Civil unrest and martial law in the US

I sear Rod you are becoming the Hal Lindsey of Poltical commentary nowadays. The Late Great Planet Earth by Rod Dreher :)

I must say for all those that complain about WHERE was the fed in New Orleans well if you wantt a repsonse to a National Disaster you got to prepare fo it.

If A nuclear Bomb goes off in LA and the Fall out is heading your way to Dallas shall we have the Louisiana and Texas State police handle the panic as you and your loved ones are trying to escape the clouds of death.

While I do appreciate the concerns I am pretty sure the ethos of American Culture will make sure that Martial law is not decalred at a drop of a hat if it occurs

JH, the fact remains that Congress did make the changes in the law that made it much easier for the US government to deploy federal troops domestically -- and Congress passed this act over the objections of many state governors. Read the Bovard story. You don't have to become a conspiracy theorist or a Soldier of Fortune-reading survivalist to be troubled by that, and to foresee how it could be misused.

Rufus, as to your scenario, my wife pointed out this morning when I told her about the Army Times story that J.H. Kunstler's novel "World Made By Hand" begins in an America broken up by a devastating epidemic hitting amid an economic collapse. It wasn't a single thing that broke the country, but the confluence of several major events and phenomena that overwhelmed the system's ability to cope.

"While I do appreciate the concerns I am pretty sure the ethos of American Culture will make sure that Martial law is not declared at a drop of a hat if it occurs"

And if you ask a frog, he will swear that you would NEVER be able to boil him. But we all know how easy that is... just keep adding hotter and hotter water, and pretty soon? Frog Soup.

That's what's happening to us. Our "representatives" and elected "leaders" continue to pass these potentially dangerous pieces of legislation (and sometimes the ridiculous - wooden arrows, anyone?), but it's buried in the 400-500 pages of pork legislation, and nobody is willing to read it.

If only EVERY piece of legislation passed received the same type of scrutiny that the recent "bailout" bill received. The scrutiny didn't matter this time, but perhaps if people realized that nearly EVERY bill looks like that, we wouldn't be so quick to re-elect the morons that are up there now.

move to Alaska

So, my SIL, who is the daughter of P. Farrah founder of Home Depot....no kidding, I am serious.....and operates on the stock market all day every day, suggested that everyone have 3 months supply of food just in case there is, in her words, "a bank blip that causes supply line troubles", 3 months supply on money in the house and a way to have clean water. She said for me up here in Alaska, make sure I have wood heat. She said this is MOST LIKELY NOT going to be needed. But she felt that, especially given the way Alaska is isolated form the US supply line, that these would be important for us. She said she is NOT, I repeat, NOT an advocate of stuffing money under your mattress. However, she said, these are times never seen in our generation so being prepared is better than trusting. She said DO NOT pull your money out of the bank because that will devalue it for everyone if a lot of people do that and we will be using it for wall paper if that happens.

Wasn't there a poster under the Ron Paul thread who said his friend just left the country for a month because he anticipated marital law and foriegn travel restrictions soon?

Doesn't the Ron Paul essay say something is going to be happening but he didn't say what?

Do YOU have a food supply?

If I hadn't read this myself in Army Times, I would have thought all this was conspiracy theory, but it's not. I have to say that it might be comforting to have troops around should the unthinkable terroist attack occur and we may all be glad for it. If an economic collapse happens, then troops will not only do "crowd control", they will hand out food and such. I would HOPE American troops would treat American people kindly.

The scary thing is that the Bush Administration has found a way to legalize a lot of things that our fore-fathers learned from EXPERIENCE are BAD for freedom and democracy.(martial law, torture, pre-emptive anything) He seems to have "forgotten" that those early American leaders were opperating from direct contact with things like Napolean, the French Revolution, Prussian gov't suppression and so on. They were actually being WISE, as in learning from the mistakes of others.

Shelley

Wasn't there a poster under the Ron Paul thread who said his friend just left the country for a month because he anticipated marital law and foreign travel restrictions soon?

It was my friend who recently left the country, but NOT because he feared the imposition of martial law. That was simply a side issue -- he feared that martial law would be imposed prior to his leaving, thus preventing his travel.

I think he's a bit loony. But every time I'm tempted to argue with his logic, I'm at a loss to do so. Still think he's crazy, but I'm keeping an open mind about this subject especially in light of stuff like this.

