On 14 December 2022 German police arrested 25 people over what was called the “Reichsburger plot”. Two days later The Observer published an article by Philip Oltermann posing the question of whether this was a far-right “…sinister plan to overthrow the German state or just a rag-tag revolution?”

Although a long way away from our shores, this bizarre event has implications for New Zealand which should not be ignored. It got me to thinking about the attempted coups by electorally defeated presidents in the United States and Brazil.

This then led on to considering the occupation of Parliament grounds in early 2022 and a recent sighting in a tiny community about seven km away from my home on the Kāpiti Coast.

In the midst of writing this all up, came the unexpected resignation of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern last week. Then union leader Robert Reid popped up with a pertinent observation. But first, Germany.

German coup-plotters
Along with 25 other German co-conspirators, one Maximilian Eder was arrested. They were accused of planning to overthrow the state by violent means and install a shadow government headed by a minor German aristocrat.

Few of these coup plotters were well-known public figures. But they included some with a military background, doctors, judges, gourmet chefs and opera singers, a Lower Saxony civil servant at the criminal police office, and “…several of the ragtag bunch of wannabe revolutionaries seemed to have been radicalised in the comfortably well-off, respectable centre of society.”

Eder was a genuine commander of one of Germany’s armoured infantry battalions between 1998 and 2000. He had served in Kosovo and Afghanistan and was a founding member of Germany’s special forces command.

What further rattled Germany’s cage was the inclusion of a former member of the federal parliament from the far-right AfD party. She had knowledge of security arrangements and special access privileges to the complex of parliamentary buildings in the heart of Berlin.

Eccentrics or serious threat?
The plotters’ potential targets included seven members of Germany’s Parliament, including the Foreign Minister, conservative opposition, and two leaders of the governing Social Democrat party.

German police found weapons in 50 of the 150 properties linked to the co-conspirators (there may have been other weapons stashed away elsewhere). This was an insufficient arsenal to overthrow the government of a country with a population of 83 million. However, it was enough to carry out a targeted terror attack killing and maiming many.

The question remains unanswered as to whether these conspirators really did seriously threaten German democracy as it presently exists or were they “…just a  bunch of eccentrics with a hyperactive imagination…”

One of  the difficulties in making this call is that previously the growth of the German far-right had been under-estimated. The relatively recent electoral success of the AfD party was unexpected. Oltermann concluded his interesting article by citing a German terrorism expert who noted that while he didn’t believe the coup-plotters would have overthrown the government, the question that remained was how much damage they would have caused in trying to.

Washington DC and Brasilia
While we await a fuller analysis of the extent to which these coup-plotters were a threat to German democracy, we know enough to make some conclusions, especially in an international context.

The German coup-plotters may have included eccentrics. But their defining characteristic was that they were from that part of the extreme far-right of politics which was prepared to use violence to achieve their objectives.

There are similarities with two actual attempted coups seeking to overturn election results and putting back into power two far-right presidents who were defeated at the polls. These occurred in the respective capitals of the United States (Washington) in January 2001 and Brazil (Brasilia) two years later.

These attempts to put Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro back in power were both far-right led and involved short violent destructive occupations of their parliaments. The major difference was significant high-level military involvement in the attempted Brazilian coup.

Far-right levering off anti-vaccination protests
In February-March 2022 there was an anti-vaccination occupation of New Zealand’s Parliament Grounds. Last February I published a Political Bytes blog on the far-right agenda  in this occupation.

My essential point was that the susceptibility, to say the least, of many of these protesters was fertile territory for far-right leaders to exploit, influence and shape its more violent direction. This was well-highlighted in the excellent Fire & Fury podcast documentary published by Stuff.

Fire & Fury: Who’s driving a violent, misinformed New Zealand – and why?      Video: Stuff

The documentary has come under some peculiar criticism from those who believe it should have given similar or greater blame for the actions of Parliament’s Speaker in trying to dissuade the occupiers from continuing the protest.

However, aside from overstating his impact, this criticism misses the whole point of the documentary. Its focus was on what was behind the occupation and related protests, including the significant far-right influence and support.

One of the biggest beneficiaries of these protests was the far-right Counterspin Media online outlet. It reported the occupation virtually non-stop, quickly becoming the main source of news for the occupiers and their supporters.

Run by local far-right leaders, Counterspin Media relies on a far-right media outlet in the United States for support (Trump confidant Steve Bannon is in its central leadership). From a very small base its viewing numbers have rocketed upwards.

The occupation also accelerated the use of two new terms to designate some people within the far-right – “sovereign citizens” and “sheriffs”. The former believe they are not bound by laws unless they personally consent to them. They carry out violence although this is largely verbal.

The latter, sheriffs, believe they can take the law into their own hands, including apprehending, violence and even execution. In other words, those holding either designation are vigilantes.

