Sunday, June 22, 2014

A Call to Arms: Part II

On June 17, 2014 I issued a call to arms on this link:


Some of you who read that piece might have thought: “Attacking the military oath of induction isn't a new idea – wasn't that tried by draft resisters during the Vietnam Era?” No, it wasn't. They tried to avoid taking the oath, hoping that would make a difference; there was no thought of renouncing it once taken or replacing it with the several suggstions I made on the link above.

Right now, we have a volunteer military, so – one could say – the pressure is off. During the Vietnam Conflict, the mighty machine known as the Selective Service System was very hard to resist. When your number was called, you went and you were mercilessly pressured into being processed into service. And that's exactly why now is the time to start applying our own pressure by encouraging current military to revise/renounce their oaths. I believe we're going to be snookered into reestablishing the draft, which might be too late to challenge once it's been resurrected from the dead.

Face it – we're always going to be at war. And we'll always have faux anti-war pols like then-Senator Obama. And people will believe in them. I think our next conflict will be in Africa which, at first, a lot of [USA] Americans won't mind. They'll see that as easy as shooting fish in a barrel. But even if that were to be the case, that doesn't make right our projection of force.

Now is the time to take concerted, aggressive action to challenge the machine. I direct these comments to career officers and enlisted personnel current serving:

If you really want to “support and defend the Constitution” as called for in your Oath, then the best way to do so (ironically) would be to renounce your original oath and proceed in the manner I've prescribed. You cannot avoid concluding that the Senate's filibuster rule is unconstitutional. And you should not have to wait for the Supreme Court to act, which it never will by the way. Once the Constitution has been violated, your current oath makes you duty-bound to do something about it.

And it shouldn't matter that the filibuster has been a long-standing Senate institution. Violations of long-standing are still violations. And they should be resisted when a threshhold of public consciousness has been passed. When large numbers of people come to realize how badly they have been cheated and for how long, terrible retribution cannot be far behind.

Many are aware of this abuse and have been for a long time. But they felt powerless to act. By means of my “Call to Arms,” I am telling them they have a tool which they can use to take back their Constitution. So what can you do? Spread the word. It doesn't get any easier than that. You might not think your promotional activities will make any difference. But just remember: A journey of 1,000 miles begins with a single step. You can do this and we have to start somewhere.


A new wrinkle

I thought of yet another strategy since posting “A Call to Arms.” I'd like to see an on-line petition set up which will allow active-duty military to state publicly:

I, [name, rank, and branch of service], hereby cast my vote – that I believe the US Senate's filibuster rule is unconstitutional and should be actively opposed by our military establishment, up to and including the arrest of all Senators who refuse to act to permanently strike this rule from the books.

If military brass would try to thwart such a petition by ordering troops to ignore it, that would (in effect) be the same as ordering them to ignore their oath. Which of course they cannot do.


A note to progressive activists

It's time you stop playing around by doing useless stuff like kneejerkingly supporting a black man for President – or whatever the future equivalent of that support would turn out to be. You've got to start focusing on stuff that will work. We don't have all the time in the world for you to entertain us with your more far-fetched fantasies, one of which I'll address now: The ESRA – the Environmental & Social Responsibility Amendment.

This proposed amendment to the US Constitution has been promoted by Rabbi Michael Lerner for over four years now. He is currently trying to enlist the aid of MoveOn.org to generate some traction for this dubious cause. On May 18, 2010 I had sent Rabbi Lerner an email which included this sentence:

The ESRA, with 1527 words, is 3.5 times wordier than the Fourteenth Amendment, the currently wordiest of them all.”

That was four years ago. Well, now the amendment is 4234 words in length, which is just about as long as the entire US Constitution (main body only, minus the amendments), which is 4440 words in length. This alone should argue against its merits. But I will direct you to a post I'd written four years ago which contains specific arguments against this mess of an amendment:



This link connects you to the current incarnation of the ESRA, of which you will notice my arguments posted four years ago still apply:



There's a saying: The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. We can't afford the luxury of indulging in such good intentions as the ESRA. We've got to get sober and put serious effort behind strategies which can work. Compared to the ESRA, any serious movement to challenge the illegitimate filibuster rule is far more worthy of your time and attention.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle, just another member of the
Virtual Samgha of the Lotus and
Former Candidate for USA President (in 2008 & 2012)

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com


No comments:

Post a Comment