It is about expanding the empire, not defending the homeland"
I do respect those who have served in the US military with the intent to defend our nation. However, with the exception of World War II, wars waged by the United States have not been defensive in nature. Too often, our imperialist government has used US soldiers as pawns in wars of aggression waged under the guise of "protecting" or "spreading" democracy. To maintain the obscene profits of entities like Halliburton and the Carlyle Group, our government has sold many Americans on the notion that wild hordes of barbarians stand ready to storm the "castle gates" of our nation to rape our women and plunder our wealth. Even if that were the case (and it is not), the United States could mount a viable defense on much less than $500 billion per year.
I believe in achieving goals through non-violence, but I am not a pacifist. I own a gun and would not hesitate to act to protect my family in the event of a real threat to their safety. As individuals have the right to defend themselves and their families, nations possess the same right. Yet why does the United States, a nation representing 5% of the world's population, need to account for 50% of annual world military expenditures while maintaining military bases in 130 countries? Were I to follow my government's example, I would fill several rooms of our home with a variety of munitions and explosives, and hire a squadron of private militia to patrol our city, simply to ensure my family's safety.
While the avid supporters of the American Empire scorn those who support a greater emphasis on the betterment of humanity, the military they are so quick to deify is poised to nullify the very freedoms it purportedly exists to protect. Throughout history, the state has been a threat to the freedom of individuals. The principle weapon of government to impose its will upon the people has been the military. For many years, the US government has carefully crafted a covert tyranny of the wealthy through the use of media and propaganda, but as more Americans awaken to the true nature of their state, the Bush regime is becoming more eager to employ its unparalleled military power on the domestic front.
Posse Comitatus, a law which essentially prevents the military from policing the domestic populace, represents a thin veneer of protection against the imposition of martial law. Since it is statutory law and not derived from the Constitution, it can be altered or nullified by further legislation. Reagan trampled Posse Comitatus when he used the Air Force and Navy to fight the "war on drugs". Bush told us in his address during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina that he wants to expand federal authority and the military's role in domestic matters. In his recent press conference he told us that he will press Congress for the authority to employ martial law in the event of an Avian Flu pandemic. The presence of Blackwater paramilitary security forces and the emphasis of property protection over saving human lives in New Orleans provided a glimpse of what the Bush regime has in store for America's citizenry.
Based on reader feedback I have received, it is apparent that a fair number of Americans are prepared to sacrifice what freedoms they still have for the "security" afforded them by increased federal and military authority. Obviously they have not read Orwell, or if they have, apparently did not take his ideas seriously. The Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security have broadened federal powers and seriously infringed upon fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. One of the most dangerous aspects of the Patriot Act is that it empowers law enforcement to act outside of the system of checks and balances so crucial to our Constitutional republic. Consolidation of FEMA into Homeland Security was one of the causes of the feeble federal response to the disaster in New Orleans. To those so eager to rush to the "secure embrace" of Big Brother, I would remind you that the fates of Jose Padilla, the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, the residents of New Orleans, or even those of the Japanese citizens interned during World War II could befall you.
As Benjamin Franklin once said:
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."
In 1935, Sinclair Lewis published It Can't Happen Here, his depiction of a "democratically elected" US president imposing a tyranny on Americans. In 2005, life is imitating art. However, there are those of us who are willing to sacrifice and endure whatever is necessary for the cause of a more humane and just government and society. I will stay in the United States to work for something better. I will continue to teach my children to struggle for social causes. And yes, I will persist in my writing and other forms of dissent against the tyranny of the aristocracy, regardless of the consequences.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
