PAUL AND THE MILITIA
Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
Therefore, making revitalization of the Militia a major issue can be key to uniting people now; forming a grand political coalition by amalgamating voters on the “right,” “left,” and “center”; and thereby winning both a nomination and the Presidential election.
For practical examples, revitalization of the Militia will appeal to those on the “left” who are concerned—and rightfully so—with the elaboration of a National police state in this country under color of waging “the war on terrorism.” By taking over many important functions of “homeland security,” revitalization of the Militia will prevent any police state from being set up. Revitalization of the Militia will appeal to those on the “right” who are concerned—also rightfully so—with the loss of their right “to keep and bear Arms” through expansion of “gun control.” Revitalization of the Militia will end “gun control,” once and for all, because every member of the Militia (other than conscientious objectors) will be required to possess and become proficient with his own firearm, which he will maintain at all times in his own home. The only candidate who can plausibly make these arguments—because he has always opposed all the police-state schemes and tactics of the present Administration as well as all manner of modern “gun control”—is Representative Paul.
6. Revitalizing “the Militia of the several States” may provide the most direct and efficacious means for President Ron Paul to accomplish anything of significance in at least his first two years in office.
For Representative Paul to win election to the Presidency is one thing; making effective use of the office is another. Initially, Congress, the Judiciary, and the General Government’s huge bureaucracy will be against him. So, too, the major political parties; aspirant politicians of an Establishment stripe; influential special-interest groups, domestic and foreign; the big media; and the intelligentsiia. For that reason, President Paul must be prepared to sidestep the Establishment and go directly to the people—not simply with words from a “bully pulpit,” but with actions grounded in his and their legal authority.
The Constitution provides the roadmap. Article II, Section 3 imposes on the President the duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” Plainly, the Constitution itself is foremost among those “Laws”—for in Article II, Section 1, Clause 7 it requires of the President an “Oath or Affirmation * * * that [he] * * * will to the best of [his] Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 imposes upon the Militia the authority and responsibility “to execute the Laws of the Union” when “call[ed] forth” for that purpose—the only explicit delegation of such authority and responsibility anywhere in the Constitution. And Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 appoints the President as “Commander in Chief * * * of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States.” Thus, unmistakably, the Constitution foresees, because it provides in so many words, that the President may employ the Militia to fulfill his oath of office and to perform his duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”
Many critical reforms that a hostile Congress would not entertain could nonetheless be effected by the President and the Militia as part of a wide-ranging program of true “homeland security.” Perhaps the most pressing would be the implementation of a system of silver and gold currencies, in anticipation of the collapse of the Federal Reserve System (described above). Many others can be imagined.
Announcing this strategy would lend immense credibility to Representative Paul’s campaign, by demonstrating that he has a plan for reform that follows the Constitution’s prescription and cannot be frustrated by entrenched special interests—if the American people will take his part in the election and do theirs afterwards. This would constitute a meaningful “contract with America,” because it is truly mutual, and ultimately builds upon self-government, not rule by professional politicians and special-interest groups.
7. Revitalizing “the Militia of the several States” will leave an institutional presence, fortified with constitutional authority, for common Americans’ political self-defense in both the governments of the States and the General Government, long after a Paul Administration has passed from the scene.
Even if a President Ron Paul could effect major reforms in foreign policy, in money and banking, in securing individual constitutional liberties, and so on, he would not be successful unless, at the termination of his Administration, he left the American people themselves firmly and permanently in control of their State governments and of the General Government. For future rogue Presidents and Congressmen might contrive to “roll back” these reforms, if the people could not deter, and if necessary oppose, them from positions of unassailable legal authority and power. Revitalizing the Militia will provide the American people with those positions. Indeed, only revitalizing the Militia can do so.
So, here and now candidate Paul should tell the electorate that the most important part of President Paul’s “legacy” to the country will be the constitutional means to regain and preserve individual freedom in the only way it can be regained and preserved in the final analysis: through the “well regulated Militia” that are “necessary to the security of a free State.” This would be the most significant political promise ever made since ratification of the Constitution, because Representative Paul not only would pledge to return the Constitution to the people, but also would explain precisely how he, together with the people themselves, will do it.
8. No one can plausibly oppose revitalizing “the Militia of the several States.” Opposition to the Militia is easily exposed as;
the Constitution requires the Militia to be properly organized, armed,
disciplined, and trained;
If this list of deficiencies would not suffice to win any debate, and any election in which this were a major issue, what would?
9. If revitalizing “the Militia of the several States” becomes part of Ron Paul’s campaign (and even if it does not), it should be made an issue in every other Presidential and Congressional candidate’s campaign. The following questions would probably suffice to smoke out a candidate’s position on (or, more likely, total ignorance of) the matter:
QUESTIONS FOR CANDIDATES
People throughout the United States, all across the political spectrum, are concerned that a police-state apparatus is being set up in the Executive Branch of the Federal Government, centered around the Department of Homeland Security.
