The Casedemic: Sweden

Ever since the WHO rather strangely recommended that countries ‘test, test, test’ for SARS-CoV-2, a mantra quickly parroted by leaders such as Jacinda Ardern, cynics have been predicting a ‘casedemic’, ie a pandemic narrative based purely on the meaningless pcr test. And so it came to pass: the decrease in deaths was matched by frenzied media hype about ‘cases’. Swedish Covid statistics through November exemplify the tenuous nature of the relationship between reported cases  based on positive testing and the lethality of the virus.

Sweden refused to overreact during the ‘first wave’ of the alleged pandemic earlier in the year, choosing to follow a policy of allowing healthy people to develop natural immunity, with few restrictions. The country’s administration is now caught up in the case frenzy, bringing in a ‘new wave of restrictions after daily coronavirus cases hit a record’.

Here are the figures for the ‘Daily New Cases’ in Sweden, showing a terrifying rise over the last month, several times that of the first wave between March and July:

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-4.png

You could be forgiven for concluding that Sweden’s most dangerous time for the pandemic to date began in October. But not according to the death statistics – the Daily New Deaths for the last few weeks, normally considered the beginning of the seasonal flu season, average about a third of the figures for the first wave:










The United Kingdom shows a similar contrast, with a death rate slightly higher than Sweden’s for the new flu season:












In Italy the death figures for the new season are higher still, but again they contrast markedly with the case pattern:

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-6.png












The figures for Covid-19 cases match those of deaths most closely in the mid-late summer months. This may be because the PCR test picks up viral residue (and not just from Covid-19) for some weeks after infection, and there are far fewer new viral infections once the weather warms up (note: this is purely a hypothesis on my part).

As the ‘casedemic’ narrative has worked so well, world-wide claims of a frightening increase in Covid-19 are still invariably based on cases, even now when the new flu season in the Northern hemisphere will inevitably lead to more deaths from influenza and pneumonia.


See also:  There is No Covid Test and the Casedemic is a Shameless Scam

UK Ministry of Health Expects COVID-19 vaccine to Lead to a ‘High Volume’ of Adverse Reactions

The UK has been on a shopping spree to secure coronavirus vaccines from multiple companies.   According to Reuters, in total it has made agreements to buy 362 million vaccine doses in total; the population of the UK is 66 million.

At the same time the Ministry of Health is aware that the fast-tracked vaccines will not undergone the necessary testing (which normally takes years).  A recent contract award notice by the Ministry of Health’s Medicines & Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), for software to manage adverse reactions, makes it painfully clear that those brave enough, or compelled, to take the vaccines when they first become available will be the test subjects.

The notice makes it clear that

  • the UK government is expecting an unprecedented number of injuries arising from the Covid-19 vaccine, so many that its normal systems won’t be able to cope, and
  • that the government plans to process the adverse reactions as quickly as possible, so that then, and only then, can it evaluate the safety of the vaccine.

So, like other governments around the world, the UK is committed to investing huge sums in a vaccine and to essentially forcing it on the populace, when it knows the vaccine:

The following was written by Mandata and first published in Greek at Mandata  (translated by Barbara McKenzie).

“Just when:

  • Major pharmaceutical companies are embarking on a frantic race to make the new coronavirus vaccine,
  • Governments inside and outside the European Union are rushing to conclude contracts and agreements for the supply of the vaccine, and
  • The mainstream media, fully coordinated and in complete unanimity, are committed to propagating the new vaccine that is coming to ‘save’ us, emphasizing its effectiveness, but also its safety,

The United Kingdom is taking urgent measures to prepare to deal with a ‘high volume’ [sic] of side effects from the new vaccine.

On 23 November, the Ministry of Health’s Medicines & Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) published in TED (Tenders Electronic Daily – annex to the Official Journal of the European Union) a contract award notice for the supply of Artificial Intelligence software to handle the ‘expected high volume of COVID-19 vaccine adverse reactions’.


The following is a description of the procurement process, by which the contract (worth £1,500,000.00 plus VAT) will be awarded directly without it going to tender.


The (self-evident?) conclusions are yours, but we will emphasize only one point:

The UK does not know at the moment which vaccine to order, since from the point of view of the pharmaceutical companies the process hasn’t moved beyond announcements to the press, because  no Covid-19 vaccine has actually been approved.

However, the relevant department of the Ministry of Health knows very well and with absolute certainty that, whatever the new vaccine is, not only will it have serious side effects, but they will manifest in such a large number that its information systems will be unable to cope.

Nevertheless, the Ministry continues to enter into contracts and agreements with the pharmaceutical companies for the purchase of the vaccine and asks to strengthen his system with new artificial intelligence software in order to be able to cope!

In other words, in addition to the money the Ministry will spend on vaccines, it will spend more to deal with the expected damage that they will cause!  It could be considered just another case of scandalous government procurement and embezzlement of public money, if not for the criminal implications for the health and lives of millions of people.”

Source: (archived

See also:

Qantas Boss Says Passengers Will Need to be Vaccinated for International Flights

Head of WHO Suggests COVID Restrictions Will Continue Even After Vaccine

A vaccine on its own will not end the #COVID19 pandemic. We will still need to continue:
-Testing, isolating & caring for cases
-Tracing & quarantining contacts
-Engaging communities
-Encouraging individuals to be careful #ACTogether #EB147

— Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus (@DrTedros) November 16, 2020

There is No Covid Test and the Casedemic is a Shameless Scam

‘The controlled demolition of society, named COVID-19, places us at the gates to hell, somewhere between freedom and slavery, fighting a battle for humanity against a government who have become the occupational hazard of being human. […] liberties older than Parliament itself have been confiscated on the basis of a disease with an average mortality age of 82.’ (Dustin Broadbery)

On the back of a completely invalid testing process, a new wave of lockdowns is being imposed on the countries of the world.  Humanity is now psyched into believing that unproven, asymptomatic cases of SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) constitute a deadly threat to mankind, justifying draconian measures that impact very negatively on economies, human rights and human welfare. 

While the northern hemisphere is entering into a new flu season, and one can expect increased sickness accordingly, the new basis for covid fearmongering, world-wide, is not actual hospitalisations and deaths, but ‘cases’ – we are in the midst of a ‘casedemic’.

Back in March the World Health Organization called on all countries to ramp up their testing programs as the best way to slow the advance of the coronavirus pandemic: We have a simple message to all countries – test, test, test’.  As the official Covid-19 death toll has dropped, there has been a shift of focus from deaths to ‘cases’, and ‘test test test’ to find these cases.  In August the World Health Organisation changed their definition of a confirmed Covid-19 case:

‘Confirmed COVID-19 case: A person with laboratory confirmation of COVID-19 infection, irrespective of clinical signs and symptoms.’

Sot it was no longer necessary to show defining symptoms to diagnose SARS-CoV-2, as is normal for a seasonal virus: for someone to be declared to be suffering from the virus, they just had to have ‘tested positive’.  Governments then vowed to introduce large scale testing to find these cases. There was much that was odd about this:

  • The shift was worldwide – governments from the UK to New Zealand were suddenly, on cue it seemed, all talking about ‘cases’ instead of mortality.
  • The cases are largely asymptomatic – deaths continued to drop.
  • The cases are determined by an invalid process, using a test unsuitable for the purpose.
Comparison of UK ‘covid cases’ versus deaths

UK deaths Sept 5

The Casedemic Unrolls

Most countries in the world have been in a state of emergency since about March. Typically there were extreme restrictions imposed early in the year, then perhaps a loosening up, then perhaps a reimposition of some restrictions.  Boris Johnson strangely imposed for the first time mask mandates for shops and supermarkets from 24 July, the very height of the English summer, when people are least vulnerable to flu and colds.

