BISHOPS AND POPE MAY BE SOCIALIST BUT MAYBE NOT HALF NZ AFTER ALL

 To comment please open your gmail account or use Facebook, Messenger or Twitter. Scroll down for other comments.

If you, like moi, are still upset by the thought that half the people you pass in the street post-election 2020 are 'useful idiots' who voted Labour, read on. 

If as a Catholic, given the political bias of New Zealand's bishops and priests you feel even more upset that more than half the people in the pews with you on Sunday (if you attend the Novus Ordo) are 'useful idiots', then take fresh heart. Keep praying. 

Because David Farrar of Kiwiblog (who admittedly is right-wing, but well-informed and well-connected right-wing) has turned up some startling stats in New Zealand's 2020 election.

"A friend once said forensic analysis of statistical records can unearth various anomalies that become the pointers to provable fraud. I am going to focus exclusively on statistical anomalies in the New Zealand election that at the very least raise questions and likely point to targeted election fraud.

1 – MMP anomaly. MMP is designed to stop any party getting a majority. But Labour won 65 seats out of 120.

2 – Party vote anomaly. Our election history shows that parties never get 50% of the vote. No party has got over 50% since 1951. Yet Labour got 50% in 2020.

3 – Suspiciously round percentages. Labour got almost exactly 50% of the vote, which is very suspicious. Not 49%. Not 51%, but 50%. And even at one decimal place 50.0%. What are the chances of that happening randomly?

4 – Advance vote differences. In 2017 parties got almost the same share of the vote in advance votes and election day votes. In 2020 parties of the left did 9% better with advance votes. This has never occurred before. Can we rule out that advance votes which were stored out of sight for up to two weeks were interfered with?

5 – Special votes. Where did all these special votes comes from? They weren’t included in election night totals. There were no progressive updates on them, such as we had on election night. Suddenly two weeks later the Electoral Commission just announces new results and Labour suddenly wins three more electorates – and two of them were seats they had never won before

6 – Electorate anomalies. In 2002 National got even fewer party votes than in 2020, yet it still won Northland, Whangarei, Ilam and Nelson. How does it make sense that you lose these four seats in 2020 when you got more party votes?

CONCLUSION. These various statistical patterns raise some serious concerns. The current election results sees a seemingly defeated National Party defy a number of statistical conventions going back many decades over dozens of elections. The various anomalies unearthed by various people point to irregularities in the vote that should be investigated and litigated to the highest level possible to ensure widespread integrity in the voting system."

 

And if you'd like to challenge my assertion that New Zealand's Catholic bishops and priests are of the liberal, Labour stripe, take a look at this interpretation of Bergoglio's latest talkfest, Economy of Francis (opened by arch-abortionist Jeffrey Sachs, as detailed on this blog a couple of days ago) and Bergoglio's latest encyclical, Fratelli Tutti (by some irreverent spirits aka Tutti Frutti): 

 

The “Economy of Francis” Pushes Poverty and Pulverizes Achievement

November 25, 2020 | Julio Loredo 

This drabness is an obvious consequence of the economic failure of communist regimes. However, there is also a philosophical reason behind it. The communist system is designed to encourage laziness.

Those who have lived under communism experienced not only its dictatorial nature but also the drabness of its daily life. A communist regime is marked by poor lighting, non-existent maintenance, dilapidated buildings, meager food, empty shelves, dull clothing, little choice of entertainment, absence of superfluous goods and other somber elements.

 

Just look how laziness is encouraged here in New Zealand, under communism's little sister, socialism, by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern. All those people on the dole, and Ardern is importing 2000 workers to pick our food and veges - but only so long as the stressed growers pay them the living wage for at least 30 hours a week, and (height of absurdity) paying their 14-day accommodation costs in the hope that the demon COVID will not evade testing (as it does). 

Not only are there thousands on the dole who could do the work, but 50,000 potential harvest workers have been legally slaughtered, by abortion. 

Outside of the privileged few of the nomenklatura, no one has the right to seek out greater well-being based on a systematic quantitative and qualitative increase in effort.

An Urgent Appeal to Resist the Betrayal and Ruin of the West, Flower of Christian Civilization

Indeed, the essence of communism is the totalitarian principle of equality: no one can have more than the other since it would produce “alienation.” Thus, the only way for everyone to be equal is for all to be poor: when all are poor, all are equal.

This egalitarianism is the key to understanding Pope Francis’s latest encyclical and the international event “The Economy of Francis” recently held in Rome. The event’s message is that poverty is the means. The goal is egalitarianism.

