshore between a carpark and the sand. From about 10 metres away I could see a father and mother, two teenage or early twenties kids, and an old, infirm dog being gently cradled by the dad. It was carried a few metres from the car, across the path, and now being laid down on the little bit of grass growing on the sand dunes.

Was this spot a favourite of the dog? The sun was shining and the family was in the lee of the cliff, sheltered from the wind. The sea was calm.

By the time I realised what was going on it was too late to reverse course or avoid walking between them. I hurried on with my own pup, his energy, and cheekiness on the end of the lead a stark contrast with the slow, pained movements of the old dog that was blinking into the sun and raising his muzzle to the ocean smells. Perhaps not today, but soon, that old dog will have one last journey in the car. Those moments of peace, togetherness, and dignity were precious. I was very moved and sat down on a bench about a hundred metres away to offer a prayer for the family and the dog.

Dignity is a concept that doesn’t seem to cut any ice with our overlords. Even if they worked, and especially if they didn’t, masks were an affront to dignity. Denial of the comforting embrace or kiss of a loved one made dying with dignity that much harder. The invasion of snarling, smug, hunching, hectoring tyrants into our living rooms each night made dignified conduct a test of willpower and patience.

The extraordinary turmoil of the last three years, on the surface, is ebbing away. But the undercurrents are as strong as ever, dragging us further away from the dignity that used to be inherent in our daily lives, our encounters with others, our institutions, our nations.

The algorithmic censorship and self-censorship we commit in our guarded conversations with friends and colleagues attacks the dignity of relationships in general, and friendships in particular. There are some things we cannot say, will not say, are frightened to say, especially if someone beloved might hear or read them. Ironically, some self-censorship would have been nice from those who thought it was appropriate to hector, bully, and guilt-trip those who were not to be coerced into injecting an experimental concoction on pain of exclusion from society.

The evasiveness and weasel-wording of our institutional representatives continues apace, vowing before an election not to make changes to tax on superannuation, then months later reversing course. It was ever thus; it’s unreasonable to expect that this feature of our democracy would be at the vanguard of a revival in trust. The politicians have sacrificed their own dignity on the altar of power. Likewise, the so-called health experts, proclaiming their infallibility and imposing strictures at odds with human dignity, and human life.

State-wise, Victoria seems likely to pass legislation that will share personal health ‘data’ compulsorily, with no opt-out. The long-held tenet that medical information was the most sacrosanct private data of all, is being swept away before our eyes. At the national level, in Australia and across the world, the proposed changes to the WHO treaty will see whole nations prostrate themselves to a global scheme, abdicating responsibility, and making the idea of national sovereignty, and thus national dignity, completely obsolete.

Even more insidious inroads are being driven into our cultural understanding of what it means to be an individual with agency, and responsibility, and autonomy. Here is an extract of the Product Disclosure Statement that came with my latest House and Contents insurance renewal bill:

On page 28 under the heading ‘Things we don’t cover’ delete the exclusion ‘Communicable Disease’ and replace with:

Communicable Disease

any loss, damage, claim, cost, expense, legal liability or other sum, directly or indirectly arising out of, or attributable to, a Communicable Disease or the fear or threat (whether actual or perceived) of a Communicable Disease.

So my insurer will not cover ‘any loss…arising out of…the fear…of a Communicable Disease’.

What on earth is this clause saying? What possible circumstance would see the insurer invoke this clause to deny a claim? In any case, fear, as such, is baked into this contract as an entirely predictable predisposition or attitude for someone to hold – and that if a claim arises because someone was afraid, then the claim is avoidable. Bottom line – our insurers have conceded that fear is an attribute of our culture, and they don’t want to have to pay for it. Fear and dignity can’t coexist.

The good news is that no one, not a supermarket insisting on ‘vaccination’ to hold down a job, not a Premier salivating about qualifying for a bronze statue on account of being in power for 3,000 days, not a bully masquerading as a cop walking away Scot-free from court, can take a person’s dignity, no matter how much they might want to. Ultimately, it is a personal possession, only to be freely exchanged, and only retrieved at great cost.

What then to make of the rest of it, our ‘democracy’, our nation, our culture? Is it time, lovingly, to pick it up and lay it on a blanket in the sun, and like the family at the beach stroke its head while we say goodbye through our tears? I’m reminded of Wilfred Owen’s poem Futility.

Move him into the sun—

Gently its touch awoke him once,

At home, whispering of fields half-sown.

Always it woke him, even in France,

Until this morning and this snow.

If anything might rouse him now

The kind old sun will know.

Think how it wakes the seeds—

Woke once the clays of a cold star.

Are limbs, so dear-achieved, are sides

Full-nerved, still warm, too hard to stir?

Was it for this the clay grew tall?

—O what made fatuous sunbeams toil

To break earth’s sleep at all?

Can the kind old sun wake our democracy? Or will we, grieving, one day find a new puppy, and train him in the ways of dignity?

This piece was originally posted on Richard’s blog. You can find his work here.

Source