With all the ramped-up fearmongering and the obsession with ‘cases’, the new wave of authoritarian measures should not have have come as a great surprise. At the end of October / beginning of November most of the countries of Europe went into some form of lockdown.  The United Kingdom likewise declared a lockdown from 5 November, on the basis that the worst case scenario for the next wave was 80,000 deaths.  Those figures have been debunked, but the government has refused to cancel the lockdown

Mongolia, which has had no Covid deaths at all, has now declared a three day lockdown for the capital Ulaanbaatar, purely on the basis of its ‘first locally-transmitted case since the beginning of the pandemic’.   This is being done with a certain amount of fanfare, with repeated sponsored posts on social media from, at least, the Mongolian Consulate in New Zealand.  Mongolia is sending a message,  that Mongolia too is being responsible, or compliant – what inspired this sudden promotion on Mongolia’s part, one wonders, and who is paying?


New Zealand is now threatened with a lockdown for Christmas – in the Antipodean summer –  if we aren’t good, i.e. if we don’t use the contact tracing app. (most important) and wash our hands.

New displays of authoritarianism are being dreamed up all the time.  Measures in Greece, for example, include, a requirement that in the case of movement outside the home, an SMS message must be sent before venturing out indicating the reason, or if no smart phone is available, a piece of paper with the reason stated must be carried round. 

New Zealand went into lockdown in March while the WHO was still discouraging mask use, and so the use of masks was minimal.   When it went into ‘heightened alert’ in August, masks were mandated on public transport (including for secondary school children) and by some employers.  Now, although there have been no ‘with Covid’ deaths for months,  Director-General of Health Ashley Bloomfield is seeking for masks to be compulsory on public transport for all levels of the state of emergency, thus for the foreseeable future, again purely on the basis of ‘testing’ and ‘cases’.

There is NO Covid Test

Given that authorities round the world, after numerous FOI requests, admit they have no evidence of SARS-CoV-2 ever being isolated, it’s not clear what exactly governments are testing for.  

The test most commonly used is the RT-PCR test.  The PCR test does not actually show whether the viral particles it finds are infectious or not.

‘[…] patients that have recovered from a viral infection have cells that can continue to produce viral RNA without actually making infectious virus particles. That means it is not only possible but common to detect viral RNA without there being any infectious virus present. (A Virologist Explains Why Covid-19 Coronavirus Isn’t Really Dangerously Lingering on Surfaces for Weeks)

This is clearly stated by the World Health Organisation:

Infection with the virus causing COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) is confirmed by the presence of viral RNA detected by molecular testing, usually RT-PCR.   Detection of viral RNA does not necessarily mean that a person is infectious and able to transmit the virus to another person.

And by Public Health England:

RT-PCR detects presence of viral genetic material in a sample but is not able to distinguish whether infectious virus is present.

Another type of test is antibody testing: also known as a serology test, it detects the presence of antibodies in your blood.  The problem with antibody testing is that a positive result can be triggered by other coronaviruses, including the common cold.  From the US Centres for Disease Control:

‘A positive test result shows you may have antibodies from an infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. However, there is a chance a positive result means that you have antibodies from an infection with a virus from the same family of viruses (called coronaviruses), such as the one that causes the common cold.’

Furthermore, the testing is inconsistent and usually voluntary, being carried out on those prepared to be tested, or caught up in the system.

The case statistics are essentially fraudulent, and do not correspond to hospitalisations or mortality.  These fraudulent case statistics are being used to justify the continued imposition of draconian measures. 

See also: ‘If the PCR Test Is Unreliable – Why Are Health Officials Demanding The Public Be Tested?’

Long Covid

The shift in focus is often justified by references to ‘long Covid’, long term damage caused by symptomatic SARS-CoV-2. The latest British long covid study with more than 4000 PCR-confirmed participants found that most people fully recovered within 12 days, about 15% had symptoms for at least four weeks, about 5% had symptoms for at least eight weeks, and about 2% had symptoms for at least 12 weeks, so really no different from flu.  There is no evidence that asymptomatic Covid-19 ‘cases’ suffer long-term damage.

Covid Response Measures Are a Self-Fulfilling Prophesy

The dangers to human life and well-being of closing down economies, health systems and freedom to move and socialise should be obvious to everyone – except, it seems, to politicians and bought-up scientists.  The harm being done is then used to justify imposition of further measures – take, for example, the inevitable consequences of ill-treatment of the elderly and mask mandates.

Elder Abuse

The cruel treatment being accorded the elderly has inevitably led inevitably to avoidable and miserable deaths, which are then recorded as ‘Covide’, or ‘with Covid’.   New York governor Andrew Cuomo moved more than 6,300 recovering coronavirus patients into vulnerable nursing homes; New York ended up with one of the highest nursing home death tolls in the country.   About half of New Zealand’s ‘with Covid’ deaths were of elderly patients from a secure dementia ward who suffered a traumatic move to a new institution, where they were deprived of contact with their loved ones.  Arguably death was then a blessed release, but it was the government that ensured the ‘blessedness’, and it was a wretched way to die.

See also: Conditions in Care Homes Are Barbaric


Mask mandates are perhaps the most obnoxious of all ‘covid response’ measures.   There are obvious social and psychological effects of course, not least the use of masks as a symbol of control and compliance.  Science is totally ignored: the long-standing assumptions that fresh air is better than stale air, that deprivation of oxygen to the brain is damaging, and lethal if absolute, are forgotten.  

‘The rebreathing of our exhaled air will without a doubt create oxygen deficiency and a flooding of carbon dioxide. […]  Oxygen deprivation damages every single organ.’ (Margarite Griesz-Brisson)

Aside from the question of fresh air, issues arise from the accumulation of bacteria, loose fibres and carcinogenic chemicals.  

‘I’m seeing patients that have facial rashes, fungal infections, bacterial infections. Reports coming from my colleagues, all over the world, are suggesting that the bacterial pneumonias are on the rise.’ (Dr. James Meehan)

Masks cause pulmonary infections, which can lead to pneumonia and deathBacterial pneumonia was the biggest killer in the Spanish flu epidemic of 1918, which killed at least 20 million people, according to some reports 50 million or more. It came in several waves, but the second wave was the deadliestMasks were mandated for the second wave, and they would have been  a contributing factor to the severity of that wave.

 It is inevitable that an increased incidence of pulmonary illness and a higher death toll from the wearing of masks will continue to be attributed to Covid-19.

Note: a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection has not been established,  but in any case the harm arising from imposing them on the general public will certainly be far greater than any perceived benefit.  (See also Denis Rancourt’s review of the science relating to mark effectiveness’) which led him to conclude that Masks Don’t Work.)

The Justification for Authoritarian ‘Covid Response’ Measures

Lockdowns are a nuclear bomb for public health (Lockdown Resistance)

In May 2009 the WHO removed the requirement of “enormous numbers of death and illness” for a pandemic to be declared.  This enabled the relatively mild Swine flu to be labeled a pandemic a few weeks later, and for the pharmaceutical companies to make a killing, as it were, on the Swine Flu vaccine before it was pulled as being too dangerous.  The ‘Swine Flu Pandemic’ is regarded as a hoax and is only of interest now from the view of court cases and pay-outs.

The justification for the designation to be applied to SARS-CoV-2 is equally thin. Estimates of the lethality of SARS-CoV-2 continue to drop, and there is no evidence that it constitutes a greater threat than a serious flu at worst – the covid-19 mortality profile is almost identical to natural mortality, even without taking into account the huge inflation of death statistics by authorities including any death with the remotest connection to SARS-CoV-2 as a Covid death.

‘A patient who has tested positive, but successfully treated and discharged from hospital, will still be counted as a COVID death even if they had a heart attack or were run over by a bus three months later. (Loke and Heneghan, Why no-one can ever recover from COVID-19 in England – a statistical anomaly)

Regardless of how the threat of the virus is evaluated, there are questions over whether the measures taken are effective or, if they were effective, whether the human cost is worth it (see Collateral Global,  a global repository for research into the collateral effects of the COVID-19 lockdown measures).  The IMF and World Bank have warned that ‘Covid lockdowns and economic recession may drag 100 million people into extreme poverty and set back poor nations by ten years’.  The extreme lockdown applied in Melbourne, Australia Victoria, led to more suicides than ‘covid deaths’.