Now to Peka Peka
This leads on to the peacefully seaside locality Peka Peka on the Kāpiti Coast of the lower North Island with a population of around 700. As it happens, it is seven km from where I live. I frequently cycle through it and walk dogs on its beautiful beach.

Its name is derived from a native New Zealand bat, the Pekapeka, which represents the interwoven nature of the spirit world and the world of the living — the seen and the unseen.

But following the end of the occupation of Parliament Grounds a small group of occupiers moved on to the land of a supportive local farmer. While numbers have diminished there are still there.

While driving past earlier this month I noticed a conspicuous vehicle parked outside on the road as photographs I took show. The vehicle belongs to Counterspin Media.

The issue at hand was the far-right’s support for the parents of a critically ill baby who tried to deny him access to a life-saving blood transfusion because overwhelmingly donors are vaccinated. They and Counterspin Media have also denied the right of their baby to privacy by breaching a court order for name suppression. [The matter was resolved by the court overruling the parents which enabled a successful transfusion that saved the baby’s life.]

What was particularly relevant to this blog, however, was the fact that the far-right Counterspin Media was present visiting the small group who among them are believed to include sovereign citizens and a sheriff or two.

It is a very long bow to suggest that the occupation of Parliament Grounds was responsible for Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s dramatic resignation last week. Nevertheless its ferocity (including intimidation and threats of execution) and duration rattled her government’s cage and confidence.

Many are attributing Arden’s resignation to the volume and viciousness of the personal attacks on her, much of which was misogynous. They are right to make this conclusion but it is much deeper than this. To begin with, had her government been more successful in policy development and implementation or been doing better in the polls, she was less likely to have resigned.

Former Prime Minister Helen Clark (1999-2008) also came under vicious misogynous attacks but, as she has acknowledged, the attacks on Ardern far exceed those on her. What is the difference? First, social media’s influence in Clark’s time was much less than Ardern’s.

Second, the far-right was politically much less influential than now. We now have far-right governments in countries such as Italy, Poland, Hungary and India. There are strong far-right movements threatening countries like France and Spain. Both the United States and Brazil have had single term far-right presidents.

Germany had a follow-up from the December coup-plotters this week with five more far-right activists arrested for a second alleged coup plot, including kidnapping the health minister, to overthrow the government which The Guardian reported on January 23.

In New Zealand, the far-right’s levering off the anti-vaccination protests has led to an environment of threats through a sense of deluded entitlement, as Stuff reported on January 20, of a magnitude far greater than Clark and her government ever experienced.

Union leader Robert Reid was as close to getting it right as one can get in a Facebook post on January 20. He observed that, on the one hand, unlike the United States and Brazil, New Zealand was able to keep right-wing and fascist mobs from storming their parliaments.

However, on the other hand, in New Zealand they “…scored their first victory of bringing down the political leader of the country. Not a good feeling.”

I agree with Reid but would make the qualification that these far-right influenced and led “mobs” significantly contributed to bringing down a political leader.

Sociopaths and psychopaths
Soon after commencing working for the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists over three decades ago, I asked a leading psychiatrist, Dr Allen Fraser, what was the difference between sociopaths and psychopaths (Dr Fraser was the union’s first elected vice-president and second president).

His response, which I have never forgotten, was to repeat what he advised medical students and doctors-in-training: Sociopaths believe in castles in the sky; psychopaths live in castles in the sky

In other words, while Helen Clark was threatened by sociopaths, Jacinda Ardern was threatened by psychopaths. The transition from the former to the latter was the increasing influence of the far-right.

Robert Reid is right; it is not a good feeling. He is a master of the understatement.

Ian Powell is a progressive health, labour market and political “no-frills” forensic commentator in New Zealand. A former senior doctors union leader for more than 30 years, he blogs at Second Opinion and Political Bytes, where this article was first published. Republished with the author’s permission.

New Zealand has designated US groups the Proud Boys and The Base as terrorist entities.

Set down in the government’s official journal of record — the Gazette — last Monday, 20 June, it was published publicly a week later but with no wider dissemination.

The move — authorised by Police Commissioner Andrew Coster and signed off by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern — makes anyone with property or financial dealings related to The Base and the Proud Boys liable for prosecution and up to seven years imprisonment under the Terrorism Suppression Act.

• READ MORE: Other US terrorism reports

The American Proud Boys is a US neo-fascist group with members and leadership who have been federally indicted over the 6 January 2021 riots at the US Capitol.

The Base is a paramilitary white nationalist hate group active in the US and Canada, with reports of training cells in Europe, South Africa and Australia.

Commissioner Coster said in practice the designation would mean funding, supporting, or organising with those groups in New Zealand became a criminal offence.

“Those groups are respectively neo-Nazi, neo-fascist, white supremacist groups who have been responsible for some key unlawful events overseas, and so police supported the designation,” he said.

Met terrorist definition
They met the definition of terrorist groups, he said, and the designation had gone through a rigorous analytical process with input from several agencies, which generally took several weeks.

