[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Resistance See other Resistance Articles Title: Zorro or Zero Since I began promoting revitalization of “the Militia of the several States,” I have become the recipient of all sorts of captious criticism. Although I no longer suffer fools gladly (if at all), I nevertheless consider some of these complaints to be worth refuting, because the exercise brings to the fore certain truths that might otherwise go unappreciated. 1. From one quarter comes the contention that revitalization of the Militia would be unwise, even dangerous, because the Militia would necessarily come under the command of the Governors in each State, and thus inevitably (if not immediately) would be co-opted, controlled, and compromised in favor of the Establishment and against We the People’s vital interests. True enough, if a State were mechanically to adopt the typical pre-constitutional pattern, her Governor would likely become the titular commander in chief of her Militia. That pattern, however, derived from the position of each Colonial Governor as the English King’s appointee, and the position of the King as the generalissimo of all the Militia in both the home country and the Colonies. Under the Constitution, however, Americans have no human king, in any State or in the General Government. And the Constitution prescribes that, other than the President of the United States—who becomes the “Commander in Chief * * * of the Militia of the several States” when and only when they are “called into the actual Service of the United States” (Article II, Section 2, Clause 1)—the States have “reserv[ed] to [themselves] * * * the Appointment of the Officers” of their Militia (Article I, Section 8, Clause 16). So, each State can decide for herself, under her own law, to designate whomever she wants as her Militia’s commander in chief, or perhaps to have no titular commander in chief at all, but instead a collective or decentralized structure of supreme command. No doubt the draftsman of the first model Militia statute for some likely State will take this into account. In any event, the more pressing question these worryworts must answer is: “Who is in charge of your State’s military and police “homeland security” forces now—you?!” The answer, of course, is: “Not you, but the Governor!” Under present conditions, the average American in each State is no independent, “sovereign” citizen, immune from legal control, with his own police authority, who answers to no one higher up in a legal and political chain of command. And imagining that he is simply makes certain that he never will become a self-governing individual in the foreseeable future. Other than as voters and jurors (and leaving out of consideration the apparent futility of the former right now and the obvious infrequency of the latter at all times), average Americans enjoy no positions of authority in their own State and Local governments. Instead, legally and politically, the residents of each State find themselves “under” the Governor, and thus “under” the State and Local police and the State component of the National Guard, which the Governor can command pursuant to State and National law, and against the possible depredations of which common citizens have little or no recourse. Without revitalization of “the Militia of the several States,” average Americans will move not a single Angstrom Unit away from their present unsatisfactory situation in the direction of self-government. And without revitalization of the Militia they may—almost certainly will—move thousands of units on the linear scale of political and economic oppression in the opposite direction in the years to come. So, is it more prudent to do something that might change things for the better, or in the manner of ostriches and jackasses blindly and stubbornly to abide the status quo, until everything becomes decidedly worse, and perhaps irreversibly so? With revitalization of the Militia, We the People will become integral parts of the governmental structure in each State—indeed, the very largest parts, in overwhelming numbers, and with physical as well as political, legal, and moral power in their own hands. They will have organization, arms, training—and, most important of all, governmental authority deriving from the very highest human source: the Constitution itself. Instead of being, as they are now, impotent nothings and legal nobodies whose only participation in government is to ratify the mess politicians are making of this country, by electing and re-electing to public office the incompetents and criminals whom the Establishment serially foists off on them. Besides, the naysayers forget to ask why properly formed, informed, and motivated Militia would ever be expected automatically to obey rogue Governors (or other malevolent public officials) who were grasping for unconstitutional and antisocial powers. Would not the existence of a State’s Militia—thoroughly organized, armed, disciplined, and conscious of its constitutional position and responsibilities—deter a Governor inclined towards usurpation or tyranny from attempting any serious wrongdoing, even if he contemplated it? Would rogue police agencies be able to cow the Militia into submission, when the