Lockdown will come to be seen as a “monumental mistake on a global scale” and must never happen again. The equivalent of 400 million jobs have been lost world-wide, 13 million in the U.S. alone.  (Professor Mark Woolhouse, UK advisor on indectious diseases)

A study comparing American states that went into lockdown with those that did not shows that lockdown measures did not actually reduce deaths.

Yes, But Why?

‘The reason Bill Gates wants you to believe a Corona Virus will exterminate over 450 million people is that he hates nature, God, and you. (A subjective interpretation.)’ (Celia Farber)

Given the crimes against humanity that are being perpetrated in the name of an overstated ‘pandemic’, and the ruthless suppression of dissenting voices, no matter how numerous and authoritative, it is impossible that the Covid-19 narrative is being promoted out of humanitarianism.

One could argue that money alone is the root of this evil: the pharmaceutical companies will reap huge rewards from the vaccines; repeated lockdowns will ensure the demise of small businesses, who will be replaced by monopolies.  

However, the cruel measures being imposed in the name of ‘Covid’ are designed to cause enormous, irreparable damage to human health, morale, intellect, and individual sovereignty, thus weakening the bulk of humanity as a species and as a force.  This can only be to make humanity more controllable when the plan for global government by the elite, promoted by the United Nations for decades, comes to fruition. 



Some reports from ‘Are Masks Effective: the Evidence’

3. Risks associated with face masks

Wearing masks for a prolonged period of time is not harmless, as the following evidence shows:

  1. The WHO warns of various “side effects” such as difficulty breathing and skin rashes.
  2. Tests conducted by the University Hospital of Leipzig in Germany have shown that face masks significantly reduce the resilience and performance of healthy adults.
  3. A German psychological study with about 1000 participants found “severe psychosocial consequences” due to the introduction of mandatory face masks in Germany.
  4. The Hamburg Environmental Institute warned of the inhalation of chlorine compounds in polyester masks as well as problems in connection with face mask disposal.
  5. The European rapid alert system RAPEX has already recalled 70 mask models because they did not meet EU quality standards and could lead to “serious risks”.
  6. In Germany, two 13-year-old children died suddenly while wearing a mask for a prolonged period of time; autopsies couldn’t exclude CO2 intoxication or a sudden cardiac arrest.
  7. In China, several children who had to wear a mask during sports classes fainted and died; the autopsies found a sudden cardiac arrest as the probable cause of death.
  8. In the US, a car driver wearing an N95 (FFP2) mask fainted and crashed into a pole.

See also:

Covid-19 Roadmap: 12 Steps to Create a Totalitarian New World Order

How Cecil Rhodes Fathered the Modern Globalist Movement: a Timeline

Dustin Broadbery, The Controlled Demolition of Society

Celia Farber, Was the Covid-19 Test Meant to Detect a Virus?

 William M. Briggs, Do Not Buy The Manufactured Second-Wave Panic

Jennifer Margulis, Wearing a Mask Can Damage Your Health

Cory Morningstar, Face Masks: A Danger to Our Planet, Our Children & Ourselves

NZ National’s Election Strategy

On election night, 17 October, Labour won 64 seats out of 120, thereby having enough to govern alone, if the result stands after special votes are counted. In any case Labour’s preferred coalition partner, NZ Greens, currently on 10 seats, will certainly have enough MPs to enable Labour to govern, This represents a disaster for National, which was the largest party in Parliament after the 2017 election, but which failed to come to an agreement with king-maker Winston Peters of NZ First. Peters went into coalition with Labour and loyally supported Labour/Green Marxist policies while at the same time alienating NZ First voters, which meant an ignominious and probably final defeat for the party.

Labour clearly benefited from its handling of the global ‘covid crisis’. However, whether National chose the best strategy in confronting Labour’s advantage is questionable. Todd Muller, leader of the National Party from 22 May to 14 July 2020, declared in his maiden speech:

‘First and foremost, I’m about what’s best for you and your family – not what’s wrong with the Government.  I’m not interested in Opposition for Opposition’s sake. We’re all tired of that kind of politics.’

Which amounted to an announcement that National had no fundamental problems with Labour policy. While Muller himself was replaced in July by the more feisty Judith Collins, there was no noticeable change in strategy. All year, non-mainstream commentators have desperately tried to expose the more extreme policies of the Labour/Green partnership, in terms of:

  • The numerous measures to undermine traditional property rights;
  • Bribing of landowners to convert pasture to pine (just when China is planting up huge forests which will come on stream at the same time as New Zealand’s);
  • Encouragement of foreign interests to buy up huge swathes of New Zealand farmland provided they convert it to forestry (inevitably monoculture pinus radiata);
  • The child-abusive education policies, such as the curricula for Sexuality Education and Climate Change;
  • The lack of a scientific basis for its zero carbon policy;
  • The fact of the zero carbon policy being in breach of Article 2 of the Paris Accord, which specifically prohibits countries from restricting food producers;
  • The lack of scientific basis for its panicked response to the Covid19 ‘pandemic’, for its mask mandate on public transport, and for its withdrawal of hydroxychloquine from the market;
  • Refusal to acknowledge the economic consequences of the government’s cancellation of tourism, its policy to replace farming with forestry, and its aim to convert New Zealand to renewables;
  • The determination to further the policies prescribed by the United Nations with total disregard for New Zealand’s interests.

Questioning the corporate narratives on either climate change or the ‘pandemic’ would entail declaring war on the corporate sponsors of those narratives, most obviously the Gates and Rockefeller foundations.  Any party who did this would, at the very least, be vilified mercilessly in the domestic and international press, and its leader compared to Donald Trump but there are other issues, however, that one might have expected that National could safely address, in fact had a duty to do so.  The National opposition, however, has steered clear of any major issues – its strategy strongly relied on being seen as a safe pair of hands. 

‘Strong’ leadership

This strategy depended on convincing the public that management of the ‘pandemic’ would have been handled at least as well by National, and that National was a safer pair of hands to manage the economy. At the same time National, like Labour, has been careful to avoid spelling out the extent of the looming economic crisis, which would raise questions of whether the lockdown was worth it and bring the heavens (or at least the corporate media) down upon the party.

Thus the National Party continued to keep clear of criticising the government on any fundamental issues.  So rather than exposing the false premise behind Jacinda Ardern’s ‘test, test, test’ strategy, that there is a test that actually works (probably too risky to mention that the virus hasn’t even been isolated), Collins preferred to make capital out of any perceived failures in ‘securing the borders’, and promise even more draconian measures to combat the dreaded virus.

National’s boldest policy was its agricultural policy, which proposed to modify the provisions of the Zero Carbon Act which affected farmers. The policy also removed the exemption that streamlines the process for forestry applications in the Overseas Investment Office. However National did not campaign on the government’s pasture to pine policies. So when I raised the issue at a candidates meeting in Ohariu, NZ First minister Tracey Martin was able to point to Pan Pac, given permission by Environment Minister Eugenie Sage to buy 20,000 hectares, as a ‘New Zealand company as it already did business in NZ (so why did it have to be given special permission?). There was no attempt from the Ohariu candidate Brett Hudson to query this ridiculous claim, or to ask whether the European aristocrats who have also been able to buying up land on this basis were also ‘NZ companies’, or to address the principle. Incidentally, the effect of the agricultural policy was to put itself in competition with ACT, its natural partner, which had garnered huge support in the rural sector when sole ACT MP David Seymour voted against the Zero Carbon Bill.

National also committed itself to repealing the Resource Management Act, but the stated aim of this policy was to facilitate development – the party did not set out to make an issue of the provisions in the Act which are being used to undermine property rights, nor the Urban Development Act which allows the compulsory purchase of private homes for development. Nb: the founding objectives of the National Party were stated as:

‘To promote good citizenship and self-reliance; to combat communism and socialism; to maintain freedom of contract; to encourage private enterprise; to safeguard individual rights and the privilege of ownership; to oppose interference by the State in business, and State control of industry.

