What’s Behind the Anti-Right Witch-Hunt? – Part 1

A witch-hunt is an attempt to find and punish a particular group of people who are being blamed for something, often simply because of their opinions and not because they have actually done anything wrong.

— Collins English Dictionary

Since it was discovered that Christchurch mosque shooter Tarrant gave a small donation to Martin Sellner of Generation Identity in Austria over a year ago, followed consequently by a couple of e-mails exchanged in acknowledgement, a witch-hunt has been launched against the ‘Far Right’ in a cynical use of the Muslim deaths.

In particular Martin Sellner has been targeted because of his articulate and professional manner. It is claimed that Sellner is of such influence that his (GI’s) campaign against the United Nations Compact on Migration was responsible for several states not signing the compact as the result of what is called ‘fake news’ and ‘lies’ about the compact being ‘binding’.

In New Zealand a journalist, Patrick Gower, has become fixated with Sellner. Gower, if remembered at all, will be so probably because of the fool he made of himself in his ‘interview’ with Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux,¹ when they arrived for a speaking engagement that was cancelled due to extreme Left threats.

While the media remains mute on the long history of violence from the Left against the Right, Mr Gower et al., with the assistance of supposed ‘experts’ such as sociologist Dr Paul Spoonley, have sought to show that New Zealand has long been ‘terrorised’ by the Right which, despite the media’s and police’s endeavours, remains elusive. The only examples given during the course of a TV series promising to expose a long-running campaign of violence by the ‘Right’, were the psychotic antics of a gang called the Fourth Reich, which supposedly ‘terrorised’ Nelson and the West Coast of the South Island. According to an ‘expert’, the Fourth Reich, ‘were responsible for the murders of young Māori man Hemi Hutley, gay man James ‘Janis’ Bamborough, Korean tourist Jae Hyeon Kim and Christchurch woman Vanessa Pickering’.²

Mr Gower’s ‘experts’ failed to mention that the Fourth Reich gang was comprised of those of Chinese, Maori, and Pacific island descent. Whether there was a token White in the membership is unknown. Nonetheless, with a name like Fourth Reich, it must have been motivated by Rightist ideology, like the Maori street gangs that have taken to wearing the swastika. According to Mr Gower and his experts, there is some type of historical and ideological continuity between the Fourth Reich, Tarrant, local critics of the U.N. compact on migration, and Sellner. Mr Gower and other journalists, and their experts, have failed to come up with anything that justifies the hysteria that they and the Government have tried to generate amidst gun confiscations, demands for ‘hate speech’ laws, the sacking of a Dominion Movement member from his job, and a police ‘black list’ that was leaked first to the media and then to a psycho-Left ‘anti-racist’ grouplet, which has the endorsement of Mr Gower for publicly targeting dissidents.

Since Mr Gower’s fiasco in attempting to take on Southern and Molyneux he seems to have been trying to redeem himself. A TV ‘Newshub’ series called Because It Matters,³ fronted by Mr Gower, has been trying to show that Mr Sellner’s influence is ‘pervasive’ (sic) in New Zealand politics, and that it is ‘Identitarian’ ideology largely emanating from Mr Sellner that prompted the Tarrant shootings. The only ‘dangerous white supremacist’ that Mr Gower and his crew have been able to uncover is Mr Phil Arps, jailed for having shared Trarrant’s video footage. He has been shown to have been present at an anti-U.N. rally in Christchurch, where he called out that New Zealand First Party leader and deputy prime minister, Winston Peters, should be executed for ‘treason’.⁴

The only other examples of supposed ‘pervasive terrorism’ were several typically childish internet threats against Green Member of Parliament Golriz Ghahraman, over her demand for the introduction of ‘hate speech’ laws. Her support for ‘identity politics’ is based on uniting non-whites against ‘white privilege’.⁵ The threats allowed Ms. Ghahraman to posture for a few days and receive a police escort, since her life was supposedly at stake.⁶ Ms Ghahraman was also conspicuous for her participation in an aggressive effort to stop the New Zealand National Front’s annual (and only) activity in October 2017, at its ‘Flag day’ rally, which was blocked by an alliance of anarchists and communists with Ms. Ghahraman to the fore.⁷ Aggressive confrontation is acceptable to her, unless there is a reaction. Now it is Mr. Peter’s turn to act the drama queen for a few moments of publicity aboard the anti-Right bandwagon.

