Why are they doing it?

There seems to be a developing consensus on the part of realistic people — even including some ‘experts’, that the lockdowns were not just ineffectual in getting us through the ‘pandemic’, but that they were counterproductive in a number of ways.

In addition we now have a judge saying that the lockdowns and their associated rules and conjured-up ‘laws’ were illegal, and ordered Ohio health authorities to stop within 14 days. We’ll see if that happens.

While a lot of states are now opening up to one degree or another, some remain under lockdown, and some states (notably Washington state) are being told that mandatory ‘contact tracing’ is planned, along with testing of possibly everyone, and that anyone who is uncooperative will have regular visits from minders who will see that they comply.

And though the miracle vaccine is not available and not likely to be, the idea is that once it is available, we must all submit to taking it, despite Bill Gates’ somewhat dubious results with his ”vaccines” in the past.

Freedom??

There’s also been some ambiguous answers on the part of politicians and ‘experts’ as to when the lockdowns will end. There have been mentions of recurring lockdowns, meaning there is no return to normal in sight.

What are those in power thinking? Do they expect that we will just give in and accept the current state of things as inevitable, or will they attempt to return many of us to the state of fear in which we will accept whatever they tell us or require of us? Is this just how easy it is to demolish a country and its people?

It appears a lot of people believe that this is just a temporary inconvenience or a glitsch that is easily corrected, and that we still live in the same country in which we grew up. I feel as though we are definitely ‘not in Kansas anymore.’

Where do we go from here?

After yesterday’s impeachment charade, I suppose all that could be said about it has been said by somebody somewhere, or will be, shortly.

Most of us were likely not surprised by the way this staged event played out. I know I wasn’t surprised.

Some of us may follow Q and the ‘predictions’ or riddles that are doled out to us. Do I believe Q absolutely? I would say I’m not a denier or a complete skeptic, but more of an agnostic, who is open to being convinced, looking to see if the ‘predictions’ or whatever prove to be valid.

I have noticed that Q often tells readers that “they” (TPTB) “want us divided.” Dividing the populace so as to solidify control is a very old idea in the minds of the more manipulative people who rule over others, or who want to rule. But are TPTB the ones who have divided us, and who keep ‘us’ divided? They like us to be divided; it makes things easier for them when we take out our anger and hostility on our neighbors or even kinsmen instead of focusing it on the people holding the reins.

The ‘civnats’ and mainstream conservatives like the mantra about those in power dividing us. They appear, these civic nationalist types, to think that once upon a time it was otherwise; we all lived in happy harmony in a rainbow America where all that mattered was our belief in holy Democracy and Brotherhood and Equality, until the left came and taught us to distrust one another and stirred up trouble amongst us, which was something new and unprecedented. Why, for example, during the Revolution (against King George and the villainous ‘redcoats’ who had somehow gotten the whip hand over us) Crispus Attucks was our hero , proving that there were no divisions among us apple-pie Americans. Or so the story goes.

It may be that the people who seem to believe this view of a once-idyllic America don’t actually believe it, but feign belief in the hope that believing in it really hard will bring it into being.

Forgive me for being a little cynical here; when I began this blogging business some 13 years ago, I was a little more idealistic. Still I was not as naive as to believe that America was ever a peaceful “pluralistic” (pre-multicult) country; ‘E Pluribus Unum‘ and all that. I think some people still don’t know that the Latin E Pluribus Unum never referred to multiculturalism and ‘world citizenship’ or any such fairy-tales. It referred to the states, the sovereign States, a confederation forming one nation. Only the South, or what is left of it, remembers that rather important fact. America has always had problems stemming from its ‘pluralistic’ origins.

But since the Civil Rights contretemps, the ‘Late Unpleasantness’ in the South, it’s required that we speak as though we were once a big happy family until The Left divided us, an event which would never have occurred otherwise, as we were all like peas in a pod, living side by side. The ‘right’ manages to give the appearance of believing this, but the left and their client ‘victim’ groups don’t believe this, and never did; why would they? There’s no advantage to be had from believing it. No grievances, no payoff.