National founding principles, therefore, are in direct conflict with the policies of Karl Marx, the UN and the NZ Labour/Green partnership to to eliminate property rights of homeowners.

Regardless of outcome, National’s strategy was deeply worrying to many of Labour’s critics. Even if it worked, and National gained the Treasury benches and maybe rolled back some of Labour’s more obnoxious measures, little or none of the Labour/Green agenda to serve global Marxism (including a massive transfer wealth upwards and ultimately global government), would be exposed. After a couple of terms the public would inevitably get bored and, still unaware of some vital issues, vote Labour/Greens back in, to pick up where they left off.

See also:

CO2 is Not Causing Global Warming

Coronavirus: WHO Backflips on Virus Stance by Condemning Lockdowns

WHO (Accidentally) Confirms Covid is No More Dangerous Than Flu/

NZ Government MPs Lie About Contents of the Sexuality Education Syllabus

WHAT can we do to stop our MPs lying their heads off? 

At a meeting in Ohariu last night I directed a question at the representatives from the parties in government, thus NZ First’s Tracey Martin, Labour local MP Greg O’Connor and the Green candidate, John Ranta.

‘The New Zealand sex education curriculum turns small children into sexual beings, strongly promotes gender stereotypes, and forces children from the age of five to see gender dysphoria and and transition as natural and desirable. Will you support the inevitable move to extend the programme to early education?’

When pressed for further detail I explained that children are actively and repeatedly encouraged to see gender transition as a viable option and that ‘by the age of about nine children are invited to imagine waking to find that their gender has changed’.

First Greg O’Connor and then Tracey Martin, who as Minister of Education was involved in developing the programme, flatly denied that the Sexuality Curriculum groomed children for gender transition, or that children were invited to imagine that their gender had changed.  The curriculum was completely age-appropriate and anything to do with gender was purely to encourage tolerance.  (The Green candidate was open about knowing little of the syllabus.)

What the text says

‘Encourage students to recognise that some people’s biological sex is different to their gender identity. For example somebody born with a penis may identity as a girl’ (Years 1-2, section “Gender Roles”, in which ‘Students will describe themselves in relation to their gender’ and ‘Students will explore diverse gender roles’ ).

Gender diversity is again explored in detail in Years 3-4, in Theme 2, and is referred to also in Theme 4, thus gender diversity is addressed in years 1, 3 and 4.  In year 5, when children are about nine:

Have the students make themselves comfortable in small groups. Ask the students to use their imaginations and consider the following scenario: Imagine waking up one morning and discovering that your gender has changed.  What that would that be like?  Allocate two questions per group for the students to discuss:

• How would your life be the same? How would it be different?
• Would any of your ambitions change?
• What could be some negatives about living with this “new” gender?
• What could be some positives about living with this “new” gender?
• Do you think people would treat you differently?
• What couldn’t you do anymore?
• What would you be able to do that you may not have been able to yesterday?
• What would you need to learn?
• How would you be expected to dress?
• If you looked different but were exactly the same on the inside, would you still fit in with your friends and family?
• Are the expectations for genders the same? Or are there different expectations?
• If you looked different but were exactly the same on the inside, would you still fit in with your friends and family?
• Are the expectations for genders the same? Or are there different expectations?
• How do you suppose it feels to be transgender? What are the expectations if you are transgender? Discuss any stereotypes or challenges associated with growing up.
(Years 5-6, Theme 2, so year 5)

Tracey Martin, Minister of Education told the meeting that she was closely involved with the development of the syllabus and knew it well.  Thus Martin’s authoritative claim that there was no such provision for small children to be instructed to ‘Imagine waking up one morning and discovering that your gender has changed’ has to be seen as knowingly false.  Greg O’Connor probably had no idea what was in the syllabus, but under pressure his instinctive response was flat denial.

Note: Tracey Martin, as Minister of Education would also have been responsible for the equally manipulative Climate Change syllabus.

See also:

Cultural Marxism and the NZ Sex Education Curriculum

UK Government issues gender identity guidance for teachers: pupils must not be told they might be a different gender based on personality or clothes. 

‘War is Peace’: NZ MP Greg O’Connor Claims Labour Supports the Farming Sector

Ohariu MP Greg O’Connor is an ex-policemen and long-time President of the New Zealand Police Association, best known in that role for his strong support of armed police.  (In 2019-20 New Zealand trialled armed police patrols, and for a while it looked as though armed police visiting private homes for minor offences, or where no offence has been committed, was going to be the norm in New Zealand, see Is New Zealand on the Road to Bolshevism?)   O’Connor supported the gun reforms which were fast tracked in the aftermath of the Christchurch shooting, and spoke in favour of the government’s draconian Covid-19 Response Bill.  First elected in 2017, O’Connor would be a front-runner for the post of Minister of Police in a future Labour government.

On 29th September 2020, O’Connor sent out an email to subscribers in which he came out with this startling statement:

‘And our economic news is improving as well with small businesses bouncing back and the primary sector continuing to do the heavy lifting by producing what the world needs most; quality food.  I’m just one of several of my fellow MPs with a farming background and the value of that sector is well recognised in our caucus.

What can have possessed O’Connor to come out with this whopper?  Labour has done all in its power, not just to undermine, but to eradicate the farming sector:

“The coalition government […] is implementing a strategy squarely aimed at replacing the farming sector with forestry.  The result will be depopulation of the countryside, the destruction of our environment and our way of life, and set us on the road to poverty.”  (The NZ Government’s Strategy to Destroy the Farming Sector)

The measures include:

The batty Zero Carbon Act, which

  • Is in breach of article 2 of the Paris Agreement, which specifically prohibits countries from restricting food producers;
  • Forces little New Zealand to try to compensate for the CO2 emissions of China and India;
  • Relies heavily on junk science, including the claim that methane is a major greenhouse gas justifying the policy of a 24 to 47 per cent decrease in methane emissions by 2050.  Methane is in fact virtually irrelevant as a greenhouse gas, as its energy absorption is completely within the bandwidths of the far more dominant H2O (when did it ever rain methane?)

One Billion Trees Fund and Overseas Investment Office incentives to all and sundry, at home and abroad, to convert farmland to forestry

The One Billion trees fund pays landowners, including farmers, to plant trees – any trees.  At least half of this is expected to be pinus radiata forest plantations – it will probably be much more. According to Forestry Minister Shane Jones, ‘ the commercial forestry sector [is] projected to plant half a billion trees in the next 10 years’.

Selling land into overseas ownership: Despite farm land being defined as ‘sensitive land’ that should not be sold to overseas interests, an exception is made for farmland that is to be converted to forestry.   Overseas investment in forestry is actively encouraged: ‘Generally overseas investors buying fewer than 1000 hectares of forestry rights per calendar year are exempted from needing consent.’

Often the parcels of land far exceed 1000 hectares. In 2019 Land Information Minister and Green MP Eugenie Sage gave Pan Pac Forest Products approval (signed off by Assistant Finance Minister David Clark) to bypass the OIO to to make 25 transactions involving 20,000 hectares of land, valid until 2022, for the purposes of forestry conversion.  Pasture is a carbon sink, while logged forests impoverish the soil and are net carbon emitters, but hey, it was never about the environment.

‘If sheep and beef farms convert to forestry on a nationwide scale at just half the rate that has occurred in Wairoa this last year, there will be no sheep and beef farms left by 2050’ (Neil Henderson, Gisborne farmer, 2019)

Fresh Water

All New Zealanders want clean rivers and clean beaches,  but the very language of the Fresh Water proposals makes it clear the the government is targeting farmers and has little interest in our unsanitary urban beaches.

Let them eat pine chips

All these measures are accompanied by the heavy-handed promotion of veganism, including a big push in the child-abusive climate curriculum, which imposes on growing children guilt about eating meat and proposes that they consider (to begin with) meatless Mondays – if schools make this a policy, it will be virtually impossible for children to opt out.

New Zealand’s future – what future?

