Un-American yourself!

A new fashion has sprung up in America today. Those who have taken over the federal government, have taken to calling people Un-American for opposing them. This applies as well to those who voted for them. (Which, yes, many did—just not so many as they pretend.) Their use of that phrase un-American looks like a classic example of projection. Which, as your editor learned in his core clinical clerkship in psychiatry, is the defense of throwing off on the other guy. (From the Latin pro- before and iacio I throw, the passive participle of which is iectus.) Only this time the throwing-off won’t work – because the ones using it lack any qualification to call anyone un-American. And the reason they don’t is that they are the real un-American actors.

Two Americas

Today we inhabit two Americas competing in the same geographical space. One is the America your editor knows and loves. This is the America of patriotism and long-standing custom and tradition. In this America one respects the Constitution, and the lives, liberties, and properties of others.

The other – well, actually, one shouldn’t even call it America anymore. Your editor thought at first one could call it the North American Polity, but now believes one might as well call it el nuevo imperio de Aztlán – the New Aztec Empire. Or perhaps some might want to call it Oklahoma – Land of the Beringians. (And by this your editor does not mean the State!) Actually your editor cannot say for certain what the adherents of this other polity want to call it. But they most certainly do not want to call it the United States of America any longer!

Wanting to change America

Those who doubt this, need only read the piece in The New York Times that called the American flag a symbol of division. Or listen to Macy Gray, who wanted to change the colors of the flag. Instead of the purity of white, she wants to use off-white. (And add two stars, one each for Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia.) Yet another group wants to change the red, white and blue to the yellow, white and black. And add a new symbol called a “manny” to replace the stars.

And then, of course, we have the Aztec Chicano Student Movement (Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán) and the National Council of La Raza. You know the words: ¡Por La Raza todo; fuera La Raza nada! (Literally, “For The Race, everything; for all outside The Race, nothing!”) They have existed for decades, and one could almost forget about them. Almost.

How dare these people call anyone un-American?

So how dare these people call anyone un-American? Are not they the un-American ones?

How dare Andrew Weissman, once the lead counsel on Robert Mueller’s team, call Tucker Carlson un-American? And why does Mr. Weissman say that? Because Tucker Carlson complained that the National Security Agency must be spying on him. Carlson has the evidence to prove it.

Weissman will pretend that he takes issue with Tucker Carlson airing a grievance in public.

If you think about what Tucker Carlson could have done here, he could have followed the same route that The New York Times and other respected journalists did when they were incidentally overheard and may have, in fact, not been incidentally had their call records obtained by the Department of Justice.”

They could have gone to the attorney general, and Tucker Carlson could have joined them to say what I’m concerned about here is not that there was incidental collection when I am calling a foreigner, including if you try to reach out to Vladimir Putin, you can pretty much be sure you’re going to be at high risk of being intercepted.

Is Andrew Weissman Foxtrotting kidding?

Shall Tucker Carlson complain to the very people who have started an official vendetta against him? After what we have witnessed with the FBI orchestrating a riot and then taking political prisoners?

What’s really un-American

Why does your editor protest so strongly?

Because your editor is a patriotic American.

I don’t like to see electoral fraud prevail. And the evidence for such fraud is starting to come out. That is the only reason for any objection to the Maricopa Audit. Some have, in supreme confidence, said, “Let it happen! Then when they find nothing, they will apologize!” At least that is a reasonable position. Opposition to the audit is not.

Furthermore, I don’t like false-flag pseudo-operations designed to induce and promote inflation. Nor do I like those who actually say that inflation is a necessary reparation to the less-well-off. What will happen to those less-well-off when they lose their jobs? Ah, but that leads to the next part.

I don’t like policies that pay people not to work, for the covert purpose of “Resetting” the economy, first to rental-only, then to a command economy. Don’t just assume that your editor, or his sources, made that up out of the whole cloth. Read the manifesto of a group that advocates for it!

Toward a post-American world

That the crowd now hurling the un-American slur at patriotic Americans actually want a post-American world, follows logically. CNAV has discussed this before, under the heading of Rewilding.

So what would a post-American world look like? For one thing, the continents of the Western Hemisphere would lose their names. The northern would take the name Aztlán, and the southern, Amazonía. The post-American crowd would bury even the legacy of Amerigo Vespucci, who gave the Americas their names.

For another, everything north of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo south of the border) would change drastically. Of the former United States, only a small portion would remain:

• Megalopolis East, from Boston, Massachusetts to Richmond, Virginia.
• Megalopolis West, from Seattle, Washington to San Diego, California (or maybe no further south than Los Angeles).
• Eastern Minnesota.
• All of Wisconsin and Michigan.
• Northern Illinois.
• Southern New York State. Northern New York State would get the full rewilding treatment.
• Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine (parts of that getting the same “treatment”), Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Delaware.
• Eastern Maryland and Virginia, with new wild areas between Washington (renamed Cornwallis or some such) and Richmond.

And everything else? Protected Wild Space!

This would also include the two conservative provinces of Canada – Alberta and Saskatchewan. The other southern provinces are already “woke” enough.

Give it to the indigenous

And everything to the north? Yukon, the Northwest Territories, the new semi-autonomous region of Nunavut, and Alaska? The “indigenous” people would take that over. This includes mainly the Inuit (hence Inuit Nunangat, “The Lands/Waters/Airs of the People”), the Aleuts, and the First Nations. Never mind that they all migrated, too. All that matters is that they command no technology, and thus are close to that “noble savage” of Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

Have the un-American crowd thought this through?

To assume that they who bandy the phrase un-American about so freely haven’t thought the matter through, would be easy. Whether the abbreviated polity of the Left Coasts and Great Lakes Regions would survive economically is an open question.

But is that assumption safe? CNAV thinks not. In brutal fact, these people don’t care if they are the physically poorer for it. To be sure, most of them smugly assume that their Big Cities would still thrive. (If you call it thriving!) But show them that they would not thrive, and they still won’t care.

Why not? Because selfishness does not drive them. Spite does. And the spite of the un-American crowd is greater than America or the world has ever seen.

But in no event can they with any justice call anyone else un-American.

Treason means making war against your country—not any particular government but your country. Or it means adhering to its enemies. Let anyone who understands the events of last year and this, know who the real traitors are. For no one, engaging in treason himself, may call another traitor.