10. Patriots must also consider the possibility that Ron Paul may not obtain the nomination of any political party for President, or may not win the election. Although that would amount to a tactical set-back, his candidacy will nevertheless remain the harbinger of ultimate victory. [See Ron Paul and Edwin Vieira in the new DVD "Fiat Empire"]
Even in defeat, Ron Paul’s campaign for President would not be the end of the line, but the beginning. His success will lie in proving that the “two”-party system can be effectively challenged, that the big media can be circumvented, that common Americans in the millions and tens of millions can be aroused, mobilized, and organized to work for a restoration of limited, constitutional self-government in this country—in short, that patriotism is still alive, angry, and able.
At the seaside, the surfer waits for just the right big wave, then rides it in to shore. In American politics, the big wave of self-government has been waiting for just the right surfer—and when Ron Paul appeared, the wave began to swell. Even if the wave does not crest in this election, Ron Paul’s candidacy will provide the irrefutable evidence that the elemental political forces capable of generating an overwhelmingly powerful wave do exist below the surface, and that these forces can be harnessed and directed against the Establishment in a manner the Establishment cannot thwart. So, even if Ron Paul does not succeed in 2008, patriots can, and must, use the ground swell of enthusiasm he has unleashed to prepare for victory in 2012.
America can survive four years of Giuliani or Clinton—or whichever of its other Pinocchios the Establishment succeeds in foisting off on the country. After all, America already has survived twenty years of the Bush and Clinton families. Oh, it will be arduous, costly, sordid work. But it will not be Hell, only a spell in political Purgatory, because America can work her way out of it. Certainly she will have every incentive to do so. Samuel Johnson once quipped that nothing focuses a man’s attention more than his impending hanging. The same is true for a nation. Whoever is elected President from the present gaggle of candidates, other than Ron Paul, will threaten this country with destruction. Every thinking American instinctively knows that. So, the motto of New Hampshire applies to America now more than ever: “Live free or die!”
But the potential for and urgency of victory is not enough. It is not enough for patriotic Americans to know that they can and must win. They must also take the necessary and sufficient steps to insure that they do win. Here again, revitalizing “the Militia of the several States” can play a key part. Many of the same people who can be instrumental in forming the “Citizens’ Homeland Security Associations” that I advocate in Constitutional “Homeland Security” can serve as the focal-points for organizing the next “Ron Paul” candidacy (even if Representative Paul himself, for some reason, cannot run). And imagine if, not only does a second “Ron Paul” candidacy succeed in 2012, but also the new President enters office in 2013 with “the Militia of the several States” actually revitalized in a few States, and with the revitalization process well on its way elsewhere in the country.
History lays out an encouraging parallel here. Just as were the Japanese at Midway in 1942, America’s enemies in the Establishment today are suffering from “victory disease”—they have won, and won, and won political battle after political battle over the last several decades; and their ascendancy appears so secure, to them at least, that they are wallowing in arrogant self-confidence. Yet, just as the Japanese at Midway knew that they had to finish off the American Navy’s carrier force in one engagement, the Establishment also knows that it must impose a final, crushing defeat on the beleaguered forces of patriotism, before aroused Americans can mobilize vastly superior numbers and resources against it. For, like the Doolittle raid on Japan, Ron Paul’s candidacy has proven what the Establishment surely already knew, that its base is still dangerously insecure. So the Establishment is going out on a limb—or, really, several limbs, from imperialistic aggression in the Middle East, through establishment of a police state here at home, to the creation of the North American Union—to destroy this country and replace it with some new, grotesque creation. And, just as the Japanese at Midway were defeated because they underestimated their opponents, overestimated their own power, and divided their forces, so too will the Establishment be defeated—if patriots can concentrate their efforts along the decisive line of attack.
Ron Paul has taken America midway to restoring self-government, by showing that it is possible. Now it is up to patriots to prove him right. For part one click below.
here for part -----> 1,
© 2007 Edwin Vieira, Jr.
- All Rights Reserved
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).
For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark decisions Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, and Communications Workers of America v. Beck, which established constitutional and statutory limitations on the uses to which labor unions, in both the private and the public sectors, may apply fees extracted from nonunion workers as a condition of their employment.
He has written numerous monographs and articles in scholarly journals, and lectured throughout the county. His most recent work on money and banking is the two-volume Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution (2002), the most comprehensive study in existence of American monetary law and history viewed from a constitutional perspective. www.piecesofeight.us
He is also the co-author (under a nom de plume) of the political novel CRA$HMAKER: A Federal Affaire (2000), a not-so-fictional story of an engineered crash of the Federal Reserve System, and the political upheaval it causes. www.crashmaker.com
He can be reached at:
The bedrock of Representative Paul’s campaign—as of his entire career in politics—is his concern for popular, constitutional self-government.