Dr. Edwin Vieira,
Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
November 12, 2007
The last thing I claim to be is a political-campaign tactician.
Yet it seems obvious to me that revitalization of “the Militia of the several States” ought to become a major
issue in Representative Paul’s Presidential campaign, for the following reasons:
1. Revitalization of “the Militia of the several
States” is required by the Constitution—“[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security
of a free State” (U.S. Const. amend. II). To this author’s knowledge, at the present time no State either has
a fully constitutional Militia in place or intends to raise such a Militia, notwithstanding all the problems of “homeland
security” that confront this Nation.
Self-evidently, a constitutionalist candidate should promote
whatever the Constitution requires—particularly when the Constitution describes no establishment or institution other
than the Militia as being “necessary” for any purpose. And especially when neither Congress, nor any State,
nor any Presidential candidate is doing or saying anything of consequence about this unconscionable and dangerous disjunction
between constitutional mandates and political practices.
2. Revitalization of “the Militia of the several
States” is necessary to set any program of “homeland security” on a legally proper and practical foundation.
Basing “homeland security” on the Militia will uniquely
comport with the Constitution, which explicitly assigns the authority and power “to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress
Insurrections and repel Invasions” to the Militia and only to the Militia, and explicitly assigns the duty to
“take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” only to the President of the United States, who it appoints
as “Commander in Chief * * * of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United
States” (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 15; art. II, § 3; and art. II, § 2, cl. 1).
Basing “homeland security” on the Militia will promote
federalism in the most thoroughgoing manner possible, because it will organize “the security of a free State”
from the bottom up, through mobilization of concerned and knowledgeable citizens within each of the States, not from the top
down, through a central bureaucracy staffed with supposed “professional security experts” within the General Government.
Basing “homeland security” on the Militia will remove
any further excuse for the on-going para-militarization of State and Local police forces, ultimately subject to directives
from the General Government’s Department of Homeland Security. This will thwart the creation, whether intentional or
accidental, of a National police state in this country.
Basing “homeland security” on the Militia will mobilize
tens of millions of Americans for various types of service—far in excess of any police or emergency-response forces
that could possibly be raised otherwise, let alone funded.
Basing “homeland security” on the Militia will prepare
this country for any conceivable crisis, because it will bring to bear on the question the minds of millions of citizens best
situated, most knowledgeable, most experienced, and most highly motivated to foresee future problems in their own States and
Localities, and to devise workable solutions for those problems that take maximum advantage of the personnel and resources
Thus, making revitalization of the Militia a major campaign issue
would demonstrate to the electorate Representative Paul’s concern for and realistic assessment of what is requisite
for successful “homeland security.” Indeed, it would demonstrate that he is stronger and more cogent on “national
security” than any other candidate, because he would be the only one with a plan that was at once constitutional, comprehensive,
practical, and proofed against a National police state.
3. Revitalization of “the Militia of the several
States” will restore popular self-government in this country.
At the present time, little scope exists for intensive self-government
in America, other than during elections and on those odd occasions when large numbers of citizens may be moved to petition
their representatives with respect to some controversial pending legislation or other governmental action. In contrast, when
revitalized the Militia will be permanent institutions, in continuous activity, directing the attentions of the vast majority
of citizens every day towards all the needs of “homeland security” in their Localities, their States, and the
Nation as a whole. The Militia will provide citizens, not only with a context in which critical political debate and action
could take place, but also with a personal and collective sense of need, of mission, of cohesion, and of competence. Moreover,
through the Militia, a large measure of initiative, authority, and responsibility will pass from public officials to the people,
to be exercised by them directly. The people will be able to solve problems themselves, rather than wait for others to solve
them (and generally be disappointed by the results); and to act immediately, often in advance of danger, not when it is too
late. Thus, as members of the Militia, citizens will become active, self-directed participants in self-government, rather
than remaining mere spectators who can do little more than respond to the initiatives or (more likely) failures of others.
The bedrock of Representative Paul’s campaign—as of
his entire career in politics—is his concern for popular, constitutional self-government. Making revitalization of the
Militia a major issue would demonstrate how this political philosophy can be translated into actions that truly promote “the
common defence” and “the general Welfare” (U.S. Const. preamble).
4. Revitalization of “the Militia of the several
States” will provide a means for the American people themselves to effect many critical reforms in addition to the restructuring
of “homeland security” against “terrorists.”
The likelihood of a collapse of America’s monetary and banking
systems in the not-too-distant future hangs over this country as a sword of Damocles. Although major reforms of those systems
are absolutely essential, for Congress or the Judiciary to undertake any significant actions in that direction unless and
until a financial catastrophe erupts is improbable to the point of impossibility. Representative Paul is the only major political
figure speaking out on the issue. But it is not enough even for him simply to advocate “repeal” of the Federal
Reserve System without explaining exactly how—gradually and systematically, according to a detailed plan—this
country’s monetary and banking arrangements could be restructured without plunging the markets into extreme turbulence,
and the country into social and political crises.
A controlled reform, however, could be effected through “the
Militia of the several States.” As part of a plan for providing economic “homeland security,” the Militia
could require their members gradually and methodically to acquire adequate amounts of silver and gold coin, to maintain accounts
in “electronic” silver and gold (such as through or an equivalent service), and to conduct
their common business transactions in silver and gold as well as in, or even in preference to or to the exclusion of, Federal
Reserve Notes. Because the Militia would consist of the vast majority of the general public, these steps would quickly create
a parallel currency system of silver and gold coinage, actually employed in day-to-day transactions as media of exchange,
that could circumvent, supplement, compete with, and if necessary in (or even before) an economic calamity altogether replace
the Federal Reserve’s fiat currency and the Treasury’s base-metallic coinage—whether in just a few States
or throughout the Nation as a whole. Moreover, in his constitutional capacity as “Commander in Chief * * * of the Militia
of the several States,” President Ron Paul could encourage, facilitate, or even direct this process without having
to wait for a politically reluctant or incompetent Congress to act—and without having to defer to the Federal Reserve’s
“monetary policy”, because the use of silver and gold by common Americans within the Militia is neither a part
of, nor subject to, that “policy.”