So when Q (or are there multiple Qs?) talks of ‘Them’ wanting us divided, he means the invisible PTBs. Sure, they want us divided, but it wasn’t their doing from the beginning. Nature divided us, or God divided us. The Bible itself says that God ‘sets the bounds of nations’. In speaking of this dividing, the great Bible commentator Matthew Henry, in his commentary, said, of this division amongst the various peoples, ‘What God hath set asunder, let no man join together.’ He had a sly sense of humor, apparently, did Matthew Henry, but he was serious in his meaning.

The whole point of the Babel story was that there were meant to be differences; that we were not all made identical and interchangeable, and it was God-ordained, and for a reason.

Now, I can see that there is a need for strategic alliances in certain circumstances, and that there ought not to be perpetual hostilities between peoples, as is now the case. The events in this pretend impeachment story are the result of the out-of-control animosities between people, even people of a common origin and language and history. The left has stoked those flames of anger and hostility, and they continue to do so; it seems a deliberate decision they’ve made, evidently looking to provoke some aggressive action on the part of the right, providing them with a pretext to — – what, exactly? Only they know what they are thinking, if in fact they are capable of thought; we can only guess.

The powers that be, those Q says ‘want us divided’, are sitting back watching this as their surrogates or puppets stir up more conflict. The latter seem unmoored from reality, whereas many of the ‘mainstream’ right choose to live in some kind of civnat fool’s paradise, where we’re all really the best of friends, brothers and sisters, if only the Left wasn’t stirring the pot, bringing it to the boil.

Meantime, does the POTUS really believe in the civic nationalist ideals he expresses so often? Does he really believe that we need ‘more legal immigration, much, much more’? Does he really believe that Israel is our friend? I don’t know. Only he knows, I suppose.

I think I wrote on my blog years ago that it seemed we were in a car with no brakes, careening toward the edge of a cliff.

Somehow, though, I believe that there is someone in charge; I have complete faith in a Creator who knows the end from the beginning, and I trust Him completely, though all looks to be out of control. Isn’t it increasingly obvious that we humans are not able to extricate ourselves from this dangerous situation under our own power?

Does that mean we should do nothing? No. We have a part to play, and we are to be actively trying to do what we can to right things. It’s obvious that we are not really in charge — and neither are the other guys. But they are at a disadvantage because they are blinded to their own wrongness.

Do Q and the others (whoever they may be) know what they are doing? There are a lot of verbal reassurances that they expect success, and a reversal of the dire conditions. Some are putting their trust fully in the mysterious Q et al, and in the President, saying that it’s all a grand plan, a ‘strategy’, as they said about G.W. Bush during his bungled presidency. Obviously, though, “W” did know what he was doing — but he was not on our side. Things are seldom what they seem.

Right now praying seems the best plan.

In my opinion.

Who are we?

weareamerica

Back in spring of 2006 I began my first blog by writing about the question of American identity. Who are we? What does it mean to be an American?

Immigration was the one issue that started me on this journey, and over the past decade I have re-thought a great many things, things that most of us take for granted and never really question because our society would have us believe that certain things just ”are”, and should not be questioned.

As I began to notice that the city I lived in then was increasingly full of people from the Third World, as I began to notice neighborhoods changing (for the worse), as I began, at times, to find myself apparently the only person of European descent in the immediate vicinity in certain places — I began to wonder how America had morphed into something else while I wasn’t paying attention.

Immigrants are implicitly assumed to be ”victims”; after all, the vast majority are non-White, and thanks to cultural Marxism, therefore said to be victims (of Whitey), most people assume that immigrants are entitled — they are entitled, first of all, to our sympathy. They are entitled to charity from us; not just kind treatment, but tangible charity: social services, handouts, special assistance. Above all, they’re entitled to a place in our country. After all, goes the story, we are so rich; they are poor. We have a vast country with wide-open spaces; they live in crowded, overpopulated hellholes. How dare we not give them a place in our country? Are we heartless? And aren’t we all immigrants? This is a ”nation of immigrants”, is it not?

Actually, no, it is not.

