by Geoffrey Churchman

In an article on here in May last year, Carol Sawyer observed that PM Jacinda behaves like an apprentice dictator — which led to intriguing if disconcerting contemplation of what things would be like if she were a full-fledged dictator. 

But one has to get there first and just as importantly, maintain that status, not least against opposition within your own support base.

In his introduction to the book, Frank Dikotter provides a concise summary of what is required: “A dictator must reply on military forces, a secret police, a praetorian guard, spies, informants, interrogators, torturers; but it is best to pretend that coercion is actually consent. A dictator must instil fear in his people, but if he can compel them to acclaim him he will probably survive longer. The paradox of the modern dictator, in short, is that he must maintain the illusion of popular support.”

Accordingly, the first things that must go in a dictatorship are free speech and freedom of the media, followed swiftly by the state apparatus mentioned above.   The version you get from media of what is going on is the government version, only.  That, of course, used to be a lot easier before the Internet, it’s more difficult now, despite the massive censorship that goes on by the IT companies like Google and Facebook, usually at the behest of governments (including Jacinda’s) and powerful non-government vested interests.  Unsuitable literature has to be eradicated.

The book contains 8 case studies: Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler, Mao Zedong, Kim Il-sung of North Korea, Ceausescu of Romania, Mengistu of Ethiopia and Duvalier of Haiti.  The first six of these are well-known, the latter two less so and many will wonder, why not also talk about despots like Franco, Gaddafi, Pol Pot, Castro, Saddam Hussein, Khomeini of Iran and Mugabe of Zimbabwe?

The obvious answer is that it would be a substantial tome if they and a hundred or so others justifying study were included, and the publisher needs to produce an affordable book.  The ones chosen have sufficient variety to compare and contrast methods and results, although an Islamic example (Khomeini) would have been useful.

While the Fascists developed the principle of the Cult of Personality in the 1920s and 1930s, the Communists took it to extremes.  The ‘Great Leader’ was not just the rightful ruler like a King in earlier times, he also had super-human qualities: immense wisdom, intellect, insight and so on: in short the best person there could possibly be for the position; a person to be worshipped and adored.  Anyone who challenged the Dictator had to be silenced, either by imprisonment, or simply a bullet.

The Dictator has to be omnipresent: if not in person, then in the form of portraits on photographs, posters, life-size cutouts, billboards, postage stamps, banknotes and coins.  Giant statues and street names are part of that, although Hitler eschewed the former, he considered statues should be of historical figures only.

Hitler also differed in the way political opponents were treated: he and his followers considered German communists to be potentially useful to them, they just needed ‘re-educating’ and while over 50,000 were arrested in the early days, nearly all were subsequently released. By mid-1934 the first concentration camp, Dachau, had only 4,000 inmates.  The number incarcerated there and elsewhere gradually grew to reach 21,000 in 1939. Jews and other undesirables were ‘encouraged’ to emigrate and many did.

The best circumstances for an aspiring dictator to become one are political turmoil with warring factions and economic depression — people will want a return to order and if not prosperity, then at least an absence of severe privation.

That makes things difficult for an aspiring dictator in an environment like NZ which is relatively prosperous and peaceful; trying to manufacture a crisis, like Jacinda/Andrew Little/Stuart Nash did after last March, is a big ask when there isn’t one.

An interesting question, which the book deals with, is how closely did the dictators follow their core ideology once in power?  The fascists generally did, the communists tended not to; the practical problems they discovered about how things work in reality required some ‘modifications’ promulgated in book form by the leaders, and in communist North Korea, eventually Marx’s writings were added to the banned list.

There are some minor historical points in the book which one can quibble with, but generally it is a good concise guide for politicians of all persuasions who have ambitions of being a dictator!

Published by Bloomsbury, 274 pages including b/w illustrations, hardback.

‘What, the Dear Leader doesn’t like me reading Mein Kampf and I won’t get a gun license because of it?’

Described as an award given to journalists who combine excellence in their work with courage and a refusal to compromise, Tommy Robinson of England was presented with the award for his defense of free speech at the Danish parliament.

He is one of (at least) two journalists the British government threw in jail for exposing unwelcome truths — he was released from prison last September; the other, Julian Assange, is still there.

This one had some distinctive Japanese themes, in particular about 300 bonsai plants.

Here is another excellent article by journalist Karl du Fresne from his blog.  A consistent record of wrong predictions going back a quarter-century, as well as misinformation, selective and doctored data, and conflicts with other established science should cause skepticism and questioning about what is behind Climatism.  “Follow the money”? —Eds

There was a striking synchronicity in the timing of two of the New Year’s first political pronouncements.

On January 13, Education Minister Chris Hipkins announced that parents would in future be required to give written consent for their children to attend religious instruction classes.

This effectively signalled the end of religious teaching in state schools, since parents are far less likely to opt in than to opt out, as they are permitted to do now. RI classes will likely wither on the vine through lack of interest, which is Hipkins’ avowed intention.

The public response was so muted as to be unnoticeable. This may have been because most of the population was still on holiday and focused on other things – a factor the minister very likely took into account in the timing of his announcement.