Thus, by incorporating revitalization of “the Militia of
the several States” into his campaign, Representative Paul could present to the voters a very concrete, comprehensive,
and credible method for dealing decisively with the dangers the Federal Reserve System poses.
A problem that Representative Paul, as a constitutional “strict
constructionist,” will be forced to face throughout his campaign will be the attempt on the part of other candidates
and the big media to malign him as “insensitive” to the needs of the poor and disadvantaged, because he refuses
on principle to endorse proposals to alleviate poverty and other economic ills by means of “top-down” bureaucratic
schemes for redistribution of wealth. Here, too, supporting revitalization of the Militia could materially assist his candidacy.
One critical function of “homeland security” assigned
to the revitalized Militia will be to maintain economic and social stability in their States and Localities. “The economy”
and “society” are not bloodless abstractions, however. First and foremost, maintaining economic and social stability
entails maintaining the economic and social stability and well-being of particular individuals, families, local businesses,
educational and charitable institutions, and so on.
Because every able-bodied adult citizen will serve in some capacity
in the Militia, everyone through the force of circumstances will learn to work with everyone else, and through relationships
of mutual reliance and responsibility will come to be concerned with everyone else’s welfare. Participation in the Militia
will teach Americans—from all social and economic classes, and all walks of life—
that their legitimate interests are often identical, and even
more often interdependent; that people should gain from the community in proportion to what they contribute to it; that the
selfish outlooks of special-interest groups and factions are counterproductive, socially destabilizing, and unpatriotic; and
that unity in a community depends upon instilling in each member a recognition of his personal duty to every to other member,
and through that recognition creating a spirit of mutual purpose, cooperation, reliance, and trust.
Thus, the Militia will become, in important part, institutions
for promoting true social welfare, primarily on the Local but also on the State level. Militia units will concern themselves
with the economic condition of their individual members and their members’ families. They will raise money for those
in difficulty, arrange for jobs, and generally act as clearing-houses to match the needs and skills of some members to the
resources and opportunities that other members can provide. They will assist legal immigrants to assimilate quickly. And they
will even help to socialize troubled youths, by taking them from street gangs and other undesirable milieux (including the
menticidal “public schools”) into the discipline of Militia training where responsible members of the community
will mentor them in patriotism, constitutionalism, and general civilized behavior. [See Ron Paul and Edwin Vieira in the new
DVD "Fiat Empire"]
Moreover, because the Militia will operate in the very Localities
where social-welfare work may prove to be needed; will number among their members not only the individuals who may require
assistance but also those who can best provide it; and will otherwise have unique knowledge of Local needs, personnel, and
resources; they will perform the social-welfare function far more efficiently than distant, aloof, and uncaring governmental
agencies and the bureaucrats infesting them.
Applying federalism, subsidiarity, self-reliance, and concern
for the general welfare of their communities, the Militia will demonstrate a “compassionate constitutionalism”
that will exceed in scope and effectiveness anything that could be accomplished either through “liberal” politicians’
bureaucratic “welfare” schemes, or through “conservatives’” “trickle-down economics.”
Thus, making revitalization of the Militia a key issue in Representative Paul’s campaign would enable him to turn the
tables on all of his detractors.
5. Revitalization of “the Militia of the several
States” will cut across the dividing lines on America’s phony “right/center/left” political spectrum,
and unite Local communities in mutual efforts directed towards providing the only true “homeland security,” “the
security of a free State.”
Tens of millions of Americans instinctively know what “the
security of a free State” is—and that they do not now enjoy it. They have been prevented from attaining that security
primarily because of: (i) the political oligopoly consisting of the “two” major political parties, professional
politicians, special-interest groups, and the big media; and (ii) the “divide-and-rule” tactics that oligopoly
has successfully employed in election after election. Americans realize that this is the situation, and resent it—but
they do not know what to do to rectify it.
Revitalizing the Militia is the answer. The Militia will disarm
the oligopoly and frustrate its tactics. Because their purpose is unitary—providing “the security of a free State”,
and nothing less—the Militia will tolerate no parties, special-interest groups, or factions that detract from the unity
necessary to achieve that end. And “divide and rule” will have neither place, nor proponents, nor practitioners
within the Militia, because (as pointed out above) mutual duty, purpose, cooperation, reliance, and trust will be the rule.
For part two click below.
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
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;
anti-constitutional—because the Constitution requires
the Militia to be properly organized, armed, disciplined, and trained;
against federalism— because the Militia are
“the Militia of the several States”;
against popular self-government— because the Militia are “We
against the only kind of “homeland security” that the Constitution declares to be “necessary”
for “a free State”—and therefore implicitly against “a free State”—and therefore implicitly
in favor of a police state; and
distrustful, fearful, and even contemptuous of common Americans.
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.
What do you intend to do, at the Federal level, to prevent such
an apparatus from being constructed?
Do you support a revitalization of “the Militia of the
several States” along strict constitutional lines, so that, in the event of a regional or national crisis, the control
and direction of “homeland- security” operations at the State and Local levels will remain in the hands of the
States’ Militia and other public officials, with Federal assistance to be brought in only when and to the degree necessary,
and in any case fully subordinated to State authority? If you support such a policy, what do you intend to do to bring it
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.