Rod,

My worse-case scenario would be something akin to what would have happened if a Great Depression-type economic catastrophe had begun in 1939 instead of 1929.

Or if a Pearl-Harbor-type attack had occurred in 1931 instead of 1941.

And if the President had been Huey Long or Henry Wallace.

And all that on top of a citizenry who were not only under-educated and misinformed by the governing elites, but also lacking in moral resources to weather hard times.

There some chance we'll all get to see what that would've been like in the next few years.

This is not surprising given our current administration. A small number of people in the executive branch have decided that they know what is best for the country. They have ignored treaties, laws and ethics by which we have functioned for years. They have not tolerated any dissent and have worked in secrecy.

The decision to torture is a good example. This decision was made absent any input from people who had real experience in interrogation. There has not been any monitoring to see if the program is actually effective. The law has been manipulated to achieve whatever end is desired.

The executive branch wanted carte blanche to engage in surveillance of anyone, anywhere without any oversight. How can this not lead to abuse?

I am not sure why the Insurrection act needed broadening. it already provided a lot of latitude. The National Guard is already present. This current act provides for too easily abused powers.

The actual training which these troops are undergoing seems appropriate. If there were a real national emergency, under the Insurrection Act, their skills would be useful. I suspect it is something they are working on also with an eye towards nation building. If you have been following the situation with the cartels in Mexico, with over 400 police dead there this year, they may also be needed to help on the border.

Steve

Thanks for an injection of level headed thinking, Mr. Mills.

The military and current administration are damned if they do, damned if they don't. Now they are faulted by the Crunchy "Con" for being too damned prepared for the worst.

You are hanging out in the paleo fever swamps on this site.

Chris: e're not ticking time bombs just waiting to rape, pillage and oppress the citizens of the United States. If you actually knew some soldiers or had served your country you would know that.

Chris, my brother-in-law is an officer who returned this summer from a year in Baghdad. I'm not talking about the Big Bad Military, or the character of soldiers. I'm talking about powers the federal government has granted to itself to use the military in a way that our laws have traditionally guarded against. To misconstrue this as an attack on the good character of soldiers is to badly miss the point.

Besides, Chris, AnotherBeliever -- who is now on active duty in Iraq -- understands the importance of this. It's not about whether or not soldiers are good people. It's about what a future Commander in Chief might order soldiers to do against his or her own people, in the name of "helping" them.

Shelley, I looked for that Ron Paul interview from CNN online, but couldn't find it. I think, though, from looking at Paul's statements in the past day or so -- see www.ronpaul.com -- that the thing he's talking about is a depression coming -- this on the theory that what Washington is doing is only deferring the day of reckoning, and making it much worse.

"When I decided to finally start a blog after years of reading other blogs and thinking, "I can do this, why don't I start a blog?" I knew that I wanted it to be a current events blog because that was my interest, I wanted to share with others what I found on the Internet and what I thought of it. But I didn't just want it to be a normal current events blog, I wanted to reflect my love of the Lord and my reformed Christian worldview. I believe that it would seep through my posts and that it wasn't necessary to be explicit about it. I believed that the name of the blog warned the reader that they weren't in for the views of a typical "evangelical," conservative, religious right Christian. Maybe I expected more of my reader than they were able to comprehend but I've been trying to remedy that with links in the sidebar and trying to publish posts about the distinctives of Reformed Theology (this being the first of many, I hope :-)"

I'd agree this is something worth paying some attention to, but I wouldn't get too overwrought about it just yet. As pointed out, some degree of military involvement in domestic disaster preparedness is a good idea. However, the implications of this sort of thing are always worth watching and debating, particularly to the extent they can be used as precedent for more disturbing stuff.

Also, I can remember the days (back in the 1990s) when some people thought FEMA was a powerful Death Star-like federal entity that had the ability and desire to seize control of America when the right time came. Yeah, some people actually thought that about FEMA. Those were the days...

Rufus, I hope you read the following before responding to my first post, because I just realized that I left it open to be taken as an insult. That was not my intention at all.

Only you can decide if you've been "given proper motivation", and only you can step back and rethink your conclusions. You may be right, and no sane person will deny that. You may also be yet another victim of fear mongering; that doesn't make you either stupid or a fool. I can assert that because you've shown in your writing that you are capable of rational critical thinking... but no one can employ that skill who has been kept in ignorance, who has been conditioned to where hot buttons that are readily pushed by those in power.