Government policies to eliminate beef and sheep farming combined with its cancellation of tourism mean that New Zealand is faced with a future that comprises a fire-sale of assets, huge tax hikes, and spiralling debt. 

See also:

Greg O’Connor’s Latest Push to Arm Police and 5 Reasons Not To


How Neo-Marxists Have Hijacked the New Zealand Labour Movement

Ayn Rand famously said that ‘the difference between a welfare state and a totalitarian state is only a matter of time’.   Maybe it doesn’t have to be like that – but maybe it does.

In its early years NZ Labour stood for affordable health and education, national rail, home ownership for all, job protection and full employment.  How does Labour today compare?

Why I have abandoned Labour after 40 years

Labour’s post-war ideal has given way to a naked drive towards Marxist totalitarianism and one world government, with the Labour/Green partnership launching a fast-moving assault on the NZ way of life.  The introduction of initiatives to:

  • undermine property rights and replace homes with apartments
  • destroy the farming sector and rural New Zealand
  • weaken the fabric of society through child abusive education policies
  • use the cold virus to crash the economy and the health system and create a police state

all follow a neo-Marxist model as dictated by the UN and the elite foundations that own the UN.  The goal is communism in its proper sense, a highly controlled world population governed by an elite, in other words totalitarianism.

From a conservative Christian website:

‘So all this mass media claptrap lately about how well our friendly, smiling, unmarried Communist NZ Prime Minister P [… is doing…] – while behind the scenes, she and her Marxist/Socialist colleagues are frantically working day and night to destroy marriage, destroy the family, destroy gender, get all the nation’s children out of the control of parents at home and indoctrinate them all to become little socialists in state-funded child care centres, destroy all personal freedoms under state dictatorship, tax and spend like there is no tomorrow to destroy the economy, while working towards the ultimate Marxist goal to abolish the right to own all private property – isn’t it about time we all woke up to who she really is, and called her the wickedly deceptive little Communist Comrade she really is?’ (Genuine Christianity Now)

So how much of this is wrong?

‘the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property’ (Karl Marx, Communist Manifesto)

Labour has introduced a raft of measures to remove traditional private property rights and eliminate home gardens, arguing the prior claim of ‘biodiversity’, despite NZ’s extensive national and urban reserves.  The measures include the Statement on Indigenous Biodiversity, Biodiversity Strategy and Urban Development Bill.   The aim is  to move the populace to high-density rental living, in accordance with the UN’s Agenda 21.

Clearing the countryside and eliminating the agricultural sector

The New Zealand government has brought in so many incentives to convert fertile pasture to pine forest that purchase of land with an intent to farm is not an option.   Forestry can not provide anything like the jobs that agriculture does, and there are huge implications for rural life, the economy, the food supply and the environment.  Moving people out of rural New Zealand will further Agenda 21 and Labour’s policy of high density living.

The impoverishment of New Zealand

The goal of Marxism is to ensure that all power is concentrated into a few hands.   The Ardern regime has done all in its power to impoverish NZ to the benefit of the wealthy, with foreign interests expected to benefit most.

The encouragement of the sale of farmland into overseas ownership: Farmland is considered by the Overseas Investment Office (OIO) to be ‘sensitive land’ and purchase by overseas interests requires OIO approval. An exception is made for farmland that is to be converted to forestry.

The disastrous effect of Covid-19 measures on NZ businesses: As a result of the measures taken on the back of the Covid-19 ‘pandemic’, an enormous transfer of wealth upwards and outwards (ie overseas) is expected, when small family businesses (‘the bourgeoisie’) go to the wall.  While the super-rich are making billions , Labour MP Deborah Russell expressed her contempt for small businesses struggling to survive the lockdown:



The government has throughout the manufactured crisis been reluctant to discuss the negative consequences of its response.  It has recently been revealed that Treasury, who obligingly agreed to suspend all Regulatory Impact Assessment relating to Covid-19 measures, warned back in early April of a possible fire sale of NZ companies to foreign owners.

Destroying society, culture and the family are fundamental policies of Cultural Marxism

When a society stops caring for its young, it has reached a level of degradation from which recovery may be impossible.

The NZ Sexuality Education syllabus

 The teachers’ resource Navigating the Journey: Sexuality Education:

  • Recommends the sexualisation of children from the age of five,
  • Forces small children to consider transsexuality as a natural option,
  • Reinforces and exaggerates male-female stereotypes.

The World Health Organisation recommends instruction in masturbation for European toddlers from 0 to 4 years– this will certainly become NZ policy under a Labour/Green administration.  (See Cultural Marxism and the NZ Sex Education Curriculum.)

Gender self-identification

Both Jacinda Ardern and the Green Party support a policy of gender self-identification, which puts newly declared rights of men ahead of time-honoured rights of women and children.  An attempt to insert an amendment to the Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Bill at select committee stage without public consultation failed – no doubt it will be introduced in another Labour/Green term.

Labour seeks to bully and blackmail children into becoming climate activists via the Climate Science Curriculum

The curriculum is devoid of science, actively discourages critical thinking, and is designed to frighten children into compliance. The provision of a long list of agencies that can advise parents or treat deliberately traumatised children, including suicide-help, should be a clue to how iniquitous this curriculum is. (See The NZ Climate Change Curriculum is Cult Indoctrination and Child Abuse)

Burning books

‘Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.’
(Winston Smith in George Orwell’s 1984).

As part of the protests against ‘white supremacy’ and Western Civilisation, statues and other historical references been vandalised or removed across the English-speaking world, including New Zealand – one startling example being the defacing of Penny Lane’s street signage in Liverpool , claiming an (unproven) link with slavery.  It is perhaps no coincidence that NZ’s National Library is culling 625,000 books, almost the totality of the international collection, which:

  • Reduces access to factual knowledge
  • Cuts links to a heritage going back thousands of years
  • Creates a sense of disempowerment

Creating racial hatred in New Zealand

Many people, including Muslim familes, walked out of a post-Christchurch vigil organised by Green Party leader Marama Davidson when they found it was an anti-white hatefest.  Davidson could be Deputy Prime Minister if a Labour/Green coalition win the election.

The bizarre policy, unique to New Zealand, of imposing a hybrid form of English by inserting large quantities of (unfamiliar) Maori phrases into English texts creates resentment amongst the non-Maori population, and presents considerable difficulty for non-native speakers of either language, including immigrants.

Labour exploits a cold virus to create a police state

Ardern ignored expert advice, scientific studies and facts on the ground which show that the Covid-19 virus has not lived up to the media build-up, in order to crash the economy, wreck the health system and trash democratic freedoms.  The Covid-19 Public Health Response Act gives the government, the police and ‘authorised persons’ undreamed-of powers to control the lives of NZ citizens, including powers of entry without a warrant, for up to two years.

Is NZ headed for martial law?

Ardern has assigned responsibility for policing its Covid-19 quarantine to the military.   This opens the way for these responsibilities to be extended to include entering private homes without a warrant.

If we look back over the period since the Chrischurch mosques shooting on the Ides of March 2019, we can see that the event set in train a series of measures by the government which have charted a seemingly inexorable course towards the establishment of a police state.  These include:

  • the draconian censorship imposed to prevent viewing the documentary evidence,
  • the announcement of the fast-tracking of hitherto unmooted gun control laws, in tandem with
  • a policy to normalise armed police patrols, including visits to law-abiding citizens.  (see Is New Zealand on the Road to Bolshevism)

Be Kind  – Or Else

Ardern’s style consists of appeals for kindness, moral blackmail for waverers, and threats of imprisonment for dissidents. New Zealanders have had to tolerate the Orwellian experience of Jacinda Ardern within the space of a minute reinforcing the need for kindness, reminding of police powers to ensure compliance, and advising how to dob in one’s neighbours (see Appendix, 6:00).  For weeks exhortations to ‘Be Kind’ were everywhere, even in lights on State Highway 1.

It’s a moot question whether we term Jacinda Ardern’s dystopia Brave New World, or 1984.