“It’s ultimately a matter for each jurisdiction to decide, but I would note that these groups have been designated in Australia and obviously they’re one of our closest partners in assessing the terrorism threat.”

He said such designations were not done lightly, but he was not aware of any suggestion it was a current problem domestically.

“It’s a preventative, deterrent mechanism for those groups not to operate here.”

Researcher into the far-right Byron Clark said most other groups on the list were Islamic terrorist groups, and the designation showed New Zealand was taking far-right terrorism seriously.

“It’s aligned I guess with what intelligence agencies are saying, that this is the biggest risk now is far-right terrorism — it’s a higher likelihood of a far-right terrorist attack than an Islamic terrorist attack in the current climate.”

It would likely mean those linked to the groups would be under more scrutiny from law enforcement and journalists, he said. With the Christchurch mosque attacker having come from Australia, there was still some complacency over the far-right in New Zealand.

‘Shared the ideology’
“There are some small groups here who share a lot of the ideology of the Christchurch shooter and I think perhaps we’re still not paying enough attention to those.”

Te Pūnaha Matatini’s The Disinformation Project researcher Dr Sanjana Hattotuwa said anti-vaccination proponents were deeply sceptical of government, had moved on to other causes, and were more often coming in contact with far-right ideologies.

“So within that constellation that is informed by mis- and disinformation predominantly, what we find are belief systems, structures, attitudes and perceptions linked to white supremacist discourse and ideologies coming in and taking root here,” he said.

“It’s no longer something you can say are imported harms because there are people within the country who are producing and mirroring that kind of discourse as well.”

He said the Disinformation Project had seen an increase in transnational funding for ideological groups in Aotearoa, which the designation could capture.

“One would hope … that the designation timing creates friction around the growth of these entities,” he said.

Fight Against Conspiracy Theories (FACT) Aotearoa spokesperson Stephen Judd said it would also send a message to people considering setting up local branches or equivalents of those groups.

‘Legitimate concerns’
“There are legitimate concerns about groups along the lines of the Proud Boys or The Base forming and operating here … you can see the same ideologies and some of the same conspiracy theories circulating online and in real life between people here.”

He said the ease of online communication meant such groups could form, organise and recruit much more easily than ever before, and develop their ideas and messages more easily.

Massey University Centre for Defence and Security Studies director Dr William Hoverd said New Zealand was following its partners: Both Australia and Canada had banned the two groups, and the US was starting to focus more on right-wing extremism.

“They are decentralised right-wing extremist groups with internet platforms who are seeking to influence others, and whilst there’s absolutely no evidence that I have seen of them operating here, that’s not to say that the right wing isn’t operating here in New Zealand.”

The designation automatically expires on 20 June 2025, unless extended or revoked.

Justification for the move
Dr Hoverd said the fact the groups were advocating armed violence, and had the capability to do it, was where the state became particularly interested in such groups.

“We’ve got groups in New Zealand and individuals in New Zealand who do have these types of profiles, but they aren’t violent – so how do we prevent that type of violence happening here.

“The big threat .. in terms of terrorism is lone actors, and decentralised groups like The Base, through the internet, could potentially radicalise someone here.”

Documents setting out the evidence and reasoning behind the designation — called a Statement of Case — had not been publicly available until after media reporting of the move.

Using referenced sources, they said the Proud Boys used a tactic called crypto-fascism — disguising their extremism to appeal to mainstream people and avoid attention from authorities — and constructed the idea of an antifa (anti-fascist) organisation as a strawman to rally self-described patriots.

Since its beginnings in 2016, the group had deliberately used violence — though to date, not typically deadly — against ideological opponents, and celebrated members who succeeded in doing so, the documents said.

“The APB have an established history of using street rallies and social media to both intimidate perceived opponents and recruit young men via the demonstration of violence.”

Detailed account
They also gave a detailed account of the Proud Boys’ involvement in the Capitol riots.

The Base was identified as a survivalist paramilitary group planning for and intending to bring about the collapse of the US government and a “race war” in the country, leading to a day of the mass execution of people of colour and political opponents.

It had achieved limited success in expanding to other countries including Australia, by targeting impressionable teenagers and socially isolated individuals lacking a sense of community, uniting a disparate body of largely online activists into a network of like-minded individuals.

“A key goal of TB is to train a cadre of extremists capable of accelerationist violence,” the documents said.

The group’s St Petersburg-based leader Rinaldo Nazzaro guided cells of three or four individuals to regularly meet and train, including at so-called “hate camps” — with at least some members having military training or skill in small arms, they said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

As the French Pacific is gearing up for Sunday’s first round of the French presidential election, incumbent President Emmanuel Macron appears to be enjoying the most support among the 14 candidates.

Committees set up in support of Macron have been campaigning with the backing of those in power in New Caledonia and French Polynesia.