I don't see myself as smarter or wiser than you are, or anyone else. I do see myself as less ignorant, which while not necessarily saying much, does allow me to keep my paranoia under control... more often than in the past, anyway.

A) We lost the republic 150 years ago so that's hardly the issue.

B) I'm not sure have active duty soldiers is that big of a change from having a militarized police force, which has been a fact of American life for over a century.

c) The time for dictatorships of naked force is past in advanced societies. It's completely unnecessary. The powers that be can control the populace with education and the media far more effectively than with police state tactics. It's cheaper and easier too, far fewer rebellions to put down. Everyone stays fat and happy in their chains. If you control their minds there is no reason to control their bodies.

"Rufus, I spent much of the last 30 years in a sub-culture ruled by paranoia. We kept aspects of our lives secret, we avoided wearing anything that might remotely allow others to identify us, and we had our paranoia bolstered by true -- and anecdotal -- stories of one of our number being outed in a situation that resulted in loss of jobs, loss of child custody, and threats of violence. My GLBT friends would rightly assume I mean them, but they'd be wrong. I am a pagan. But I could easily truly mean them, or an ethnic minority, or a people of color."

Funny, I used to be a pagan now I'm Christian. I had a whole lot less problems with "loss of jobs, loss of child custody, and threats of violence" as a pagan. About the worse thing you can be in American society today, in many people's eyes, is a Christian, one that actually believes in and tries to practice the faith that is (cultural Christians are excluded since there is nothing about them that sets them off from the [post-Christian, neo-pagan] society])

The panic will begin at Walmart:

Somewhere in America, a few people will start to hoard food and necessities, making large purchases of a month's supply (or more) of canned goods, bottled water, batteries, ammunition, etc. Others will take notice and do likewise.

A local television will report on the phenomenon.

Walmart shelves will start to empty out in an uncharacteristic manner. More people will take notice.

The credit liquidity crisis will worsen, and some stores will announce that they no longer accepts credit or debit cards. Then, perhaps due to unrelated circumstances, a certain Walmart store or region of stores will be unable to process credit cards, debit cards, or checks.

News of this localized event will hit the internet and spread like wildfire, causing a mass panic of emergency buying. Grocery supply lines will not be able to keep up with the sudden increase in demand, thus creating shortages.

Mass hysteria is not far behind. People start running on their banks, their gas stations, and grocery stores simultaneously. There will be no choice but to declare martial law.

The edge of the abyss is closer than you think.

"This is spectacular paranoia. The brigade has been assigned for a disaster relief mission, not a combat mission inside of the United States."

Uh, Chris Mills, just which disaster would that be that we weren't expecting before October 1?

"Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Barack."

If martial law comes, it will be the left who impose it, all in the name of democracy, inclusiveness and tolerance, or most likely, child protection. Remember Waco? Remember the Texas Mormon compound?

They'll shoot you and send "grief counselors" for your kids.

As you requested, Rufus, I reread your post at 1:05pm. I deserves a reasoned response, and I urge other readers to reread it as well, as I will trim to avoid making this overlong.

(1) The real and and ongoing possibility of catastrophic terrorist attacks...

This is a primary factor in fear mongering. The price of an open society is attacks from those who would -- for whatever reason -- push us to act and react out of fear by curtailing our liberties. Ben Franklin had the right of it, and those who would easily give up liberty for safety deserve neither.

For me, this is the single, most important point in this or any context, and stands alone: we expect our citizens to be law-abiding and to contribute to the greater good without expectation of recompense. That is where liberty starts. The moment you surrender to fear, the moment you call upon citizens to expect the face of the stranger to hide criminal intent, you destroy any possibility of true liberty.

(2) The real and ongoing possibility of a catastrophic collapse of our financial system...

We have microeconomic examples of this every day. Local economies flourish and die because of just such collapses in their primary industries. I consider the mindset that wants 100% growth and prosperity one that has no understanding of commerce, capitalism and economic cycles. I have no illusions about the scope of a national-level banking collapse, but if that is what we've brought upon ourselves, the only prevention from it happening again is for those who created it to go down in the flames they set. I agree that this response of mine, out of context, is extreme and invalid, but in the larger context I insist that the points are both valid and important.