Daily COVID-19 Media Conference, 29 March


See also:

Olivia Pearson: Jacinda Ardern: From Prime Minister to Tyrant

Jacinda Ardern, giving closing address to the 2009 International Union of Socialist Youth Festival in Hungary, uses the term comrade 15 times in seven minutes:




Is NZ On the Road to Bolshevism?

The openly Marxist Labour/Green partnership that runs New Zealand is exploiting a series of significant events  – the Christchurch shooting, the contrived Covid-19 scare, and the orchestrated George Floyd protests – to create a totalitarian state.  The strategy relies heavily on fear, division and the suppression of dissent.

The creation of a police state

The shooting on 15 March 2019 of 51 men in two Christchurch mosques by a much-travelled Australian (some say CIA agent), set in train a series of measures by the government which charted a seemingly inexorable course towards the establishment of a police state.

The combination of:

  • the unwarranted censorship after the Christchurch event, accompanied by threats of long prison sentences,
  • the normalisation of armed police calling at family homes for flimsy reasons,
  • the role of the police during the lockdown, and
  • the introduction of new hate speech laws

all serve to create fear in would-be dissidents and protesters.

Whither New Zealand?

Slobodan Solajic asks: The Second American Revolution Or The First American Bolshevik Revolution?

‘The “revolutionary” initiatives in the US that Tucker Carlson talked about in his monologue about “Why mobs are tearing down America’s monuments” chillingly remind me of what was happening during the dying days of the Russian Empire and the Romanov dynasty, and the unimaginable horror imposed by the Bolshevik ideology in the years during and after the revolution:

Solajic’s long list of points includes:

  • Constitutional rights of Americans are continuously eroded through various coercive measures, judicial and legislative precedents, etc
  • Perpetual attempts to disarm Americans through so-called “gun control”
  • Forced displacement: a strategic development recognised and described by Kelly M. Greenhill in ‘Weapons of Mass Migration: Forced Displacement, Coercion, and Foreign Policy’
  • Mainstream media is entirely controlled, spewing propaganda for systematic brainwashing and social/mental engineering
  • Degradation of American culture and history (also through destruction of monuments and historical and cultural sites)
  • Social education which encourages a hateful and racist view of European-American citizens which could be considered as ‘reverse racism’
  • Campuses are the centers of indoctrination
  • Unnatural, oftentimes deviant, moral dogmas normalizing unhealthy and dangerous lifestyles which cause the long-term destruction of family, culture heritage, and achieved civilization levels
  • Violent false flag events being used as a pretext to disarm Americans and further increase the police/security state
  • Deliberate attempts to create racial tension leading to a race or civil war in America, while at the same time promoting multiculturalism and diversity which are then used to add more fuel to the already present racial problems.’

Solajik concludes with ‘Considering all of this, is America on the threshold of its own Bolshevik revolution?’  Many or all of these his points apply in New Zealand, though we have not yet experienced the murderous ‘race riots’ currently being experienced in America.  The recent calls for NZ to abolish police follow a US trend.

There are alternatives to violence and civil war.  Media and politicians are preparing the world for an alleged second wave of coronavirus, which may have implications for New Zealand’s elections in September.  Another lockdown would at least hinder campaigning and democratic participation at meetings, distributing leaflets etc – it could mean the cancellation of the election.  If you can achieve so much through fear – fear of disease on the part of the majority, fear of the consequences of dissent on the part of the minority – there is no need to resort to overt violence.

See also:

American Conservative, The Chilling Censorship of the Christchurch Shooting

New Zealand Police Can Bust Into Your House & Do Anything They Think is Reasonably Necessary To Enforce Lockdown

Three Academic’s From Victoria University’s Institute of Criminology Explain Why Armed Police Officers in Patrol Cars Will in Fact Make Us Less Safe

Ron Paul, The Media is Lying About  Second Wave

The Second American Revolution Or The First American Bolshevik Revolution?

By Slobodan Solajic; originally published at OneWorld

The situation the US today resembles the early days of the Bolshevik revolution in Russia. It is almost a copy and paste of it: paid mercenaries, paid agitators, false flag terror, endless brainwashing propaganda, and fully controlled mainstream media. There is looting and destruction of the people and nation by thugs, agents, activists, mercenaries, and people motivated by anarchy, chaos, destruction, death, as well as the pain, misery, and enslavement of their fellow productive Americans. They are destroying their small businesses to fit the needs of the parasitic and unproductive segments of their class.

Karl Marx set the standard of Communist ideology through his assertion:

“Let the ruling classes tremble at a communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Workingmen of all countries, unite!”

Lenin elaborated this even further:

“We can and must write in a language which sows among the masses hate, revulsion, and scorn toward those who disagree with us.”

“The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses.”

“It is necessary – secretly and urgently to prepare the terror.”

“People always have been and they always will be stupid victims of deceit and self-deception in politics.”

Sound familiar today? Does it raise any alarm?

The horror that Bolshevik “revolutionaries” brought to Russia and to Orthodox Christian Russians who were a large majority there would be better understood if we remember Trotsky’s words as he explained how the Christians and whites of Russia were going to be treated:

“We must turn Russia into a desert populated by white Negroes upon whom we shall impose a tyranny such as the most terrible Eastern despots never dreamt of. The only difference is that this will be a left-wing tyranny, not a right-wing tyranny. It will be a red tyranny and not a white one. We mean the word ‘red’ literally, because we shall shed such floods of blood as will make all the human losses suffered in the capitalist wars pale by comparison.”


“If the Revolution has the right to destroy bridges and art monuments whenever necessary, it will stop still less from laying its hand on any tendency in art which, no matter how great its achievement in form, threatens to disintegrate the revolutionary environment or to arouse the internal forces of the Revolution, that is, the proletariat, the peasantry and the intelligentsia, to a hostile opposition to one another. Our standard is, clearly, political, imperative and intolerant.”

The situation the US today resembles the early days of the Bolshevik revolution in Russia. It is almost a copy and paste of it: paid mercenaries, paid agitators, false flag terror, endless brainwashing propaganda, and fully controlled mainstream media. There is looting and destruction of the people and nation by thugs, agents, activists, mercenaries, and people motivated by anarchy, chaos, destruction, death, as well as the pain, misery, and enslavement of their fellow productive Americans. They are destroying their small businesses to fit the needs of the parasitic and unproductive segments of their class.

The “revolutionary” initiatives in the US that Tucker Carlson talked about in his monologue about “Why mobs are tearing down America’s monuments” chillingly remind me of what was happening during the dying days of the Russian Empire and the Romanov dynasty, and the unimaginable horror imposed by the Bolshevik ideology in the years during and after the revolution:

  • Constitutional rights of Americans are continuously eroded through various coercive measures, judicial and legislative precedents, etc
  • Perpetual attempts to disarm Americans through so-called “gun control”
  • Criminal banking and financial system looting the average middle and low class Americans (and the rest of the world)
  • Lack of proper investigation or prosecution in the face of exponential growth in government corruption
  • Forced displacement: a strategic development recognised and described by Kelly M. Greenhill in “Weapons of Mass Migration: Forced Displacement, Coercion, and Foreign Policy
  • Institutionalized assaults on health and choices regarding health
  • Mainstream media is entirely controlled, spewing propaganda for systematic brainwashing and social/mental engineering
  • Degradation of American culture and history (also through destruction of monuments and historical and cultural sites)
  • Social education which encourages a hateful and racist view of European-American citizens which could be considered as “reverse racism”
  • Campuses are the centers of indoctrination
  • Unnatural, oftentimes deviant, moral dogmas normalizing unhealthy and dangerous lifestyles which cause the long-term destruction of family, culture heritage, and achieved civilization levels
  • Violent false flag events being used as a pretext to disarm Americans and further increase the police/security state
  • Deliberate attempts to create racial tension leading to a race or civil war in America, while at the same time promoting multiculturalism and diversity which are then used to add more fuel to the already present racial problems.

Considering all of this, is America on the threshold of its own Bolshevik revolution?