Militia outnumbered and especially outgunned them 100 or 1,000 or 10,000 to one? Would not such a “well regulated” Militia deter even rogue elements in the State Guard from trying to finagle their units into stepping outside the Guard’s constitutional boundaries? Also, with a State’s Militia in place, what likelihood would there be that a rogue Governor would hold office at all? After all, who elects a Governor, except We the People? And, organized and educated in and through the Militia, would the People not demand, and come forth in overwhelming numbers to elect, only honest, patriotic men to that and every other important office? So, contrary to the worrywarts, the expectation must be that revitalized Militia will not come under the control of rogue Governors in their States—rather, the Militia will determine who their States’ Governors will be, and will keep them under constant constitutional control. But all this is perhaps to bring owls to Athens. For the Second Amendment already confirms that “[a] well regulated Militia” is “necessary to the security of a free State.” Can any patriot then imagine that “[a] well regulated Militia” revitalized in any State today will jeopardize her security and freedom? 2. Another set of critics claims that revitalization of “the Militia of the several States” in aid of constitutional “homeland security” would actually amount to a waste of time and effort, because the threat of international “terrorism” is wildly exaggerated. These people argue—and not wholly without evidence—that the present orchestrated hysteria over “terrorism” is little more than a rationalization for endless intervention—actually, imperialistic aggression, destabilization, and looting—in the Middle East (and everywhere else in the world, for that matter) by an ersatz Presidential “decidership” employing das Fuhrerprinzip on behalf of various special-interest groups. Maybe so. Nevertheless, no matter what threat international “terrorists” do or do not pose—and even if “the global war on terror” is nothing more than propagandistic smoke and mirrors, and international “terrorists” are mostly agents provocateurs recruited by the CIA and MI6—a crisis in “homeland security” will be coming to a neighborhood near you sometime soon, in the form of a meltdown of America’s monetary and banking systems. Whether this crisis manifests itself in hyperinflation, or in a depression, or in hyperinflation followed by a depression, the economic consequences for average Americans will be devastating. People in untold numbers will find themselves out of jobs, without incomes, lacking adequate savings, and perhaps still deeply in debt. How will reconstruction take place, and at least a modicum of normal life be restored? “From the top down,” as in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, with the iron hand of bone-headed enforcers from the Department of Homeland Security, FEMA, and jack-booted swat teams? Or “from the bottom up,” through the Militia, composed of Local citizens? Even if some semblance of police-state “order” could be imposed by storm troopers answering to “national-security” directives emanating from the Disgrace of Columbia, will these mindless myrmidons and their equally clueless masters also be able to diagnose and correct the economic and social problems peculiar to the communities they will be terrorizing? The question may be generic: How can productive employment be restored to Localities and States? But the answers will have to be specially crafted to respond to Local circumstances and conditions, and to address the particular needs and aspirations of Local people in the Localities in which they must continue to live. For most people in a time of economic devastation will be utterly unable to move in order to seek employment elsewhere. So whatever will be done will have to be done by and for Local people themselves, with whatever may be at hand. This task will not be as daunting as it may appear at first glance. For almost every Locality contains or has reasonable access to some worthwhile productive capacity in terms of natural resources, capital goods, and skilled workers. True, these material and especially human capabilities will need to be identified, organized, mobilized, and put to work. But Local people will best understand how to find and then combine the available human and material assets so as to rebuild, expand, and eventually enrich their communities with new infrastructure, public works, and private enterprises that serve Local and State needs first, National needs next, and the damnable “global economy” of the supra-national fascists not at all. In particular, rebuilding will have to emphasize: locally owned and operated factories, rather than behemoth corporations concerned more with maximizing executive compensation and returns to distant shareholders than with maintaining decent salaries and job security for workers; small-scale stores, rather than Mega-Marts that peddle shoddy goods from foreign sweat-shops, pay minimum wages, and drive out of existence every form of competition; family farms and cooperatives that secure wide varieties of Local food supplies, rather than single-crop agribusinesses intent on diverting their production into far-away markets; and