So when Mr Gower’s attempt to redeem himself after the Southern/Molynexu fiasco with a TV series on ‘white supremacist’ terrorism in New Zealand also flopped, generating mostly mirth and derision from viewers, he tried with a third attempt, this time to show how European ‘Identitarianism’, and particularly Mr. Sellner, have become ‘pervasive’ (sic) in New Zealand. Mr Sellner and the long arm of the Austro-Nazi international conspiracy have reached the halls of power, the proof being the rejection by the National Party of the United Nations migration compact. Mr Peters, who has made his political career out of demanding immigration restrictions and hyping a supposed ‘Muslim threat’, now that he and his colleagues are partnered with the lunatic Left Labour Government, called on National Opposition leader Simon Bridges to resign because of his supposedly being influenced by the ‘Austrian neo-Nazis’ (sic).⁸

Identitarianism and U.N. Global Compact

According to Messrs Peters and Gower, Mr Sellner launched a worldwide campaign against the U.N. Migration Compact which, through ‘lies’ about it being ‘binding’ on signatory states, succeeded in dissuading some states from signing. Notably absent in this scenario is any mention of Israel refusing to sign, on the very basis that it would undermine their sovereignty.⁹ Is it because it would be difficult to portray Israel as being influenced by ‘Austrian Neo-Nazis’ rather than simply following its own historic path of Judaeo-centricity, which might be construed as ‘Jewish Nazism’? Indeed, while the Liberals, Leftists and their oligarchic string-pullers squawk about ‘Austrian neo-Nazis’, the actual source of Islamophobia – influential and well-funded pro-Israel neocon think tanks – have remained unmentioned amidst the hysteria. The pro-Israel attitudes of certain of the supposed ‘Far Right’ in New Zealand also remain unmentioned. ¹⁰

My own knowledge of the U.N. Migration Compact was sparked by frequent comments made by radio talkback host Bruce Russell, a news commentator altogether more thoughtful than the obsessive Mr Gower, et al. Even then, it took me some weeks to look into whether Mr Russell’s warnings about the compact were accurate, and I had heard nothing of any resistance to it from any ‘Far Right’ in New Zealand. I read and analysed the Compact, and wrote an article about it for Arktos Journal.¹¹ I am still unaware of the details of Mr Sellner’s campaign against it, and I have not been able to find any extensive analysis on it from any supposedly Right-wing organisation in New Zealand. My opinions on the Compact in the Arktos Journal article are entirely my own research, and if one reads the document for oneself, it is indeed far-ranging and intrusive, as I believe I show in that article. But Messrs Gower, Peters and sundry media allege that the Compact was derailed by a well-oiled campaign by Mr Sellner and the Austrian ‘Nazis’, whose ‘lies’ have fooled even governments. As I state in the Arktos Journal article:

That the Migration Compact is based around other U.N. ‘covenants’ that have become ‘international law’, with U.N. sanctions against those states deemed offenders, is indicated within the Compact ‘preamble’ itself. As with other U.N. declarations and covenants, much of the Migration Compact outlines the monitoring of compliance of signatory states. Sections entitled ‘follow-up’ and ‘implementation’ are devoted to this, with the International Organization for Migration as the U.N. policing agency.¹²

The ‘Great Replacement’ & ‘Replacement Migration’

There has been much histrionics on the Rightist, Identitarian campaigns against the ‘Great Replacement’. Again, because the phrase was used by Tarrant, the term has reached a notoriety implying genocide. The Rightist claim that Europeans are being replaced in their own homelands by alien migrants and refugees is lambasted as a ‘lie’, and in the words of the ever-dubious Wikipedia, as a ‘nationalist right wing conspiracy theory’. Again, Mr Sellner is blamed for spreading the theory across the world.¹³

Yet from at least 2001 the United Nations started referring to ‘Replacement Migration’. The theory laid the foundation for the U.N. Migration Compact. The U.N. document Replacement Migration, Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations? statistically examines the demographic trends of ‘developed’ states, USA, Europe, E.U., Russia, Japan, and Korea. The issue is that of ageing population due to low fertility and the increasing duration of life expectancy. Hence, a looming economic crisis with the demographic imbalance. The solution is to replenish the labour market with migrants, by population transfers from the developing to the developed states. The preamble to the document states:

United Nations projections indicate that over the next 50 years, the populations of virtually all countries of Europe as well as Japan will face population decline and population ageing. The new challenges of declining and ageing populations will require comprehensive reassessments of many established policies and programmes, including those relating to international migration.