(3) The ongoing decline in cultural standards -- especially in terms of the moral and intellectual cultivation of future generations...

Again, something we've created, and should pay for. The apex of that decline (well, nadir) is the moral bankruptcy of a Congress and Executive that refuses to acknowledge more than two alternatives to the current crisis, and rams a bail out down our throats because "doing nothing" is the extent of their cowardly view.

(4) The election of a demagogic, would-be messianic President who springs from a politically radical subculture that regards American democratic norms at best as necessary evils and at worse as active impediments to its ultimate goals.

I respectfully submit that Ronald Reagan fit that profile exactly. Supply-side, trickle-down, Star Wars and "there you go again" all fit the bill.

(5) The relative scarcity of impartial and non-partisan media and an impartial and non-partisan education system and culture industry...

I further submit that the media is only as strong as the readership insists upon their being, the education system has long since been politicized and ruined by people ignorant of education process, and while I'm not sure what you mean by "culture industry", I speculate that it starts with freedom of speech and finds its failure in the demagoguery of culture, something within the realm of the people and frequently shown to be a complete failure when driven by political processes.

(6) The ongoing erosion of civil liberties which said demagogic, would-be messianic President would do noting to reverse and much to accelerate.

The only people to blame for that are the people who exercise their liberties. The liberty of the franchise has been spat upon by 50% of the eligible voters for decades. The party powers that be have routinely enjoyed that failure by manipulating the voter turnout as much as they could get away with.

I share your view of Kundera, and the accuracy of his observations. I ask you to apply them to every administration and Congressional majority regardless of party. When I let my paranoia out to breathe, it leaps to an immediate conclusion: we are one short step away from fascism, and it could come from either party. It became possible when our civic morality failed to uphold the balance that with liberty comes obligation to share it. Populism is not about feeling good. It's about peaceful co-existence.

Contrary to the assertions of some of the more panic-prone posters here (try saying THAT three times fast !), I seriously doubt we're going to see the End of The World coming out of this financial grief we've managed to inflict on ourselves.

What we're far more likely to wind up with is a quasi-Depression, lasting perhaps 15 years or so, where the central government first tries to jolt the economy into productivity (the Bailout), and then is forced to take steps to actually begin balancing its books after foreign creditors decide to stop or slow down their buying our central-government debt. Since spending is not likely to slow under either Dems or GOP in the White House, this will almost certainly lead to tax hikes of various flavors. These tax hikes will slow growth to next to nothing.

Eventually, however, the spending is going to have to stop. Since interest is untouchable (unless the central government repudiates or defaults on its debt, in which case all bets are off), and discretionary spending accounts for less than 25 % of the budget, there will only be two places to get the needed balancing from: defense and entitlements. I predict that defense will get slashed radically first, since the power of the current regime is based on maintaining the flow of entitlement money from taxpayers to beneficiaries.

In short, we're more likely to see our "democracy" come to a halt via redistributionist bureaucracy (which will keep the regime in power through maintaining transfers of income to what are essentially blocs of bribed voters) and a more explicit national socialism--probably under the guise of "fairness" and "sharing" and "civil rights"--than we are to see it come through a fiery collapse. We're going to get a whimper, not a bang.

The fatal American Disease is sentimentality, after all, not ruthlessness or hardheadedness.

Your servant,

Lord Karth

We already ceded emergency powers to the current president. This administration has already declared that the commander-in-chief has few (none?) limits on his power in that role. This administration changed the rules on deploying the military that Rod described. This administration engaged in domestic spying, secretly engaged us in torture, ignored international treaties and US history to lock away Americans and foreigners with no recourse to any law, granted the VP a role never envisioned in the Constitution, engaged in preemptive war and used signing statements in an unprecedented number to ignore laws passed by Congress.

In short, this administration has shown us that in order to defend our freedoms, it is willing to deny and abridge any existing liberties for as long as it deems fit. Most of what some people are afraid Obama might do, has been done by Bush/Cheney. Will Obama reverse these? Maybe. Will McCain continue these policies. Almost definitely. His selection of VP tells us that he will continue as far to the right as possible.

Steve

AB- There is much historical precedent for good people following bad orders. While I trust the vast majority of US soldiers to do the right thing, it is better to never put them in the position of having to choose.