However, pro-independence parties have remained aloof, either declining to express a preference for any of the candidates or suggesting the election be ignored altogether.

• READ MORE:  French election: Minority youth voice frustrations ahead of vote
• New Caledonia’s Palika party wants people to vote Left in Sunday’s first French election
• Other French presidential election reports

However, pro-independence Palika has called on people to vote for “any Left politician” in the first round on Sunday.

Candidates include Marine Le Pen of the National Rally, who is running for a third time, Valerie Pecresse of the Republicans and Jean-Luc Melenchon, who heads the left-wing La France Insoumise movement.

In the 2017 election, Macron defeated Le Pen nationwide, winning 66 percent of the votes.

In Wallis and Futuna, his victory was even more decisive as he won almost 80 percent of the vote.

Smallest vote in New Caledonia
In French Polynesia, Macron won 58 percent, while in New Caledonia, his score was 52 percent.

With 48 percent voting for Le Pen, her score in New Caledonia was her best result of any French overseas territory.

In the Noumea area, which wants close links with Paris, she won more votes than Macron

Anti-independence side backs Macron
In the run-up to this year’s election, Noumea-based anti-independence politicians set up a Macron re-election committee, headed by Mayor Sonia Lagarde.

The committee was formed in December, weeks before Macron confirmed that he would stand for a second term, and just days after 96 percent voted against independence from France in a referendum boycotted by the pro-independence camp.

Lagarde hailed Macron’s support for New Caledonia as flawless, saying the referendum decision to stay with France was due to his commitment.

France’s fearful election. Video: Al Jazeera’s People and Power

After meeting Macron in Paris in January, the president of New Caledonia’s Southern Province, Sonia Backes, said she would also support him, praising his engagement as a key factor in winning the referendum.

In an interview this week, Backes said that in 2017 she abstained because she refused to vote for either Le Pen or Macron.

She said what had turned her off Macron was his declaration in Algeria, when he said colonialism was a crime against humanity.

Macron’s letters to Pacific territories
In recent weeks, Macron delivered open letters tailored to French overseas territories and outlining his achievements and policies.

He told New Caledonia that “France, the powerhouse of the Indo-Pacific, is destined to stay.

“Investments mean that the armies have been able to commit since 2017 and from which the armed forces in New Caledonia will benefit in the coming months.

“I want to accelerate this and complement it with new regional partnerships at the economic, scientific, academic and cultural levels.”

The make-up of the restricted electoral rolls in New Caledonia is enshrined in the French constitution but calls for change persist now that the anti-independence camp won the final referendum.

This is alarming indigenous Kanaks who still want to achieve their promised decolonisation.

“There will be no shortage of difficult topics — everyone is thinking about the thorny issue of the electorate. We all know the terms: Caledonian citizenship can and should be open to those who live it.

Citizenship of tomorrow?
“But who is a Caledonian? How should this citizenship of tomorrow work?,” he asked.

The left-wing candidate Melenchon has urged caution in New Caledonia, saying the outcome of last year’s referendum was a catastrophe.

He said the French government destroyed the consensus process of the accord by imposing last December’s referendum date and triggering a huge abstention by the pro-independence side.

Melenchon suggested keeping the 1998 Noumea Accord going for another decade.

The Republicans’ Valerie Pecresse said that if elected she would make New Caledonia a policy priority.

She said she would want accelerated discussions with New Caledonia’s leaders to prepare a roadmap on the territory’s future status within the French republic by December.

This would include revisiting the electoral rolls.

‘Respect, traditions and modernity’
Le Pen’s support committee in Noumea said its “programme is called ‘respect, traditions and modernity’. It is to give a voice to the people, to democracy, which is sorely lacking today.

“To get out of this incessant authoritarianism by repealing vaccine pass regulations, which are a major attack on freedom.”

Running for the top job for a third time, Le Pen said she wanted to create a full-time overseas ministry and fight against the high cost of living while developing the blue economy.

In his letter to French Polynesia, Macron again stated his geopolitical views.

“The Indo-Pacific strategy I wanted for France is a major step in our common history. Through you, France is present and alive in the Pacific,” he wrote.

“At the strategic level, the continuous increase in the resources of our armies will provide for this,” adding that “we must accentuate this military effort and, moreover, accompany it with new co-operation in the region.”

French Pacific nuclear legacy lingers
The compensation for victims of France’s nuclear weapons tests has continued to be a contentious issue in the relationship between Paris and Papeete.

Twenty-five years after the last test and more than a decade after France for the first time conceded that radiation had an impact on human health, Macron assured French Polynesians that France would try to find all those affected by the blasts.

“We are going to look for the victims and their beneficiaries. We will accompany them towards compensation. The road will still be long but there is a commitment which is irreversible,” he wrote.

“Because I want truth and transparency with you,” he added.

The ruling Tapura Huiraatira is officially supporting Macron, although in 2017 he was only the party’s third choice.