Focusing on these two striking and critical population trends, the report considers replacement migration for eight low-fertility countries (France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, United Kingdom and United States) and two regions (Europe and the European Union). Replacement migration refers to the international migration that a country would need to offset population decline and population ageing resulting from low fertility and mortality rates.¹⁴

The Right uses the term the ‘Great Replacement’, the U.N. ‘Replacement Migration’; either way, the references are to the ‘replacement’ mainly of European indigenes by drawing on the burgeoning ‘third world’ population. Is that, or is it not, precisely the aim of the U.N. migration compact? If not, how not? If so, how has Mr Sellner, et al., ‘lied’ and ‘misrepresented’ the issue? The U.N. document concludes:

Finally, the new challenges being brought about by declining and ageing populations will require objective, thorough and comprehensive reassessments of many established economic, social and political policies and programmes. Such reassessments will need to incorporate a long-term perspective. Critical issues to be addressed in those reassessments would include (a) appropriate ages for retirement; (b) levels, types and nature of retirement and health-care benefits for the elderly; (c) labour-force participation; (d) assessed amounts of contributions from workers and employers needed to support retirement and healthcare benefits for the increasing elderly population; and (e) policies and programmes relating to international migration, in particular replacement migration, and the integration of large numbers of recent migrants and their descendants. In this context, it should be noted that immigrants to one country are emigrants from another country. As such, international migration must be seen as part of the larger globalization process taking place throughout the world, influencing the economic, political and cultural character of both sending and receiving countries. While orderly international migration can provide countries of origin with remittances and facilitate the transfer of skills and technology, it also may entail the loss of needed human resources. Similarly, international migration can provide countries of destination with needed human resources and talent, but may also give rise to social tensions. Effective international migration policies must therefore take into account the impact on both the host society and countries of origin.¹⁵

The concluding sentences refer to:

1. The integration of large numbers of recent migrants and their descendants.
2. International migration … as part of the larger globalization process taking place throughout the world, influencing the economic, political and cultural character of both sending and receiving countries.
3. International migration [that] may give rise to social tensions.

These are all factors posed by the Right, yet raised first in 2001 by the U.N. The problems of ‘orderly international migration’ discussed in the 2001 document are all addressed in the U.N. migration compact. Where are Mr Sellner et al. ‘lying’ in these matters?

The U.N. document refers to problems that have supposedly hitherto been unknown to history. Nonsense. It is more a matter that the U.N. ‘experts’, NGOs, Leftists, academics, journalists, and their oligarchic string-pullers do not know history. They do not have a sense of the historical. They see only ‘human progress’ like a tapeworm creeping along towards some utopian ‘end of history’. Rather, the demographic crisis in the West has been seen in prior civilisations, and the desperate answer was the same: to fill the population void with migrants. It is in this that we might discern the end of civilisations, not their embarking on a bright new future.

Polynius (born ca. 200BC) said of the Greeks:

In our time all Greece was visited by a dearth of children and generally a decay of population … and a failure of productiveness results. … For this evil grew upon us rapidly, and without attracting attention, by our men becoming perverted to passion of show and money and the pleasures of an idle life, and accordingly, not marrying at all, or, if they did marry, refusing to rear the children that were born, or at most one or two of a great number, for the sake of leaving them all well off or bringing them up in extravagant luxury.

The Greek elite become effete, and indeed were regarded as being ‘feminised’ by the influences of an already decadent Persian civilisation. The answer of Alexander was to expand the empire and integrate Persian corruption – ‘cultural enrichment’ and ‘diversity’, as it is now called – with the aim of forming a new world order.¹⁶ Of Rome, Augustus recognised the demographic catastrophe caused by the corruption of traditional Roman virtues, asking, ‘How can the commonwealth be preserved if we neither marry nor produce children?’ He referred to the city being given up to foreigners, and to liberating slaves, ‘chiefly for the purpose of making out of them as many citizens as possible.’¹⁷ Tacitus remarked that despite state efforts, ‘childlessness prevailed’. ¹⁸ At the beginning of the second century Pliny the Younger wrote that his was ‘an age when even one child is thought a burden preventing the rewards of childlessness’. Hierocles remarked that most people seemed to regard siring children as interfering with their lifestyles. Prostitution became so widespread it became a substitute for marriage. Homosexuality and bi-sexuality had become common,¹⁹ as had abortion. Many women became infertile. Birth control methods were widely used.²⁰ The cities were ‘populated by strangers’.²¹ How modern all this sounds. Of Western civilisation Spengler wrote that ‘the destiny of being the last of the line is no longer felt as doom’.²²

There are causes for this demographic crisis that are not in the interests of the globalists to raise. They include the social pathologies that they have spent decades promoting and financing, such as feminism, abortion, birth control, hedonism, and now a mania for a ‘sliding scale of gender’. This ‘progress’ has been seen before in the decaying epochs of prior civilisations millennia ago. Much of this was supposed to create a global ‘inclusive economy’, as the corporations and NGOs call it. For decades the globalists have sought to fully integrate women into the work force by ‘liberation’ from the ‘burden’ of motherhood. Now there is a demographic crisis, and the globalist answer is ‘replacement migration’, as per Rome and Greece.

References