Leonardo Boff, banned from speaking and teaching by the Vatican in 1985

The notorious liberation theologian, now self-proclaimed “eco-theologian,” Leonardo Boff, was a keynote speaker in “The Economy of Francesco” event. He claims that the gist of the encyclical Fratelli tutti is the world’s transition from the concept of “lord” to that of “brother.” In an essay that anticipated his lecture, Boff affirms that Pope Francis wants to change the current world paradigm—based on “inequalities in every field”—by introducing a new one based on a “universal fraternity,” that is, a “fraternity of equals.”1

Has Bergoglio forgotten that humankind is a 'fraternity' only because we are all children of God?  

According to Boff, this egalitarianism runs so deep that even the laws of nature would need to change and conform. He reasons that the laws of nature reflect the overwhelming power of a governing God, who is, therefore, the source of all “alienation.”

'Alienation.' God, who is Love, and acts only, always and everywhere, in Love, is 'the source of all alienation'? Why is Bergoglio listening to, and applauding, this madman? 

In his egalitarian new world, reality would need to be canceled.

Of course, canceling God outright would be a bit too shocking. These radicals begin by dissolving His transcendental nature, treating God as an energy or a fluid circulating in the universe. Boff claims that the immediate, sensory perception of this energy would generate the “universal fraternity” proposed by Pope Francis.

In another essay, the Brazilian liberation theologian explains that this paradigm change is characterized by the transition from the “dominion of the logos” to that of “eros.”2

In addition, proposing poverty as an ideal for all as a means to equality is a bit too shocking. Thus, they begin by manipulating the concept of consumption in a way that promotes pauperism. This manipulation has long been encouraged by the left, well before Pope Francis.

Nineteenth-century Jesuit Father Luigi Taparelli d’Azeglio explains the proper role of consumption in his treatise, Saggio Teoretico di Diritto Naturale. He states that God created man with faculties and tendencies that human nature tends to satisfy. This tendency constitutes man’s good. It is consubstantial with his nature and leads him towards the purpose for which he was created. Man has a material purpose, which is the conservation and development of his body. He has a spiritual purpose, which is the development of his intellect and soul, which tends towards the absolute Good. Thus Taparelli teaches that “A being will be perfect when he reaches the end set for him by his nature—material and spiritual—with the faculties given to him by nature itself.”

To achieve his dual material and spiritual purpose, man must consume. Certain modern (and even Catholic) schools of thought like to turn consumption into a dirty word. However, temperate consumerism is a conditio sine qua non for man to achieve the purpose for which he has been created. Like everything created by God, what is good for man is also good for the economy.

What does it mean to consume? Most people associate it with eating, which is certainly included in the concept. However, it also embraces many other ways the appetites are satisfied, which result in well-being. The idea of consumption covers the gamut of bodily and spiritual appetites found in human nature.

These goods go beyond the bare necessities of life like eating. They expand into areas that are strictly speaking not essential for living. Thus man can satisfy spiritual goods in theaters, museums, beautiful monuments, libraries and so on. The concept of consumption includes everything indispensable for survival, but also everything that is ample and even superfluous, making life pleasant and elevating minds towards higher things.

A lady consumes when she buys a beautiful enamel miniature portrait to display at home for the joy of her guests. A married couple who goes to the Prima della Scala opera house to enjoy a performance also consumes. A faithful Catholic who assists a beautiful Latin Mass consumes.

This healthy notion of consumption is contrary to a new emerging theological concept, which tends towards socialism. Alas, it is found in recent pontifical documents.

This trend states that when some have a lot and others have little, the former must keep only the essentials and give the excess to the latter. This anti-consumerist bias holds that man must not possess beyond what is essential. Nobody should seek after luxury or even merely an ample amount of goods.

The result of such reasoning is that in a society where no one benefits from working more than others… no one will work harder than others!

Such a society benefits the lazy and works to the detriment of good workers. In this society, abundance disappears first, then the ample things, and finally even necessary goods…

Those who work more must be given due compensation. Thus all society benefits when the most capable, efficient, productive, best sectors are rewarded. Society perishes when it falls into preconceived anti-consumerism, slips into chronic poverty and finally tends to barbarism.

Which is precisely where NZ finds itself now, with food parcels, school lunches, demands for tampons to be delivered free to all the fairer sex (will male-to-female trans people demand them too, after their state-funded, enormously expensive surgery?) and wholesale slaughter of the unborn in our hospitals, practically no questions asked.     

This thesis applies not only to the relations between social classes but also to nations. The so-called consumerist countries like the United States and European nations represent those with excessive wealth. The Third World countries are supposedly those that lack the ample and sometimes even the necessary means to survive. Thus, the rich nations exploit and oppress the poor ones. The thesis incites the exploited nations to launch a counter-offensive against the consumerist world, forcing it to lower its consumption level to harmonize with the poor. Again: when all are poor, all are equal.

This glorification of laziness is proper to socialism and communism, not to Christian civilization and the social doctrine of the Church.