Cultural Marxism and the NZ Sex Education Curriculum

Critical Theory is a play on semantics. The theory was simple: criticize every pillar of Western culture—family, democracy, common law, freedom of speech, and others. The hope was that these pillars would crumble under the pressure (Zero Hedge, ‘The Birth of Cultural Marxism’).

Through all of human history societies have protected children.   When a society stops looking after its young, it has reached a level of degradation from which recovery could well be impossible.

The campaign to ‘protect the sexual rights of children’, ie to eroticise them from a young age, is bedded in the cultural-Marxist strategy of undermining the family (aka Critical Theory) by making it hard for people to form permanent relationships. While the stated intention of Critical Theory was to undermine the institutions which stood in the way of the adoption of Communism, early sexualisation and of course transgenderisation also serve the purposes of the associated eugenicist movement.

Education departments throughout the Western world are incorporating programmes to further the Marxist goal of sexualising the young.  The World Health Organisation recommends instruction in masturbation for European toddlers from birth to four years of age.  Importantly, an association is created between tenderness, physical closeness and sexuality.


Eroticisation of pre-schoolers may not yet be applied in New Zealand, but it cannot be far away, particularly under a hard-line Marxist administration.  The teachers’ resource for the New Zealand sex education curriculum, Navigating the Journey: Sexuality Education: Te Takahi i te Ara: Whakaakoranga Hōkakatanga (overview here):

  • Recommends the sexualisation of children from the age of five
  • Forces small children to question their gender identity
  • Reinforces and exaggerates male-female stereotypes, and
  • Presents a raft of ideas for undermining a child’s feelings of self confidence and self-worth which, while reinforcing the strong and successful, are threatening to the vulnerable.

Sexualisation of Young Children

(The volumes referred to here are for Years 1-2 and Years 3-4, principally, and Years 5-6, abbreviated to 1, 2, and 3.  Thus 1/20 indicates Years 1-2, page 20.)

At present sexuality education in New Zealand begins at Year One, i.e. normally the age of five. The Guide to LGBTIQA+ Students: Plan Sexuality and Gender Education Years 1-8, which applies to all students (not just LGBTIQA), recommends:

‘Design learning programmes that meet students’ developmental

‘Some children in this age group may be aware of the connection between
“making babies” and sexual pleasure.’

The actual teacher’s resource is more specific.  As the sub-heading, ‘A blossoming takes place, a journey is set out on’, implies, it is intended that children are awoken sexually from the age of five.

From years one and two children are encouraged to talk to their families about ‘sexuality’:  ‘what are some of the elements their whanau believe are important to growing up in all areas of our lives, including sexuality. (1/ p.10)

In the lesson on parts of the body (1/49), pupils are expected not just to learn, but publicly name, parts of the body including genitalia.  This would normally be done in a mixed class – it goes without saying that any embarrassment a small child might feel in a discussion about private parts is heightened by the presence of the opposite sex.  In some classes the number of boys versus girls is disproportionate – again this will increase the embarrassment or humiliation the minority sex will feel, whether male or female, and the likelihood of bullying.

Working in pairs, they are asked to write the names of body parts on labels and attach them after discussion to an enlarged body outline. They then cover the bodies with paper clothes and then hang them on the wall. Students can then lift the clothes to check on the accuracy of the placement – the purpose of the clothes is to prevent embarrassment apparently.

In years 3-4 (circa 7-8 years of age), pictures of naked people are presented to the children, who are taught and asked to identify what used to be called private parts, i.e. breast, testicles etc.  They play ‘body bingo’. The teacher describes the sex act in detail, including sexual excitement (how the teacher should explain sexual excitement is not described).

‘Gender Fluidity’ and the Destruction of Identity

British figures to 2015 show that gender dysphoria amongst school children quadrupled in five years.  Some argue that this reflects a widespread condition that has been hitherto suppressed, but it is impossible to overlook the part played by the active policies of educationalists in the English-speaking world.

The position of the New Zealand Ministry of Education is that transgenderism – which includes a gamut of options from gender self-identity to chemical puberty blocking to physical mutilation – is natural, common and to be encouraged.  From the age of five or six, children are told that it is somehow natural for a boy to ‘identify’ as a girl and vice-versa. The conditioning starts in Years 1-2:

‘Encourage students to recognise that some people’s biological sex is different to their gender identity. For example somebody born with a penis may identity as a girl’ (1/49).

And is then reinforced in Years 3-4:

Gender diversity yr 3-4

Encouraging gender dysphoria is a primary function of the curriculum for years 5-6, i.e. for children aged about 9 to 10.  Of the four ‘themes’ in this resource, the subject is discussed in Themes 2, 3 and4: there are repeated calls to ‘affirm diversity’ and ‘affirm diverse genders’, and children are encouraged:

  • to regard having a gender identity that does not match their biological sex as natural
  • to envisage themselves having gender dysphoria.

‘Ask the students to use their imaginations and consider the following scenario:
Imagine waking up one morning and discovering that your gender has changed. What that would that be like? Allocate two questions per group for the students to discuss:
How would your life be the same? How would it be different?
• Would any of your ambitions change?
• What could be some negatives about living with this “new” gender?
• What could be some positives about living with this “new” gender? [etc]

What could be some negatives‘ is the closest to an acknowledgement that gender self-reassignment is the beginning of a road that leads to puberty blockers, sterility and ultimately mutilation, including castration for boys.

A 2008 study of the incidence of transsexualism among New Zealand passport holders gave a figure of ‘at least’ 1:6364.  The ratio of male-to-female transsexual people to female-to-male transsexual people was 6:1: the prevalence of male-to-female transsexualism was estimated at 1:3639, and the corresponding figure for female-to-male transsexualism was 1:22 714.

There is no reason to believe that natural gender dysphoria amongst young children – a feeling that they are shut off from an identity they relate to – would normally even match this figure, particularly given the breaking down of stereotypes in modern life: girls can play almost all sports available to boys, boys learn to sew and cook,  women travel the world on their own, and few careers are closed to either sex.

Reinforcing Gender Stereotypes

In order to facilitate gender dysphoria, there is a strategy to reinforce stereotypes, and then to make people who do not fit the stereotype feel threatened or different (1/p. 28). A correlation is created between choice of clothing, colours, hobbies etc and gender identity.

‘Where do messages come from about what boys and girls should wear and do we have to follow these messages.  Encourage students to recognise that some people’s biological sex is different to their gender identity’ (1/50)

The purpose of the manual is sensitise children to gender stereotyping, ensuring that minority preferences within a gender are at the least a cause for self-consciousness.

‘Encourage the students to consider and question gender roles. Ask, for example, ”Who mows the lawn?” “Who does the cooking?” “Is this the same in all our families?” Gender roles can be different in different cultures and in different families. Avoid making
generalisations and encourage students to see diversity in gender roles.’ (1/41)

‘You could invite parents who live in non-traditional roles They could share how their gender does not affect their ability to do their job well.’ (1/29)

In years 3-4 students are asked to consider how they would behave in various situations: in the mall, at the beach etc (2/38). They are then asked to form groups of mixed gender, to consider the following questions:

  • Do boys and girls make different choices to each other? Or similar choices?
  • Do girls have to act in a certain way?
  • Do boys have to act in a certain way?

And then (crunch question):

  • What if you don’t feel like a boy or a girl?

In a group of 10 children, 5 of each sex, what if there is only one girl who likes climbing trees? How is she supposed to feel?  And why does a threatening discussion on gender stereotyping have to lead to the even more threatening question of whether some boys should really be girls and vice-versa?

We have moved backwards from ‘girls can do anything’ to ‘if you don’t fit the stereotype, maybe you need a sex change’.