Then it backed the Republicans’ Alain Juppe in the primaries and after his elimination, the party supported Francois Fillon, who after also being eliminated, called for his support to go to Macron.

The Republicans’ Pecresse, who in Tahiti has the endorsement of veteran leader Gaston Flosse, promised to launch a major investigation in French Polynesia on nuclear weapons tests to reassess the compensation allocations.

She said if elected she would want to create an Overseas Bank, which would include several of the existing institutions, such as the current Development Bank.

Nuclear test legacy
Le Pen also addressed the nuclear test legacy, saying she would recognise the effects of the nuclear fallout and pay compensation for test victims.

She added that she would reimburse the expenses incurred by the CPS welfare agency.

Since 1995 the CPS has paid out US$800 million to treat a total of 10,000 people suffering from any of the 23 cancers recognised by law as being the result of radiation.

However, Paris has so far rejected calls to bear these costs.

The pro-independence Tavini Huiraatira party suggested to its supporters to abstain from voting.

Its leader Oscar Temaru said voters were free to choose but he said none of the candidates represented French Polynesia’s interests.

He said his party’s agreement with the Socialist Party of François Hollande had turned out to be a bad adventure because once in power the French side did not deliver on its promises.

The two top candidates will contest a run-off election two weeks later, with the winner becoming the President of France for five years.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The anti-mandate protests in New Zealand’s capital Wellington and around the country have also contained a strong anti-media sentiment with reporters abused and threatened.

But one far-right activist has gone a step further and as part of a targeted attack on the media has published a graphic image of public executions of Nazi war criminals.

The disturbing image shows a dozen Nazi war criminals being hanged following World War II.

• READ MORE: Covid-19: Fed up Northland nurse defaces anti-vax billboard
• Parliament covid-19 anti-mandate protest wakes up for day 11
• Copycat media abuse from ragtag bag of protesters — Dr Gavin Ellis
• Other NZ covid outbreak reports

It has become a popular meme with the online far-right ecosphere, where it is often accompanied by a caption: “Photograph of Hangings at Nuremberg, Germany. Members of the Media, who lied and misled the German People were executed, right along with Medical Doctors and Nurses who participated in medical experiments using living people as guinea pigs”.

Disinformation Project lead Dr Kate Hannah said the poster’s intention was clear.

“It’s incredibly unsubtle. Even if all they do is march outside… it is still incredibly disturbing, it is still incredibly upsetting to have their work [media and health workers] targeted in such a manner.”

But in a twist of irony — considering the fake news such far-right groups claimed to despise — only one member of the media was actually executed following the war; high-ranking Nazi politician Julius Streicher, publisher of the far-right Der Stürmer tabloid.

And the photo in question was not even taken in Nuremberg — instead it shows executions in Kiev.

‘Hideous media language’
But, errors aside, Dr Hannah said the far-right’s seizing of ill-feeling against the media was cause for concern.

“There has been a concerted effort in these spaces over the last 18 months to frame mainstream media as agents of the state, as the ‘lying press’ which is obviously from lügenpresse which is Nazi terminology for left-wing press,” she said.

“There’s been some hideous language used around journalists — the use of the [word] ‘presstitute’ to describe female journalists.

“So this is very much an attempt to shift the place where people get their information from, from being say the mainstream media to fringe media outlets.”

The ultimate goal of far-right activists was destabilising democracy, Dr Hannah said.

Media commentator Dr Gavin Ellis said there had been a concerted effort to target the foundations of democracy — including freedom of the press.

It was an orchestrated rather than an organised movement, Dr Ellis said, with some of those pulling the strings doing so from a distance.

“Some of these people won’t even be at the protest – their orchestration is behind the scenes. But they are intent on undermining the institutions of democratic government,” he said.

Most protesters not violent
Most protesters were not violent and were simply frustrated with the ongoing effects of the pandemic on their lives.

But they were being harnessed by far more nefarious actors, and their anger at the media was a case of shooting the messenger, he said.

“That’s a large part of it — that reality flies in the face of what they stand for. So they forge their own alternate reality and anything that doesn’t match that worldview that they might have is seen as not only wrong, but inherently malevolent — that the truth is something that must not be tolerated,” Dr Ellis said.

While the anger directed at the media was unprecedented in New Zealand, he did not believe it was based on any genuine criticism of the current health or quality of the industry.

However, he feared such tactics could have a chilling effect on the media and journalists, and reporters must continue to do their work in the face of such intimidation.

The other aspect of using such imagery was how offensive it was to victims of Nazi persecution.

Disgusted by poster
Holocaust Centre of New Zealand chair Deborah Hart said she was disgusted by the poster.

There was no comparison of the rollout of a potentially life-saving vaccine by the New Zealand government to the industrial murder of six millions Jews and millions of others by the Nazis, Hart said.

