Little is more certain than the absolute necessity of government.  Providing for the national safety is undoubtedly one of the primary objects of civil government.  Maintaining the safety of the nation takes into account a broad range of topics, and can be defined both narrowly and widely.  This includes subjects such as financial security, security from crime, and security from force and invasion.  In this discussion, I will limit the topic to concerns about safety from foreign military power and influence.  With this paper then, let us then begin to examine whether these United States will have the greatest security against actual hostilities from abroad under a government controlled by the people, or consolidated under the control of a relatively small number of men and women, as it is today.

Throughout history, those that have made war, have often times done so for unjust reasons, such as revenge, glory, ambition, and financial gain.  There is absolutely no just cause to initiate force, as noble principle allows force only in defense.  The morality that supports this opinion is no longer the object of speculation.  When force is initiated, resentment builds, and the people who are the objects of this force respond in kind.  Since some wars are just; as they are due to direct violence and cannot be avoided, it then becomes useful to ask whether the unjust causes for war are more likely to be given by an America ruled by the people in a Constitutional Democracy, or by the elite few that rule the republic which stands today.  Since the strength, location, size, and geographical nature of America have made it nearly impervious to foreign conquest, it is these unjust wars or the potential for them, which create the greatest diminishment of security in our nation.

One of the greatest maxims of civil society is that people do not make war, governments do.  Since the end of World War II, America has been involved in conflicts and wars with more than twenty nations, a great majority of these exertions of force were not prefaced by the constitutionally required declaration of war from Congress.  The authority to declare war was given by the framers of the Constitution to Congress alone, in order to keep this formidable power away from the executive and, although indirectly, in the hands of the people. 

Because of this Congressional power to declare war, it has until lately, been widely accepted that the security of America is best kept in the hands of the people, and the hopes, actions, and appeals of our most astute citizens have been in support of this.  In the recent decades, a growing number of politicians have insisted that this concept is specious and that instead of allowing the representatives of the people to decide whether or not to involve the nation in a costly and deadly war, they have consistently violated the Constitution and have given this power over to the executive.  However inconceivable this concept may appear to be, it does have its many proponents in Congress and elsewhere in America's circles of power, for if it did not, we would have not seen many, if not all, of our nation's so-called police actions and operations in the past decades in far-reaching locations such as Asia, the Middle East, Africa, Eastern Europe, and throughout the globe.  It has come to pass that the politicians from both political parties, who are advocates of removing the citizens of our nation from the process of declaring war, are now in the majority.  Whatever their reasons, be it gain or glory, it would be unwise for the people to adopt these same concepts without being fully convinced that they are of prudent policy.

I have often felt a high level of satisfaction when considering the wide range of people, from all corners of the globe, that make up our great nation.  We have fought amongst each other, we have defended each other, we have prospered together, and we have suffered together. We are many peoples united as one nation, and it appears that destiny has arranged for us, with liberty on our side, that we should never be reduced to subjects of an empire; our voices, in regards to our own security, should never be left unheard. 

Since all legitimate authority must come directly from the consent of the people, infringements, especially those that are repeated, of the people's sovereign rights cannot be ignored.  Politicians, past and present, are no longer simply ignoring our voices, but even worse, are openly involved in the egregious crime of handing the powers of war directly to the executive.  No longer does initiating force require the consent of the people in America, even if it's indirectly through their representatives.   These actions, as well as the continuing ability of the federal authority to rule in this manner, leaves our nation less secure.

It is a fundamental axiom on the subject of agreements and contracts, that all articles are mutually related to each other; a violation of any part is a violation of the whole contract; and that a violation, committed by any party, exempts the others, and allows them to assert that the agreement is null and void.  Since these war-powers crimes have violated the contract between the federal government and the citizens as agreed to in the Constitution, have risked our national security, and have known no limits of time, person, or political party, it is the inherent "Right of the People to alter or abolish" their government, "and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." ** 

One of the greatest weaknesses of republics is that they allow, through the limited numbers of people ruling over large masses, much too great an opportunity to become corrupt, and even the liberties of the Roman Empire proved to be the final victim of her military achievements.  It is this same path that America is quickly and dangerously moving along.  Unless the people change the system of government that has allowed for a near-perpetual state of war, rather than simply electing new people to take us down that same path, our liberties will end up as the Romans' did; in ruins.

It is worthwhile to note, that although our politicians don't believe in a real democracy, they still use the term widely, invariably because they know that the people of America hold the principles of democratic processes in the highest regard.  With what propriety then, have politicians consolidated power; giving government a dominating role in every aspect of our lives; from taxation to waging war, to energy regulation and the like?  It is my thought, that the people, and not the politicians, are right; that a limited government, ruled by the people through a Constitutional Democracy, will provide the greatest security and prosperity to the nation, and that their inextinguishable attachment to democracy rests on prodigious and considerable reasons, which I will aspire to discuss in further detail in my next paper; May 19, 2005. 

The powerful, who promote the idea of further government consolidation, know that they alone will benefit, and that after their time is gone, the empire will collapse.  Without change, this will be the case, and I do hope that every citizen will remember the words of the great Thomas Jefferson:  "All tyranny needs is for people of good conscience to remain silent."

Franklin

** Declaration of Independence