This article was originally written as a private letter addressed to Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his campaign manager, former Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH). Unanswered since it was sent in early June 2023, it is now published as an open letter.
The government is goosestepping all over our freedoms.
Case in point: America’s founders did not want a military government ruled by force. Rather, they opted for a republic bound by the rule of law: the U.S. Constitution.
The authors of the United States Constitution understood that the freedom of the people to express their disagreement with government policies is absolutely vital to democracy. The First Amendment makes explicit the protections afforded to this kind of expression: Americans have the right to “peacably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances.” In other words, non-violent demonstration and disagreement are fundamental American values. They ensure that we have a government “by and for the people,” and that a lively debate about the direction of our country remains a constant facet of American public and political life.
However, it stands to reason that no form of expression is so aggressively assailed as disagreement with leadership. Those in positions of power have obvious interests in stifling public discourse about government lies, corruption, or ineptitude, and many of the tactics they employ to short-circuit public dissent constitute particularly insidious forms of censorship.
The Louisiana Purchase is usually presented as an incredible, inspiring moment in American history in which President Thomas Jefferson, wise, benevolent eyes twinkling under his powdery white wig, made an incredibly shrewd real estate deal with notorious, disgraced French emperor Napoleon Bonaparte and, with one stroke of his giant quill pen, doubled the size of the United States of America for the bargain price of $15 million, or just three cents an acre. What we don’t usually learn about is the negative domino effect this treaty had in terms of inspiring the concept of manifest destiny or the belief that white colonists had a God-given duty to expand across North America and redeem and remake the land in their own image.
On March 29, the Senate voted to repeal two Authorizations for the Use of Military Force, (AUMF’s), one passed in 1991 and another in 2002. The repeal now goes to the House. But those Authorizations are irrelevant to the present; they apply only to the Iraq war. But a third AUMF, passed in 2001, was left untouched. And that AUMF is the only one that has a bearing on the present moment, because it provides legal cover for the many US military operations, open and secret, around the world.
In its coverage of the death of Queen Elizabeth II and the coronation of King Charles, the New York Times has published article after article celebrating the pageantry of the British monarchy. In so doing, the newspaper responsible for publishing the 1619 Project has entangled itself in many layers of contradictions.
You must be logged in to post a comment.