“The Nuremberg trials where military tribunals after World War II for senior Nazis who participated in the Holocaust. To compare that to the vaccine mandates is ridiculous,” she said.

“The intention of these two things was different; the scale was different; the policies were different; and the outcomes were profoundly different.”

It is also worth noting that where possible Hitler withheld vaccines from populations the Nazis persecuted.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

PART 1: Divide and rule with Māori and Pacific communities

White Supremacy (WS) has proliferated during covid-19 lockdowns in Aotearoa from 17 August 2021. Supremacist activism, aspirations, attitudes, behaviours, beliefs, concepts, ideas, languages, media output, organising praxes, political slogans, political thought, and political party policies have all flourished as people protested against government covid restrictions and lockdowns.

In this writing, I distinguish between anti-vaccination and freedom protesters who are not advocating for WS and those who are part of anti-lockdown protests and anti-vaccination organising who do support white supremacy.

Similarly, the focus of this commentary is not to examine conspiracy theories. Moreover, I am not seeking to examine the work of Māori or Pacific people engaged in anti-vaccination and freedom from lockdown protests.

• READ MORE: Covid disinformation and extremism are on the rise in New Zealand. What are the risks of it turning violent?
• The protest that revealed a new, ugly, dangerous side to our country
• Ardern loses the gloss as New Zealanders protest about covid restrictions
• Other reports on covid disinformation

WS works best when it can divide and rule Māori and Pacific communities. My focus in this article is on Pakeha involvement in WS as it evolves in contemporary Aotearoa.

This article seeks to offer ways to understand the contemporary emergence of the supremacy phenomenon. This article will offer a thumbnail sketch outline of some of the features of supremacy in an Aotearoa context.

I assume colonial and historical forms of WS already existent in Aotearoa are coalescing and are being energised by contemporary, hybrid variations of supremacy emerging from the US, Europe, Australia, and other countries.

Supremacists in Aotearoa are clearly drawing upon WS activism, aesthetics, hostility, media output, messaging, modes of organising, and political thought from overseas.

White supremacy in Aotearoa
I attempt to group these variegated expressions of white supremacy in this article. I seek to outline this phenomenon as a composite of ideas, concepts, languages, beliefs, ideologies, attitudes, activisms, praxes, aspirations, narratives, and political positions — all situated in a time, space, and condition in Aotearoa.

I feel that WS must also be understood as embodying modes of being, living, and knowing operational in community, family, political, and social life. WS is occurring at multiple levels of our communities.

Further, I believe people must be able to analyse WS; group supremacist phenomena, and assess it vis-à-vis a framework such as a spectrum. Further, we must invite African, Asian, Māori, Pacific, and Pakeha communities to consider WS from within values specific to each cultural group.

Most importantly, we must invite community groups to question WS from their many different community standing places. I hope this modest work offers communities a framework for assessing WS from within their own flax roots community perspectives.

We need more work considering these issues from the perspectives of women, LGBTG, working class, and disabled sectors of the wider community also.

The online Merriam Webster Dictionary defines WS in two ways. Firstly, WS is defined at its most basic as “the belief that the white race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over people of other races”.

In this definition, WS is defined as a component of an attitudinal sphere.

Secondly, the Merriam Webster Dictionary defines WS as “the social, economic, and political systems that collectively enable white people to maintain power over people of other races”.

Structural and societal level
This shifts discussion of WS from an individual attitudinal sphere to a structural and societal level. I deploy both these definitions of white supremacy in this article — and expand upon the definition in regards to specific concerns such as activism, language, and the media.

I argue white supremacy is one component of a wider colonial settler project in Aotearoa. Alicia Cox at Oxford Bibliographies defines Settler Colonialism as “an ongoing system of power that perpetuates genocide and repression of indigenous peoples… normalises continuous settler occupation… exploiting lands and resources to which indigenous people have genealogical relationships…includes interlocking forms of oppression such as racism, white supremacy, heteropatriarchy, and capitalism”.

In sum, I will argue that all forms of WS outlined in this article contribute to Settler Colonialism in Aotearoa.

I have examined commentary, comments, interviews, and video footage of well-known Pakeha WS activists and media pundits in Aotearoa. I have examined Facebook, Twitter, Tiktok, and internet commentary from flax roots people. I considered fringe parliamentary political parties’ policies of those positioning themselves for entry into mainstream politics.

I viewed video footage of freedom and anti-vax protests around the country. I looked at internet sites of groups organising anti-lockdown protests around Aotearoa. I researched QAnon, the ALT-Right, and white supremacist organisations overseas. Similarly, I read work on concepts, language, and political thought that underpins some of these movements.

I see WS as a formation existing along a spectrum for the transformation of specific sectional interests; for those seeking to use direct action to challenge the government; for those seeking representation in Parliament, and finally for people seeking a potential white ethno-state.

