State Militias: Do they represent the institutionalization of revolt and a movement towards secession?

The real news is often found not in the headlines but on the back pages tucked away in some corner.  I ran across this interesting article today on the push to form state militias in Oklahoma as a way to “defend against federal infringements on state sovereignty”; an issue that was seemingly of little concern until the last presidential election.

My first inclination is to believe that this is a response to the federal government crack down on Hutaree and other militia groups during the past few weeks.  I speculated in an earlier post that this crackdown was the administration’s shot across the bow of those groups who might be inclined to take their disagreement outside of the political realm.  I think Obama & Co. want to really body slam a few of these militias so as to make a public example out of them so certain folks start thinking twice before jumping bad, harassing congressman and making a general nuisance of themselves.  Based on the behavior that some folks exhibited during the recent passage of the healthcare legislation, I believe that the administration is totally justified in doing so, but they’re also being provoked.   I’m convinced that there’s a definite undertow in this country spoiling for any reason to revolt and they’re trying to provoke the administration to justify what they want to do.

It appears that a response to the administration’s push against the militias is taking shape in the form of state militias.  There’s a nascent movement to begin forming state militias as a defense against the federal government as well as a prelude to secession.  It appears that secession from the union is something that is actually being talked about in certain circles and it really began with Texas governor Rick Perry’s comment about his state seceding from the union.   This really explains a lot of the behavior that we’re seeing among the tea party activists and the far right of  the republican party.  That behavior has consistently been used to inflame and incite and has really been outside of the normal usual politics and partisan gridlock.

It would be easy to dismiss this as tea party antics, but that would be very short sighted.  The secessionists are raising state militias based on their interpretation of the second amendment which says:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

They’re interpreting the first portion of the second amendment as the state’s sovereign right to raise a militia and I suppose that the plan is to roll the private militias into a state militia so as to provide them some cover from federal government action. If the feds were to act against some of the craziness, they’d be forced to go up against a state militia.  This is a very deliberate move calculated to produce conflict by positioning the federal government to assert its authority against a “sovereign” state.    This is consistent with everything else the far right has done up to this point.  They want to split the country into two camps and they want to make sure that they chase anyone who might be wavering out of their camp.  This accounts for the silence of the moderates and even the Tea Party’s dislike of Massachusetts’s senator Scott Brown at this point for his moderate stance on some issues.  They wish to achieve ideological purity in a prelude for what they ultimately want to do and the events that are unfolding should be watched closely.

Not all of  this is insane tea party activism either. At the heart of the secessionist movement is a libertarian strain.  Quite frankly, the libertarian argument is one that’s bound to have an appeal to many people.  In effect, the libertarians argue that states should secede because:

  1. The federal government is confiscating their tax dollars to use on far flung military operations that don’t benefit the citizens and they don’t want have their money spent that way.
  2. The federal reserve and a cabal of  private bankers has absolutely destroyed our currency and wreaked the economy and they no longer wish to be subject to this.
  3. That there are two classes of people; the haves and have not’s.  The have not’s include welfare recipients, government bureaucrats and government contractors.  These are taking from the have’s while producing nothing.

On some of these points (the first two in particular), I actually find myself agreement with the analysis, but can’t agree with the conduct.

The fact of the matter is that the things these secessionists are complaining about have been in place for quite sometime under both republican and democratic administrations.  It’s not as if Obama’s election started all of this up.  The guy has only been in office barely over a year, so he really can’t be held responsible for all that’s occurring as the result of the cumulative effect of  mismanagement by others.  It’s not even logical to take that position, so we have to ask ourselves what gives ?

In my opinion, there isn’t just one answer to this question. There are several, but the main driver for the current situation is the economic situation.  If you’re reading this or other things like this, then it’s likely that you are reasonably well read and informed enough to arrive at a logical conclusion whether or not you agree with my interpretation of what’s occurring.  People like you and I are a distinct minority in this country.  For the majority, they can only be called with a dog whistle which means that one has to create a threat even where there is none.   This is where Obama comes in.  Because the real causes behind the economic problems are somewhat opaque, most Americans can’t appreciate the role the Greenspan Federal Reserve played in creating the problems we have nor can many people appreciate the actual extent with which their tax dollars are appropriated for corporate welfare, but they can relate to the boogeyman that someone is redistributing wealth by giving their money to “someone who’s not working” or setting up a socialist state in a power drunken stupor— even if they can’t really tell you  how that’s actually occurring.  All they know is that this information was force fed to them by the far right wing entertainment complex.

There have been some who’ve suggested that as the economic situation gets worst, the powers that be would divert the people’s attention by going to war.  They didn’t include the possibility that we’d going to war against each other.  Here’s hoping I’m wrong.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: