Republic, Sovereignty—Damn the National

Retired Colonel Douglas Macgregor is the kind of officer a man would appreciate as a superior; at least to an enlisted man of my vintage of some sixty years ago (USMC). He is also, in my opinion, the kind of officer who in this “modern” era has understood, and apparently still does, the military in most every aspect, from molding fighting MEN (yes! one of the many things he understands) to the deployment of armies regarding most aspects of strategy and the concomitant tactical building blocks of that strategy.


He also seems well-read in the history of both war and politics. He doesn’t seem to accept the well-known dictum by Carl von Clausewitz: “War is the continuation of politics by other means” as a Nineteenth Century model for the United States’ Twentieth Century War Powers Act.


Charles Linbergh was a wiser (and better) man than ilk such as Mark Levin. If we have allies, we require treaties with them.



Colonel Macgregor also seems to be a well-read student of history and has the greatest measure of economics that drive historical politics and war, with worldwide varieties of those kingdoms and confederacies throughout the world.


As a multiple theater combat veteran one would assume he has seen blood and death up close. He doesn’t seem to need the Washington (pretentious) elites to tell him about causes of war or the authority of the government (ours) to engage in them. That last part is written constitutionally (the one in 1787, not the 1781 one), whether or not the above “elites” can read or not. It would not surprise many to learn that many probably can’t, at least in English.


Often in the past months Colonel Macgregor has, via You-Tube, Substack, or other media means analyzed the Iran war in terms of fortune and/or a probable finality that the Old Testament prophets would applaud, i.e. it has a doomsday coloring for the U.S. at its end. And that day is straight ahead.


As a postscript to his many offerings, he has spoken of the rotted-out Washington Uni-Party and the political disease it has become, and what such disease has done to our American Constitution; or probably more accurately what said constitution has become—a magnificent failure!


Colonel Macgregor has offered the opinion that a new constitution is needed because the Washington crowd or the Uni-party (or whatever) has violated the 1787 one to the extent that it might as well have been written in invisible ink. I agree. However, his note of ill-use and corruption is simply a recollection and update of the violation in the disagreement of sovereignty in 1861-65.


Colonel Macgregor suggests a new constitution and a “national” one at that. Does he not see that the “unpleasantness” of 1861-65 was what gave us the “national” monster we have today? It was after that sad episode of constitutional corruption that the union became nation, and the Star-Spangled Banner would be discarded in favor of something called a National Anthem.


He has said that the constitution of 1787 is outdated. It is. But that has not been caused by a war with Iran but was accomplished by Nineteenth Century political thugs long ago. The corruption today is fostered by the lineage of those same political hacks, liars and bloodletters of yesterday. Some things never change.


I agree with Colonel Macgregor that we need a new constitution. But if it is not one of union instead of nation, not one without misunderstanding of sovereignty then it is a waste of time and it too will end on the landfill of corrupt bureaucracy.


Remember that the corrupted beast of government we have now under our constitution (article IV, Section 4) guarantees a “republican” form of government to each state: Stand and laugh, and laugh and laugh!


​But if we create a new national one, we will not have the last laugh. And we won’t be any better off. We’ll just die laughing.