TAKE BACK OUR DEMOCRACY

One of the things which should make us all the more alarmed about the current trend of our government is the number of previously conservative thinkers who have warned against an approaching "end of the American Republic". Several have written books about it, as was noted in the article, "Constitution in Peril", in the October 8, 2007 issue of Newsweek. One of these thinkers is Chalmers Johnson, who has written a trilogy of books on this theme, the latest being Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic. I remember Johnson well as a conservative commentator on the KQED program, World Press. Some reviews of his book say that he had gone over to the Left, but this is not necessarily so, for the people running this government today are not conservatives, of the old or new variety-- they are fascists, and they would alarm any genuine conservative as they alarm Leftists. Conservatives are people who, for instance, do not believe that the Constitution can be construed as permitting abortion or gay marriages. They are not people who believe it should be put through the paper shredder, as our government does. That view is outside the range of respectable opinion in a democracy, as our government's actions over the past seven years are outside the range of acceptable behavior in a democracy. So I have respect for Johnson's views, whether he is still a conservative or not.

Johnson does not believe, as I do, that the attacks of 9/11 were staged by our government. Yet he shares my deep concern about the future of this nation. In the final chapter of Nemesis, written in 2006 but obviously before the Military Commissions Act was signed into law, thus lending further credence to his views, he notes the increasing impotence of both Congress and the Supreme Court in the face of the imperial executive. As he says, "The separation of powers the Founders wrote into our Constitution as the main bulwark against dictatorship increasingly appears to be a dead letter, with the Congress no longer capable of asserting itself against presidential attempts to monopolize power. Corrupt and indifferent, the Congress, which the Founders believed would be the leading branch of government, is simply not up to the task of confronting a modern Julius Caesar... If the legislative branch of our government is broken-- and it is hard to imagine how it could repair itself, given the massive interests which feed off it-- the judicial branch is hardly less limited today in terms of its ability to maintain the balance. Even the Supreme Court's most extraordinary power, its ability to nullify a law as unconstitutional, rests upon precedent rather than constitutional stipulation, and lower courts, increasingly packed with right-wing judges, have little taste for going against the prevailing political winds... Could the people themselves restore constitutional government? A grassroots movement to abolish the CIA, break the hold of the military-industrial complex, and establish public financing of elections may be theoretically possible, but it is unlikely given the conglomerate control of the mass media and the difficulties of mobilizing our large and diffuse population." (pp. 267-269). He concludes that either a military or civilian dictatorship will be established, or the country will go bankrupt through "military Keynesianism", a view which accords with Douglas Valentine's that the Bush administration wants a depression in order to increase panic and tighten governmental control over the population. In any case, "If we choose to keep our empire... we will surely lose our democracy." (p. 279)

Another individual who was presumably conservative for most of his career yet who has spoken out against present trends is Ray McGovern, a retired CIA intelligence analyst who worked for the Agency for 27 years. In an interview with Alex Jones, reproduced on PrisonPlanet.com, McGovern said, "Well it does seem that those who have his (Bush's) ear are hell bent upon giving away or providing wider responsibilities to our military. Witness what they are talking about now, with giving the military responsibility for catastrophes such as hurricanes... Our military has been built up as an instrument of power but it has never existed with this kind of potency before, because there are laws against using the military in law enforcement capacities..." Jones says that McGovern then went on to talk about terrorism and amazingly, to suggest that if there was another attack on the U.S. it would mean a martial law state. He said that in that case, we should not accept what the government tells us because it could be them carrying out the terrorism. "We have to be careful, if somebody does this kind of provocation, big violent explosions of some kind, we have to not take the word of the masters there in Washington that this was a terrorist event because it could well be a provocation allowing them-- or seemingly allowing them-- to get what they want." Speaking of the McCain Anti-Torture Amendment, which was pending when this interview was given, he said, "At this very moment we have a president about to veto a ban on torture. Even at the height of the British Empire, torture was still outlawed because it was recognized as the pinnacle of human rights violations. What more does this Administration have to do before we remove it from power?"

Well as we know, the Administration finally approved the McCain Amendment after it was, as the Center for Constitutional Rights and Alfred McCoy noted, eviscerated by Lindsay Graham's denial of legal redress (see Nemesis, p. 267). The government's repressive measures grow ever more alarming. And this may be the very year that martial law is declared and the American Republic comes to an end. In the first place, the detention centers being built by Kellogg, Root and Brown (a subsidiary of Halliburton) are undoubtedly nearing completion. For another, it is an election year. Although we have become effectively a one-party system, something I learned painfully last month when I read that my local Representative, Nancy Pelosi, had accepted waterboarding as a legitimate procedure when she was briefed three years ago by the CIA, the government may wish to forestall the possibility of anyone who could alter its policies ever getting into the White House. Finally, this is the year the Supreme Court is due to at last hand down its first decision in a case involving the Military Commissions Act. This is a no-win situation. If it allows the MCA to stand, then it will no doubt be implemented, which is about as bad as a declaration of martial law. But although, as I have noted in a previous blog, the counsel for the petitioners argued the appeal ineptly, the Supreme Court could still decide to strike it down as unconstitutional. In that case, having lost their chief instrument for the establishment of a totalitarian regime, the government will most likely resort to its only alternative, the staging of a fake "terrorist attack" and consequent declaration of martial law. We are at the crossroads. If such an event should occur, there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that this is not Al Quaeda versus the American people, this is the U.S. government out to subjugate its own population. And "We the People" (note that this is the opening phrase of the U.S. Constitution) must rise up to defend ourselves and take back our democracy from a government which has become the number one enemy of both life and liberty which exists upon this earth.