But the public’s apparent indifference may also be explained by the fact that New Zealand is now an essentially secular society that quite reasonably sees no place in the education system for religious instruction. Only a small minority will lament its abandonment as a lapse into paganism.

But nature abhors a vacuum, and the government had a quasi-religious substitute locked, loaded and ready to fill the gap. January 13 was also the date on which the far more significant news broke that climate change is to become part of the school syllabus for Years 7-10 pupils, which means those aged between 11 and 14.

This was no sudden political impulse. The climate change curriculum (you can read it online) emerged fully formed, with the Greens’ fingerprints all over it. It was trialled at Christchurch’s South New Brighton School – an ideal test bed, since the school’s pupils have been primed with fears that their neighbourhood is at risk from rising sea levels.

Join the dots. Out goes religious instruction and in comes its secular substitute in the form of politically charged dogma surrounding climate change. The two announcements neatly complemented each other, serving as a kind of metaphor for wider political and social changes driven by the “progressive” Left.

And make no mistake: While purporting to be based on solid science, the climate change curriculum is heavily freighted with ideology and represents a world view that’s capable of being every bit as dogmatic and authoritarian as religious indoctrination.

It is quite explicit about its goal, which is to groom a generation of climate change activists. Apparently drawing inspiration from Greta Thunberg, the teaching resource is threaded with statements such as: “Climate change poses a severe threat to children’s most basic rights”.

It’s a piece of work the Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels would have been proud to call his own – one that targets malleable young minds in much the same way as the Hitler Youth did in the 1930s.

Full piece

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says there will be an inquiry into the tragedy at Whakaari/White Island, however, Internal Affairs Minister Tracey Martin says no decisions have been made about what form that will take. —Newshub, 12 December 2019

Time for action

By Roger Childs

The announcement last week that the last two missing people from the White Island eruption tragedy have been confirmed dead, brings the final toll to 20. Many people will be wondering whether anything is happening to investigate the disaster and hold people to account.

The police did not handle matters well in the immediate aftermath, and sent mixed messages to the public. At the first official press conference there was mention of a “criminal investigation” but this upset a number of people especially White Island Tours owned by Ngati Awa. The police them backtracked and the word criminal disappeared from statements. It is to be hoped this was not done because the tour operators are Maori.

Things seem to have gone quiet on what is happening regarding an inquiry/investigation, but surely, as with the Pike River disaster of 2010 which killed 29, there should be a Royal Commission? 

An avoidable tragedy 

The White Island disaster of 9 December 2019 could have been avoided and consequently the tour operators need to be brought to justice. Now that a final death toll of 20 has been confirmed, it is time for the government to act.

A week before the catastrophe a GNS scientist had cautioned that White Island was entering a period where eruptive activity is more likely than normal. On a scale of five the danger level went up from 1 to 2, however, the operators say that was still inside their safety guidelines. Nevertheless, that increase put the danger up from 20% to 40% — surely too high to risk lives in a potentially explosive and lethal situation? 

There are many questions to be answered and a key one is: were the operators – Ngati Awa — just too hungry for the big bucks the tourists were prepared to part with for experience of getting close to an active volcano? The luxury liner, Ovation of the Seas, was only in port for the day, so the opportunity for companies to take visitors out to White Island was seemingly to good to miss.

Another important question for the investigation is who made the decision? In hindsight it was a disastrous choice and one wonders if the boat operators on approaching the volcano noticed any telltale signs of danger in the colour of the water, volcanic noise and the level of steam activity on the island? 

The public both here and in Australia need answers as to why 20 people died as a consequence of risks not being heeded and poor decision making.

On 27 January 1945 the Soviet Red Army liberated the sites of Auschwitz, about 70 km south-west of Krakow, the largest of the several purpose-built extermination camps established by Nazi Germany during World War II in Poland to dispose of those that the Nazi leaders considered racially unsuitable for their Reich, primarily Jews.  Unlike the other camps, Auschwitz was left substantially intact, the Nazis only blew up the gas chambers and crematoria before they retreated.  Precise records of the number who perished there aren’t available, but it was in the one to one-and-a-half million range.

In 2005 your editors visited the two main sites — Ausschwitz 1 — the Stammlager, built as a standard concentration camp for political prisoners in 1940, and Auschwitz 2, Birkenau — the mass extermination complex, about 2 km away.  There was also a slave labour camp, Auschwitz 3, Monowitz and many sub-camps.

It is a somber and depressing experience, a stark reminder to where racism can ultimately lead if unchallenged.

As has been said on here before, while people’s attitudes, beliefs and behaviour can be legitimately challenged, they should not be attacked, denigrated and vilified for the things they are not responsible for — ethnic origin, national origin, skin colour/physical features.

The weekend’s garden trail took place in warm and dry, but mostly cloudy conditions.  Your editors visited all 12 and as always were impressed with the dedication and skill revealed.   Rather than post a summary of all in one go, we’ll spread them over a couple of weeks, starting with the one closest to us.