I know that there are a lot of people out there who have
taken a military oath, whether officer or enlisted.
I was thinking about that oath I took when I enlisted
into the United States Navy. It is just not in the nature of myself to swear to
do something that I don't understand, so I made it a point to know it before I
took it. Yet after all of these years there is something that suddenly jumped
out at me which I've never spotted before. And it really is something quite
striking when you think about it.
Let's take a look at it.
"I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or
affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States
against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and
allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the
United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to
regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
This oath is to the Constitution. It says so right there
in very plain unambiguous English. When taking this oath you are not swearing
to support and defend the president, the officers, any politician or political
party. This was pointed out to me many years ago and I've long since grown
accustomed to the idea.
So envision this if you will. You are being sworn into
the military by a uniformed officer, likely on a military facility, surrounded
by people in uniforms. What is likely going through your head, and admittedly
what was going through mine, is that you are promising to defend the United
States of America. Right? That's what you're thinking.
If it is what you think you are doing, you would be
wrong.
Look at this part of the oath again; "I, (state name
of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;"
Now tell me where it says to protect the physical United States?
That's right. Believe your eyes because it's right there
in front of you; conspicuous only by its total and complete absence. This oath
isn't to defend Ohio or Texas; although I think they should be defended. The
promise isn't to defend New York or California; and well, the jury is out in my
mind as to whether that would be beneficial or not. Be that as it may it isn't
even a promise to defend the country!
The oath is nothing more or less than a promise to
support, defend and bear allegiance to only the Constitution.
Now there is this other part you have to deal with. The
second part where it says you will, "obey the orders of the President of
the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according
to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."
Knowledge of the regulations and the Uniform Code of
Military Justice is not exactly something that I'm particularly strong on. So I
will leave the specifics of that part to anybody who has considered this oath
to do their own research. My general understanding is, this is where they gain
the authority and organizational structure to use you to defend the physical
country; assuming the president decides that that's in the Constitution's best
interest. After all, the president and the officers above you also swore to
support (or protect) and defend the Constitution didn't they?
That is their job isn't it? And all of the three oaths;
presidential, officer and enlisted are not to the physical country called the
United States. They are to the Constitution; that set of ideas documented and
agreed on by all States who decided to enter it, rather than the lines on the
maps that outline where the states all are.
This is very important, so get this; the only part of
this country that the military and president are promised to support, protect
and defend, by oath, are America's founding principles which are documented in
the Constitution.
In other words The United States of America is not a
physical location on a map. It is an idea that people can be free and grow under
a limited government. It is a very philosophical viewpoint.
If that seems like a radical concept I invite you to look
at it more closely. When the Constitution was originally ratified there where
only nine states in the country. The next four joined fairly soon after because
the idea had already spread there. As the new country prospered more and more
people formed states and entered, but their entry was the direct result of the
spreading of a set of ideas embodied within the Constitution rather than
physical force.
So it doesn't matter much where the lines of the States
are drawn. They could be nine. They could be thirteen. They could be any number
between thirteen and fifty. Guess what that means? They could also be a
hundred. They could encompass the whole world and as long as the people within
those lines believe in the ideas in the Constitution, it will be the United
States.
America is not a set of borders and names on maps.
America is an idea. It is the idea of freedom through limited government,
wherever it happens to be on any map.
With this understanding of what the country is, I invite
you to consider one of the more important points in the oath. Just what does it
mean by, "all enemies, foreign and domestic"?
Foreign and domestic are pretty easy words to understand.
They simply mean, "over there" and "over here." Or better
yet, within the United States physical boarders or outside of them.
What is an enemy when what we are talking about, as something
to be defended, is a set of ideas written in the Constitution on how the
federal government is supposed to be run? In my way of thinking it would be the
people who are entrusted with constitutional power of some sort who are either
not following it and/or people who teach others that it shouldn't be followed.
The most egregious of these is the former. The person who
would assume a federal office at any level is no better than Benedict Arnold if
he violates the Constitution. He has been given a trust to defend and has sworn
to do so. When he doesn't uphold his oath he betrays the country.
So here's the deal in other words; I swore to defend the
Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. A person in office not
following it is a domestic enemy.
This might seem to some that I am rather anti-government.
Well, if the shoe fits I would only wear it when the federal government or
anybody sworn to defend the Constitution violates it. I would be very much for
the federal government if it stuck to doing only what it is supposed to do.
This, emphatically,
does not mean that we should revolt and shoot them; at least prior to the point
of their becoming a physical threat to us. What it does mean is that we should
never provide support or defense to a person in political power who will not
understand and follow the Constitution. We should vote against them and speak
out against them at every opportunity. We have to make it fully and well known
that the only people we will support are those who will follow it. More important
than that we have to be able to teach our ideas to others.
Because the Constitution is an idea, our primary
battlefield is in the arena of ideas. Our strength is our minds. Our weapons
are our ideas. Our ammunition is our words. Because the Constitution is such a
great idea, if you can become adept at defending those ideas from all enemies
the real estate would take care of itself.
This is an excellent post. As I was reading, I was waiting for the But. It never came. I would be honored to follow you on Twitter. :-)
ReplyDeleteNo "buts" here! Especially with this. Just the truth. :) @TheAshTone The honor is mine.
ReplyDeleteShould read: the "...lawful orders of..." but I suppose that's covered in the UCMJ part?
ReplyDeleteYes. But under an oath to protect the Constitution, what lawful order would there be that would violate the Constitution? Assuming it to be as it is; the highest law in the land.
ReplyDelete