We should be sensitive to the aspirations, attitudes, beliefs, concepts, ideas, use of language, and ideals concerning economic, social, and political thought underpinning WS in the list introduced below.

Expressions of WS
When examining sources I found expressions of WS regarding:

(1) contempt for Te Tiriti,
(2) rejection of power sharing between Pakeha and Māori as articulated in Te Tiriti,
(3) appropriation of He Whakaputanga alongside a rejection of Te Tiriti,
(4) antagonism towards the historical experience of Māori,
(5) privileging of a mythology of “peaceful” or “just” race relations in Aotearoa — thereby erasing histories of racism suffered by Africans, Asians, Māori, or Pacific communities in Aotearoa,
(6) political policies of different fringe parties antagonistic to “race”-based privileges for Māori in health, in law, or at the United Nations,
(7) vilification of the NZ Labour as “socialistic”,
(8) attacks on Māori activist, community, political, or scholarly leaders,
(9) assumptions WS is on same side as “ordinary” Māori, Pacific, Asian, African, or Pakeha communities,
(10) attacks on independent university based critical scholarship,
(11) abuse of Māori language users,
(12) championing of bellicose forms of Pentecostal Christianity as the only legitimate faith for Aotearoa,
(13) attacks on the United Nations and governments as cabals of evil,
(14) contempt for migrants rights,
(15) deployment of language hijacked from liberation struggles,
(16) deployment of narratives of WS,
(17) refusal to debate honestly,
(18) antagonism and personal attacks against those considered enemies of WS using different media,
(19) articulation of action programmes,
(20) modes of praxis,
(21) introduction of Alt Right and QAnon concepts, language use, and values, and
(22) lauding of former US President Donald Trump, Republicans, and Q.

I deploy one example of the techniques Pakeha WS proponents use to articulate their programme re language hijacked from liberation struggles. Pakeha WS adherents have sought to appropriate, disrupt, interrupt, colonise, and then occupy the languages of Māori and African-American liberation — and, implicitly, the epistemologies underpinning these languages.

For example, Pakeha WS figures have called acclaimed Māori community leader Hone Harawira a “sell out”, a “house negro”, and a “traitor” for his community work for Māori families during covid-19 lockdowns in Northland in 2021.

Here, WS folk have attempted to colonise the Black Liberation language of Malcolm X. This “house negro” language was deployed by Malcolm X in a specific time, place, and condition- as Manning Marable articulates in his controversial history, Malcolm X: A Life of Reinvention. Māori activists deployed this language in debates with their more conservative elders in years gone by.

But Pakeha WS advocates deploying this language are no friends of Malcolm or the Black Liberation struggle — these Pakeha are bitter opponents of the BLM movement. Similarly, these Pakeha are no friends of Māori liberation struggles such as the one at Ihumatao.

The whakapapa of struggle
WS adherents are trying to colonise, disrupt, and occupy this language so as to appropriate it to better undermine the links connecting Hone to his own people. But Hone is conjoined to his people by whakapapa and the whakapapa of struggle.

Moreover, who would Malcolm X stand with? WS representatives attacking indigenous people — or an indigenous Māori brother, like Hone Harawira?

I invite Asian, African, Māori, Pacific, and Pakeha communities standing in their own cultures, community values, experiences, and histories to consider these questions.

Does WS in its various forms as outlined in brief above:

(1) Resonate with your community values?
(2) Articulate your vision of the country?
(3) Uphold the mana of the diverse sections of each of your communities?
(4) Sympathise with your communal experiences or histories?
(5) Align with your notions of community service?
(6) Voice your community needs?
(7) Articulate your community aspirations for your young people, women, or your elders?
(8) Support your concerns in the parliamentary party sphere?
(9) Offer a valid means to find a way out of covid-19 in a time of great uncertainty?
(10) Make Aotearoa/New Zealand a safer place for your community?
(11) Make Aotearoa/New Zealand a more tolerant society?
(12) Uphold the mana of the first people of this land, the Māori people?
(13) Offer a means to advance the concerns of all communities in Aotearoa?
(14) Does settler colonialism offer a positive vision for a united and prosperous Aotearoa/ New Zealand in the future?

Only communities in Aotearoa have the answers to these questions. I hope the definitions, analysis, articulation of a spectrum, and the final questions provide an accessible and safe framework for communities to assess, critically engage, and strategise concerning this contemporary phenomena known as WS.

Tony Fala is an activist, researcher, and volunteer for a small charitable trust engaged in food rescue and distribution to communities in South Auckland. He acknowledges his own racism in years gone by — something he had to overcome. Fala wishes to acknowledge the anti-racist contributions of Joe Carolan, Tina Ngata, Rawiri Taonui, and Joe Trinder — and all other activists, journalists, and scholars engaged in responding to WS. He also wishes to acknowledge the important work of The Disinformation Project in Aotearoa.