savings and loans and similar deposit-and-lending institutions with firm community ties, interests, and concerns, rather than globalist financial casinos (so-called “banks”). Indispensable to this process will be thoroughgoing organization of each Local community, if possible well before an economic calamity sets in. But who could accomplish this better than people already organized, on a Local basis, in revitalized State Militia? People who know each other? Who can rely on each other? Whose participation in the Militia evidences their commitment to and above all compassion for their communities? And who can get things done because they have the best reasons for doing so: the welfare of themselves, their families, their neighbors, and their co-workers? One must also recognize that economic calamity will not come alone, but will bring with it political and social upheaval, too. Some people say that “globalism” is irreversible. This is sheer nonsense. “Globalism” is not only reversible, but is actually self-destructive. And it is about to fly apart, splitting at its weakest seam: the scams of fiat currency, “monetization of debt,” and unlimited fractional-reserve central banking. But as “globalism” collapses on the economic front—where now it deceptively manifests itself in the velvet glove of materialism, consumerism, hedonism, (im)moral relativism, and the cloying narcissism of self-selected, self-promoting elitists—its beneficiaries will rush to reassert their dominance over “the masses” on the political front tomorrow, through the iron fist of a police state. (Actually, whether a financial meltdown eventuates or not, these miscreants intend to impose a police state on America, violence untrammeled by natural law being the noxious essence of their system and of their thinking. Inside every one of them lurks a little Nazi looking for an opportunity to become a big Nazi.) To this threat, revitalized Militia are obviously the necessary response. 3. A third criticism of my plan for revitalizing the Militia is directed less at the project itself than at my belief that the natural constituency to lead it consists of American patriots 45 or 50 years of age and older. These people, I am told—at least by the ones who complain—are too well along in years to take on this task. Well, perhaps they are somewhat short-winded for the heavy lifting that may come later on. But for the initial inspiration, organization, mobilization, instruction, and direction—for setting the example, and setting the wheels in motion—they precisely fill the bill. For many people in the 45-plus bracket have stored up extensive reserves of personal capital, in the form of accomplishments, reputations in their communities, valuable contacts, in many cases significant disposable financial assets—and especially wisdom accumulated through lessons in the hardest school of all, experience. Now is the time for them to invest some of that capital in the only venture worth supporting: America’s future. Specifically, in the education of this country’s 16 to 45 year olds. To show them that they can take back their country—and must take it back, if their own lives are not to ruined. And how to do it. Samuel Johnson once quipped that nothing focuses a man’s mind as much as the imminence of his own hanging. Perhaps that is not as true in the case of a whole country, in which some people always seem able foolishly to assume that the bell tolls only for others. This country is in dire straits, with its very life as “a free State” on the line. Yet, to save it, patriots do not need to enlist everyone. Yes, hundreds, and thousands, and even tens of thousands will be necessary to revitalize the Militia in all fifty States. America, however, has a population approaching some three hundred million souls. Even one hundred thousand activists amount to only three one-hundredths of one percent of that total! In Old California, the honest hidalgos and hard-working peons needed only one man to confront, challenge, and chastise their oppressors. And from their own ranks he emerged: Zorro. Are contemporary patriots ready to admit that they can muster from amongst themselves no Zorros, only Zeros?! P.S.: If you want to find out more about this subject, you need to read my first Militia book, Constitutional “Homeland Security.” You can find it on http://Amazon.com by searching under my name. Or, for less cost (and without providing any rake-off to some credit-card issuer), you can order the book directly from me, for $19.95 postpaid (Virginia orders $20.95), with a check or money order made out to “Edwin Vieira, Jr.,” sent to 13877 Napa Drive, Manassas, Virginia 20112.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: christine (#0)
Or the reverse. A revitalized militia might be an irresistible roost. The governors will follow their interests, and they will align with the militia if it is more attractive to do so. When it can't be made more attractive, then -- and only then -- hang the bastards. The people attracted to a movement on the rise or approaching success are always quite different animals from the cadre that starts it. Fact of life, get used to it, use it.
history | grep grep
Makes good sense to me bump.
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||