Undermining the Child’s Feelings of Self-worth

The more outrageous aspects of the programme – blatant sexualisation of children, forcing children to reevaluate their gender – are the tip of the iceberg.  The recommended teaching style is intrusive, heavy-handed, patronising or preachy.  The goal of the teaching programme is to invade children’s privacy, to make them expose themselves, and to feel competitive, uncomfortable, embarrassed, self-conscious, threatened, humiliated:

  • ‘Ask students to brainstorm all the things that make them happy’ (1/41)
  • ‘Ask the children how they are feeling today.’ (2/50)  (It is not part of New Zealand culture to ask just anybody how they are feeling – a question which demands a certain level of intimacy.  Otherwise, we ask, ‘how’s it going?’)
  • ‘write down a goal to work on to contribute to family relationships’ (1/59)
  • ‘ask the class to identify good listeners in the classroom’ (1/p. 16)
  • ‘What do you like about your name?’  (Some children do not like their names) 1/(p. 18)
  • ‘Explain that they are going to identify strengths in other members of the class. […] For example, “I think Marama is kind to other people because …”’ (1/p. 22)
  • ‘Create a compliments kete and encourage your students to write notes to their classmates telling them what they do well […] and share with the class at the end of the week.  If you notice that some students aren’t receiving compliments, you can write some for them to include in the kete.’ (1/p. 23).  This serves to reinforce the well-established, popular, outgoing and successful at the expensive of the new, the shy, the less successful socially, academically and sporting-wise.  (A good teacher would apply the alternative strategy of complimenting the more vulnerable members the class.)
  • ‘How am I the same, how am I different? […] Why is it OK to be different’ […] Have the students describe what makes them different. What special quality, skill or interest do they have that is different from their classmates’ (1/p. 24-25)
  • ‘Have students identify a part of their body that they like (2/66)
  • Have the students draw ‘something they are really good at doing‘ (rather than something they like doing) (2/32)
  • Children are asked to fill in a ‘pepeha’ template: ‘A pepeha is a way of introducing ourselves in Māori. A pepeha identifies who we are, where we’re
    from, and where we belong’ (threatening to children who know they’re adopted) (1/p. 21)

Sex Education as a tool for teaching Maori language

The Sexuality Education programme has been designed to serve concurrently as a Maori language teaching resource.  Children are frequently encouraged to use Maori instead of English, for example:

  • ‘You could encourage your students to use te reo Māori as they talk about their whānau’ (1/20)
  • ‘Encourage the use of te reo Māori vocabulary for feelings:
    harikoa – happy
    riri – angry
    hōhā – annoyed [etc]’ (1/48)
  • ‘The students should be encouraged to pronounce the Māori names for body parts’ (1/49)
  • ‘Students could practice te reo Māori phrases to describe how they are feeling’ (2/51)

Maori words and phrases are embedded throughout the text, and not always translated.

‘Discuss values and concepts for caring for others, such as wairua, whānau, hapū, iwi, whanaungatanga.  Encourage the students to consider and share examples of these values and concepts from their own lives, for example, kaumātua caring for their whakapapa, hapū and iwi; sisters and brothers caring for each other, older siblings caring for younger siblings, parents, aunties, and uncles caring for children and so on. […]

‘Harakeke is unique to Aotearoa New Zealand and is one of our oldest plant species. Harakeke has important historical and contemporary uses. Many of the whakataukī and waiata associated with harakeke, such as “Tiakina te pā harakeke” and Hutia te rito o te harakeke, express values that are important to Māori.

‘Talk with your school whānau group, kuia, or kaumātua about their kaupapa (protocols) around gathering and using harakeke. Make links between taking care of the harakeke and taking care of people in our classroom, school, and families.e harakeke and taking care of people in our classroom, school, and families.’

According to the Guide for Principals, Boards of Trustees and Teachers:

‘The majority of Māori students attend English-medium schools. Research indicates that Māori students can thrive when “being Māori” is affirmed by the school, Māori culture is valued, and teachers are supported to challenge their attitudes, skills, and practices in relation to Māori students (Tuuta et al, 2004; Bishop et al, 2003).  The revised guide aims to help schools to plan and deliver sexuality education and affirm the strengths and contributions of Māori students, whānau Māori, and Māori communities. The guide also recognises the diverse needs and strengths of students from Pākehā, Pasifika, Asian, and other communities within New Zealand.’

There are a number of issues associated with this policy:

  • Major questions of curriculum should not be taken lightly – who decided on this strategy?
  • In a case of mandated teaching οf Maori, is this the most effective, most empowering way to teach a second language?
  • A number of New Zealand school children have English as a second language – should they be forced to learn another language, especially in this inefficient manner?
  • Do Maori children want their language to be forever associated with the names for genitalia?  Is this another device to expose children to humiliation and bullying?
  • Is giving special emphasis to the ‘strengths and contributions’ of one minority culture at the expense of other minority cultures and the majority culture conducive to racial harmony?
  • Is the purpose of using Maori vocabulary not to teach the Maori language in a coherent fashion, but to artificially insert Maori vocabulary into New Zealand English?

Some Background

There have been protests about the direction of New Zealand’s sex education programme at least since 2015, but to no avail.  In 2015 a press release was issued by Family First New Zealand relating to concerns about the sex education programme in New Zealand schools. Concerns included:

  • Reports in 2011 revealed that children as young as 12 are being taught about oral sex and told it’s acceptable to play with a girl’s private parts as long as “she’s okay with it”.
  •  14-year-old girls were being taught how to put condoms on plastic penises,
  • One female teacher imitated the noises she made during orgasm to her class of 15-year-olds.
  • A mixed class of boys and girls were asked by the AIDS Foundation if they had masturbated lately and were given condoms and strawberry-flavoured lubricant.
  • The same class were also given a leaflet featuring graphic pictures, terms including “co*k” and “wa*k”, and advice on the best condoms.

Reference was made to a 2013 Family Planning conference in 2013 – one of the sessions was Health Promotion and Sexuality Education with the specific topic of ‘Let’s start at the beginning! Sexuality Education for Year 1-4 students’. This piece of research has proved very hard to locate, but the recommendations of the paper have been adopted.

The plan to sexualise small children goes back to the 1940s, when the Rockefeller Foundation funded paedophile Alfred  Kinsey.

‘In his 1948 book, “Sexual Behavior in the Human Male,” Kinsey naturally claimed proof that children are sexual from birth and unharmed by sex with adults. He even showed his “proof” on five tables timing the alleged “orgasms” from serial sexual abuse and rapes of children as young as 2 months old. (The babies and children screamed, fainted and/or convulsed during the abuse; Kinsey, an S&M bi-homosexual pedophile, called these reactions “orgasms.”)’ (‘Rockefeller’s Legacy Enabling Sexual Revolution’)

NZ Family Planning is affiliated to the the International Planned Parenthood Federation, which was founded by the Rockefeller Foundation.  The Rockefeller Foundation also funds the Tavistock Institute, whose Gender Identity Development Service has been accused of fast-tracking children into changing gender.

The purpose of New Zealand’s sex education programme is to sexualise children, to damage them psychologically, to make them easier prey for child groomers and reduce their chances of building stable relationships and successful families in the future.  It does not merely seek to create tolerance of transgenderism, but to actively direct children towards transgenderism.

It is clear that the intentions of the resource are destructive – just as we do not give a paedophile the benefit of the doubt when s/he is with children, we should not be giving Family Planning any lee-way.  The Family Planning Clinic should play no role in our children’s upbringing.


See also:

30,000 Sign Petition to Stop New Zealander Schools Teaching Gender Diversity

‘Daniel Andrews’ Labor left government in Victoria [Australia] invokes neo-Marxist rhetoric to defend highly questionable school programs that encourage the sexualisation of children. […]

‘Like Safe Schools, the BRR program promotes a radical agenda divorced from its stated program objective. It promotes the sexualisation of children by inculcating techniques and beliefs centred on the premise that children are sexual. Instructors are encouraged to sexualise children, and children to sexualise themselves and their peers. They are asked to view highly sexualised personal ads and write their own, discuss transgenderism and anal sex. Program authors acknowledge that one exercise may cause “disassociation” in children.

‘Sexualising and inducing a dissociative state in children are methods of pedophilic predation. They are not methods of domestic violence prevention.’

The first three volumes of Navigating the Journey, years 1 to 6, are only available by purchase from Family Planning, but Years 7-8 is on-line.