The ANZAC freedom movement, consisting of Australians and New Zealanders who are against the biowarfare attack and psyop of the Covid pandemic, must confront the political reality if they want to make a meaningful impact. Despite their impressive displays of unity during massive rallies in Canberra and Wellington, the movement often splinters into factions and micro-parties during elections, making it difficult to garner more than 2 or 3 percent of the vote. While smaller parties like KAP, UAP, One Nation, the Great Australian Party, and the Federation Party have had some positive effects in and out of parliament, they have yet to achieve significant electoral success.
In the upcoming New Zealand general election on October 14th, however, NZ First, a well-established freedom party, is poised to shake up the political landscape. After being wiped out in the 2020 Ardern Labor landslide, NZ First leader Winston Peters has built a strong team that is now polling over the required 5% to secure seats in Parliament. This has raised concerns among the corporate-dominated “opposition” parties, National and Act, who may be forced into a coalition with NZ First. This would be akin to the Liberal-National Coalition in Australia being forced into coalition with One Nation.
Peters has not shied away from criticizing his establishment enemies, recently taking television host Jack Tame to task for spreading falsehoods and wasting viewers’ time. The ideal scenario for the NZ freedom movement would be for NZ First to gain support from one or two of the ten freedom and alternative parties. However, the chances of these smaller parties gaining over 5% of the vote are not high.
Two notable coalitions within the freedom movement in New Zealand include Freedoms NZ and NZ Loyal. Freedoms NZ, comprised of Outdoors & Freedom Party, Vision NZ, Rock the Vote NZ, and Yes Aotearoa, represents an attempt by church leader Brian Tamaki and lawyer Sue Grey to unite small parties. While these coalitions have impressive lists of candidates, they face competition from other parties such as Democracy NZ, New Zeal, New Conservatives, Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis, the Women’s Party, Leighton Baker Party, New Nation Party, and Animal Justice.
It is frustrating to see these parties, which share conservative, anti-UN, anti-woke, and pro-individual liberty beliefs, competing against each other instead of uniting. NZ First, on the other hand, has a 30-year history in politics and has managed to galvanize a significant portion of the voting public at a time when distrust of mainstream media aligns with distrust of major parties.
This election also marks the increasing influence of alternative media, with platforms like Reality Check Radio (RCR) and Counterspin Media providing a voice for the freedom movement. However, it is unfortunate that some within these media outlets, such as Samantha Edwards of Counterspin, engage in counterproductive attacks on figures like Cam Slater of RCR and Brian Tamaki of Freedoms NZ.
Despite his past alliances with Ardern’s Labor party, Slater believes that NZ First is the best chance for the freedom movement to act as a “handbrake” on the likely National-Act Party government. By holding the balance of power alongside one or two other freedom parties, NZ First could disrupt the entrenched globalist power in New Zealand. Slater dismisses objections to Peters based on his previous coalition with Ardern, arguing that National leader Bill English refused to work with Peters at the time. Peters’ achievements, including blocking the Therapeutics Products Bill and influencing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, demonstrate his commitment to freedom and sovereignty.
Slater highlights the need for patience in the freedom movement, emphasizing that it took major parties like NZ First and Act decades to reach their current positions. This is in contrast to smaller parties formed in recent years that may struggle to gain traction. While some like Edwards of Counterspin may view strategic voting as a “psyop,” it is a practical approach to maximize the movement’s impact.
In conclusion, the ANZAC freedom movement must overcome its fragmented nature if it wants to have a significant political influence. NZ First’s resurgence in New Zealand and its potential to form a coalition with other freedom parties creates an opportunity for change. However, the movement must also contend with internal competition and navigate the influence of alternative media. By learning from established parties and adopting a more strategic approach, the movement can make a lasting impact on the political landscape.