• Tomorrow: Part 2: WS storytelling in more detail

The covid protest outside Parliament earlier this month served as a warning that Aotearoa New Zealand is not immune to the kinds of anger seen overseas. As Labour Party whip Kieran McAnulty put it, “I think everyone needs to be aware that things are starting to escalate.”

McAnulty himself had been abused by some with strong anti-vaccination views, and there has been increasingly violent rhetoric directed at government politicians and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.

As a result, security for MPs has been stepped up.

• READ MORE: Departing AUT lecturer makes false covid, mosque attack claims
• Other NZ covid lockdown reports

As the recent report from research centre Te Pūnaha Matatini showed, there has been a sharp increase in the “popularity and intensity of covid-19 specific disinformation and other forms of ‘dangerous speech’ and disinformation, related to far-right ideologies”.

The analysis noted a broader threat: “That covid-19 and vaccination are being used as a kind of Trojan Horse for norm-setting and norm-entrenchment of far-right ideologies in Aotearoa New Zealand.”

Terror threat: medium
Last year, New Zealand’s Security Intelligence Service (SIS) warned of the “realistic possibility” that continued covid restrictions or further vaccination requirements could trigger an act of violent extremism.

The country is not alone in this, of course. Covid-19 has seen dissent and angry protest rise globally, with inevitable concern over an increased risk of terrorism or violent extremism.

Right now, New Zealand’s official terror threat level is assessed as “medium”, meaning an attack is deemed “feasible and could well occur”.

By contrast, Australia’s threat level is set at “probable” and Britain’s at “severe”. According to its Department of Homeland Security, the US “continues to face a diverse and challenging threat environment as it approaches several religious holidays and associated mass gatherings”.

The lone actor problem
An SIS terrorism threat assessment from February this year, coupled with a “Threat Insight” from the Combined Threat Assessment Group in November 2020, divided potential terrorists in New Zealand into three groups based on faith, identity and politics. What they share is a willingness to use violence to achieve their goals.

The most likely scenario involves a lone actor, inspired by any ideology and probably using an unsophisticated means of attack, without any intelligence warning. However, a small anti-government cell was also considered a realistic possibility.

The SIS assessment noted there are almost certainly individuals who advocate the use of violence to promote racial or ethnic identity beliefs, as well as individuals potentially prone to faith-based violent extremism. As for politically motivated actors, the SIS was more reassuring:

While some individuals and groups have lawfully advocated for signicant change to current political and social systems, there continues to be little indication of any serious intent to engage in violence to acheive that change.

The February report is heavily redacted, so needs to be placed next to the November “Threat Insight”. That report noted a “realistic possibility” of terrorist acts depending on how Covid-19 and the associated economic and social impacts unfolded, and how individual extremists might be affected. It concluded:

The situation in New Zealand over the next 12 months is likely to remain dynamic. There is a realistic possibility further restrictions or potential vaccination programmes […] could be triggers for New Zealand-based violent extremists to conduct an act of terrorist violence.

Still a peaceful place?
If there is any comfort to take, it might be that New Zealand has risen in the 2021 Global Peace Index, putting the country second only to Iceland.

This represents a return to relative normality after the 2019 Christchurch terror attack saw New Zealand drop 79 places in the Global Terrorism Index in 2020 (ranking 42nd, just behind Russia, Israel and South Africa).

But while there are other reasons to be hopeful — notably New Zealand’s comparatively low and apparently reducing homicide numbers — there remain reasons for concern. From the Lynn Mall terror attack through to the murder of a police officer or the tragic shooting of an innocent teenager, serious violence is not uncommon.

There has also been an increase in firearms injuries, many (but not all) gang-related. Figures released under the Official Information Act show the police are facing increased risks: between March 2019 and July 2021, officers had firearms pointed or discharged at them 46 times.

New Zealanders can have some faith the system, however. Two potential shooting events, one involving a school, were foiled by police. The New Lynn extremist was already subject to monitoring so tight he was shot within 60 seconds of launching his attack.

Security intelligence also detected espionage in the military, and was instrumental in New Zealand Cricket calling off its tour of Pakistan due to a plausible terror threat.

A ‘see something, say something’ culture
All of this underscores the need for everyone to do what they can to combat alienation and misinformation in the community, anchored by tolerance, respect and civil behaviour. And it also requires that people be prepared to report acts of suspicious activity or threats of violence (online or not).

As the Royal Commission on the Christchurch terror attacks noted, the likeliest thing to have prevented the tragedy would have been a “see something, say something” culture — one where people could safely raise their concerns with the appropriate authorities.

“Such reporting,” the commission concluded, “would have provided the best chance of disrupting the terrorist attack.”

As the pandemic stretches into the next year, with likely ongoing restrictions and unforeseeable complications, this remarkable sentence is worth remembering. It suggests the best defence against extremism is to be found within ourselves, and in the robust and safe communities we must create.

Dr Alexander Gillespie, professor of law, University of Waikato. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.