Let us look at our recent engagement in torture. The military had a long history of a black and white view on torture. It is wrong. I think the new FM reinforces this idea. Putting it back into practice helped make the SOI's decision to come to our side possible. Yet it is also clear, that many in the military, under the influence and or orders of superiors engaged in or abetted torture. They were convinced that it was good for their country and its safety IMO. They should never have been placed in that position. I believe in this country and its principles. We stand up well to external threats. It is the well meaning zealot within our own ranks who is our biggest threat IMO.

Steve

Rufus, from where I sit you did well despite the lack of caffeination.

I have just a couple of addenda on my part...

We seem to be viewing the same mindset from different angles. I submit that we have plenty of importance to learn from those differing points of view. I am heartened that we can agree on the danger of the consequences of the mindset, and I do not view our conflict on some details as a detriment.

I hope you don't mind my repeating a quote I've used a few times recently. I believe it bears repeating, and has equal application to both sides:

"He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections." -- "The American President", screenplay Aaron Sorkin.

It would be quicker to have most of the Guard at home.

Steve, you are right. In the Armageddon scenario which folks around here continually like to wave in the air, few would choose rightly under tangled loyalties. There is far more precedent for "just following orders" than there is for principled resistance, in our history, or anyone else's.

As far as seizing power. It is harder to go backward than forward in that, isn't it? Regardless of political persuasion.

"I'm not sure have active duty soldiers is that big of a change from having a militarized police force, which has been a fact of American life for over a century."

And what nobody else seems to have mentioned is the enormous increase in the number of PRIVATE police, which have outnumbered their public-sector colleagues since at least 1974. In the Roman Republic, and during the Middle Ages, private police forces/armies were THE major threat to public order. Is nobody watching?

Rod, Section 1076 was repealed in its entirety by HR 4986: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.

That means that the Insurrection Act now stands in its 1807 form. So, while it's still possible for the President to declare martial law, he will have a slightly harder time doing it legally.

Being a unusually well-educated platoon, with those issues with authority typical (ironically) among people who choose to join the military, we've actually sat around and discussed this oath, on one of those long dark nighttimes waiting for our flight out of or into the desert or guarding some random icy ditch in the tundra north of Fort Drum, I can't recall. At any rate, we concluded that our first obligation was to the Constitution, and that its enemies could be foreign or domestic. Then we are answerable to the President, and so on down the long chain of command to us, at the very bottom. This sort of ensures, theoretically, that if one level of said Chain of Command goes Dr Strangelove, we don't.

Also, we are obligated to resist clearly illegal or immoral orders. If told to do something wrong, you ask for clarification. If the order stands, then you have to respectfully disobey. But you also have to face the consequences of this action. Thus, they system still stands, despite and individual breakdown. You could end up imprisoned, discharged without honor, or in extreme duress, executed on the spot (this hasn't happened since Korea at least, but immediate execution is still legally on the books.) But you are obligated to do the right thing. "I was just following orders," will not serve as justification. Not after Nuremburg.

i sure hope youre right. but honestly i think you are the exception to the rule. most active service members i know and have spoken to flat out said "i am a soldier , i just do what i'm told" it is not to question why but to do or die seems to be the concensus. my brother has served 2 tours in iraq and is based in georgia with the 3rd id. most training excercises that are being done in the 3rd id is nothing new to him. its not much different than the training for what they do in iraq. its just american soil now.and the difference being they will use non-lethal weapons. the training is for urban combat and search and seizures. they'll be going door to door confiscating our weapons in direct violation of our right to bear arms.all under the guise of martial law. but then what? they have our guns and were sheep easily controlled then. soon after the north american union will form and we will undeniably see a new world order. will amero's be something we can take home? can we put it in our piggy banks? probably not. maybe a id card? maybe a chip? either way its heading towards a "we the rulers" counrty instead of a "we the people". just food for thought. and just pray im dead wrong, i do!

IT MAKES SENSE TO ME, THAT THEY ARE PREPARING FOR THE ELECTION, AND THE “PEOPLE” WHO FIGURE WE ALL GET FREE TV’S IF WE SMASH A STOREFRONT WINDOW. OBAMA, WIN OR LOSE, THE BLACKS ARE GONNA GO CRAZY! IT'S ALL ABOUT CROWD CONTROL.