–“The means of defence against foreign danger, have always been the instruments of tyranny at home.” James Madison, 29 June 2 1787 (1)
–“Wherever standing armies are kept up, and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. “St. George Tucker, 1803 (2)
–“What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty…. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.” Elbridge Gerry, 17 August 1789 (3)
–“A standing army, however necessary it may be at some times, is always dangerous to the liberties of the people. Soldiers are apt to consider themselves as a body distinct from the rest of the citizens … They soon become attached to their officers and disposed to yield implicit obedience to their commands. “Samuel Adams to James Warren, 1776 (4)
During the republic-wide debate over ratification of the Constitution that was completed in Philadelphia in September, 1787, there appeared some of the finest political analysis and argument that the world has ever known. The positions in the debate solidified into two groups, Federalists and Anti-Federalists. As older Americans know — having been schooled by teachers not partisan ideologues — the Federalists carried the day, and there opponents slowly became thought of, until recently, as anachronistic and anti-modern. But now that worm has turned.
One issue on which the Anti-Federalists proved to be absolutely correct and the Federalists emerged as — perhaps unwittingly — as the purveyors of tyranny, was the constant and lethal treat posed to liberty, freedom, and republicanism by standing armies. In England’s history, the fear of standing armies was endemic, and was warned about by such great English republicans as Thomas Gordon, John Trenchard, James Herrington, and Joseph Addison.
The works of these men were read and well-regarded by our Founding generation, and were buttressed by their own suspicions of standing armies, based on the violence, theft. and law-breaking they saw from the British Army in America both before and during the revolution. After the revolution, Washington and Hamilton favored as strong a standing army as the ant-standing-army Congress, publishers, and the citizenry would permit. Both knew, however, that there would be no support for large, standing U.S. military forces. Washington initial, 1783 suggestions to the Articles of Confederation government for the creation of a post-revolution support were presented in a a very moderate paper, one gently titled “Sentiments on a Peace Establishment”. (1)
Like Washington, Alexander Hamilton, often regarded as the most militarist of the Founders, fully understood not only the animosity of the citizenry toward a standing army, but shared the peoples’ fear of a standing army because it could be used to overthrow America’s republican system and enthrone that army and its leaders at the head of a tyranny. Such a course could be best secured, Hamilton argued, by a government that argued — honestly or deceitfully — that the republic was surrounded by powerful foreign and/or internal enemies who were ready to pounce. “But in a country,” Hamilton wrote in the eighth Federalist Paper,
where the perpetual [interventionist] menacings of danger oblige the government to be always prepared to repel it, her armies must be numerous enough for instant defence. The continual necessity for his services enhances the importance of the soldier, and proportionally degrades the condition of the citizen. The military state becomes elevated above the civil. The inhabitants of territories often the theatre of war, are unavoidably subjected to frequent infringements on their rights, which serve to weaken their sense of those rights; and by degrees, the people are brought to consider the soldiery not only as their protectors, but as their superiors. (2)
Not surprisingly another facet of the Founders’ effort to close down, as much as possible, a standing army’s threat to liberty and republicanism, can be found in the 2nd Amendment. Americans were given the right to bear arms, and each state was given the right and duty to organize an effective militia. That is the sum and substance of the 2nd Amendment as it was written and as its stands a today. Currently, the states are derelict in not maintaining a strong and well-trained state militia, which would be drawn from and supported by the armed citizenry. The intend of the 2nd Amendment was to provide citizens and their state governments with tools that could be used to defend their interests against a tyranny- wielding national government, such as the one Americans face today.
The present U.S. military establishment appears to be as least as much a threat to American liberty as are the republic’s foreign enemies. Regarding the latter, it has not won a war since V-Jay Day, but reaps an unconscionable annual budget for continuing to fail.
Currently this failure is led by three despicable men; men who are undeniably traitors to their country and to their oath of allegiance: Chrm/JCS Milley, who misled and lied to his commander-and-chief and plotted a coup against Trump with Pelosi and others; Secretary of Defense Austin, a raging Black supremacist who is denying enlisted personnel their liberties under the Bill of Rights and Constitution; and the clearly deranged, retired Lieutenant-General Honore who is preparing the military to wage war against American conservatives, and who unconstitutionally seized weapons from U.S. citizens in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina. These three traitors are supported by, at least, the 4oo officers who Obama made room for by firing the same number of experienced combat officers he considered too loyal to the republic.
On the face of it — and especially because these three mad scum-dog generals are planning war on the loyal citizenry — Americans ought to begin to rethink their fawning admiration of all members of the U.S. military and relearn to regard them as an increasing threat to their liberties and tax-eaters who never win anything. They also should begin to think about necessary future actions if the relatively tiny number of Biden’s traitors who now are seeking to subvert the U.S. military appear to be succeeding. Action in the near term would be like sponging up a small pool of putrid, spoiled milk. The longer they remain in place, the harder the task will be, and the tools used to eliminte them much different.
And if the military’s enlisted personnel continue to be quiescent dupes and de facto anti-Americans in their acceptance of Critical Race Theory and intense anti-American and anti-white indoctrination, the loyal citizenry should quickly learn to hate them and accept that the military they so long admired and bore excessive taxes for are now just another sordid and lethal component of the China-owned Democratic Party.
–Endnotes:
–1.) James Madison, 29 June 1787, https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_629.asp
–2. St. John Tucker, 1803, https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs7.html
–3.) Elbridge Gerry, 1803, Speech in Congress 17 August 1789; https://www.madisonbrigade.com
–4.) Samuel Adams to John Warren, 1776, http://www.samuel-adams-heritage.com/documents/samuel-adams-to-james-warren-1776.html
–5.) George Washington, “Sentiments on a Peace Establishment,” 2 May 1783, http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_12s6.html
–6.) Federalist 8, 20 November 1787, in George W. Carey, and James McClellan, The Federalist, The Gideon Edition, p.35