I finally realized: no, my ancestors were not ”immigrants.” They resembled today’s immigrants in very few respects. They came here, to this continent, knowing it to be mostly uncharted wilderness, full of wild animals and hostile native peoples. They knew that the climate could be harsh, especially compared to their native England.But they were not ‘immigrants’ coming to an established country or civilization. There were only scattered tribal groups, often at war with each other. There was no organized government to whom they could make a petition for entry or for residence. There were no immigration laws because there was no civilization in our sense of the word.

Their situation was not analogous to today’s illegal immigrants, or even to the sainted ‘legal immigrants’ so beloved of the right-liberals. They were also not like the ‘refugees’ now swarming over Europe. They were people who fully expected to be self-sufficient. They were independent and resourceful people. They were not beggars. They were not looking to live parasitically off others. They were certainly not looking to ‘exterminate’ the natives, as the leftists would tell us. They wanted only to live freely and to worship freely without the dictates of a government opposed to their brand of religion.

They were not immigrants. They were settlers. They were colonists. They were trailblazers. Explorers. Pioneers. Some were missionaries.

None were ”immigrants”. None.

And they were mostly English, these early colonists. And their colonies formed the basis for the country which we call the United States of America. The English language, the Protestant religion and ethic, the English common law, English custom and lore, all of this played a part in the formation of our nation.

There were other colonists; some of the Dutch and Huguenot colonists were my ancestors — through intermarriage with my English forebears. But those other colonies adapted to the incipient Anglo-American ethos and culture, not the other way around.

So America was not begun by ‘immigrants’. The phrase ‘A Nation of Immigrants’ came from John F. Kennedy (or his ghost-writer) in the book of that name. It was a way of usurping the place of the original colonist stock and making the sainted Ellis Island immigrant the central figure in American history. Now we find ourselves being flooded with immigrants from the four corners of the globe — immigrants who brazenly tell us — tell us, the heirs of the colonists! — that this country is ”for everybody”, that it belongs to everybody, as much, or more, to them as to us. Imagine the gall. But this is ‘America’, or what remains of it, in 2016. Look at the picture at the top of this post.

Here you will find a blog post on the topic of “who is an American?” It’s an interesting discussion, somewhat meandering, but with some very good comments and some that will vex you if you are a ‘generational American’ or a ‘heritage American.’

Read the blog post and read of how one immigrant blogger regards her ‘Americanness’; typical of how some 21st century immigrants believe that they understand what being an American means better than those of us whose ancestors made all this come into being. This country and whatever is good about it is all to be credited to the original colonists, the English (or Anglo-Normans, as my Southron ancestors described themselves). Instead, immigrants have assumed a central position in the ”narrative.’ The immigrant ‘built’ America,  or ”immigrants made America great”, so we are now told. Just as we hear from other quarters that ‘slaves built America.’ Everybody built America but Americans.

No. The truth matters.

This country was great long before the waves of immigrants came a-begging on our shores back in the first part of the 19th century. This country was not simply waiting for the ‘magic touch’ of immigrants to ‘make it great’; the original colonists supplied the raw material: the people. A people make or break a country. Propositions and ideologies don’t make a country. A country is only as good as the people who constitute its inhabitants.

Bringing in multitudes of unrelated, often mutually hostile peoples, often peoples from failed or despotic countries, would hardly seem the recipe for ”making a country great”, yet that is what this country misguidedly did in the 19th century and afterward, intermittently, and is doing now. And now the mix of peoples is bringing not ‘enrichment’ but conflict, strife, bad feeling, crime, budget problems, public health crises, and countless other woes.

And if we read old history books, those not compromised by political correctness, we can see that even the early waves of immigration brought all those things albeit on a lesser scale than today. Immigration must not be sentimentalized and seen through a gauzy lens anymore.

Our country, founded by English colonists and for much of its history, based on English ways, should have been allowed to remain as it was, true to itself, with the ‘corn all one sheaf, and the grapes all of one vine’ as Kipling said. But it was not. And now America is unrecognizable, becoming more so.

But because America has been sold out from underneath our feet and is being transformed against the collective will into something else, that does not change who we are. Americans are born, not made. Documents and propositions do not a people make. Nor can they ever. “American” is a matter of blood and heritage as well as culture. One cannot be American just by declaring oneself to be, any more than I can declare myself Queen.