Good Order and Discipline

In his resignation letter, former Navy Secretary Richard Spencer cited the well-worn phrase "good order and discipline" as being central to his decision to resign. What exactly is "good order and discipline," and why is it important to the military mission?

Good order and discipline suggests that there are well-established, understood rules and principles that govern conduct in the military organization. It goes beyond mere regulation, to a deeper commitment to honesty in carrying out and reporting on one's duties. It speaks to not only the letter of the law, but the spirit of the law as well, recognizing a deeper need to do the right thing for the right reasons. In the specific case of the Navy SEAL, the regulation that prohibits posing with an enemy corpse, as if it were a hunting trophy, codifies a deeper moral statement about the value of human life.

The military professional sees "good order and discipline" as essential to mission success. The armchair soldier, on the other hand, learns about the military from bad movies or bad books or politicians with bad ideology, The civilian "expert," often described by the epithet "chickenhawk," sees rules as impediments to the soldier doing his job, which is simplified as "killing people."

And what happens when the inexperienced commander-in-chief, with his distorted view of the military, decides to "have this sailor's back"? How does this undermine good order and discipline? Well, it's quite simple. Now the rogue military member's unlawful behavior is excused, because the commander-in-chief says the rules don't matter, treaties are meaningless, and the law of war is just some bleeding heart liberal construct.

The Corrupted Nature of our Republic

I am continuing to enjoy Bill Everett's gem of a book, God's Federal Republic: Reconstructing Our Governing Symbol. The overall premise of the book is that the Christian imagery of the Kingdom of God is anachronistic to the Constitutional democratic republic of 21st-century America.

But Everett points out in stark terms that representative democracy is not a panacea for what might be a primary goal of government, which he posits as protecting and advancing the common good, or at least mitigating the tragedy of the commons. In his view, representative democracy devolved very quickly from a group of honorable representatives seeking consensus on the common good (at least in the ideal) to a forum in which competing interests seek to advance their own goals. In this 21st-century republic, outcomes are driven by poll results, or more insidiously, by money. The "government of laws, not of men" described by John Adams in the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has become public policy by campaign contributions.

And so politics is not an appeal to the better angels of our nature to face with unity of purpose the challenges that confront us. Instead, politics is ruthlessly calculating in finding those particular special interests that drive wedges between families, neighbors, and friends. No means is too vile to advance the end of the special interest. Truth is blurred, morality transactional, and facts debatable. The law becomes a minor annoyance, to be countered by stacking the courts with judges friendly to one's interests.

Yet in our nation's history, we have had very few idyllic moments, where calls for the common good prevailed against the siege from the special interests. Lincoln's 2nd inaugural address, "with malice toward none, with charity for all," FDR's "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself," and JFK's "we will send a man to the moon and return him to the earth" come to mind. In fact, NASA in the 1960's demonstrated the heights we can achieve when we harness the imagination and technical superiority of the American people, relying on science rather than myth.

Today cries out for another call to national unity, to setting big goals, to achieving big things, to continue to press for the more perfect Union. In the words of the Apostle Paul, we must throw off all the weights that hold us back, the weights of cynicism, of science denial, of false religion, of greed -- and press on to the goal of liberty and justice for all.

Secession Questions for Mike Clampitt

Mike Clampitt of Bryson City is running again for NC House District 119, a seat currently held by Democrat Joe Sam Queen of Waynesville. Mr. Clampitt occupied the seat after the 2016 election, but lost the seat last year.

During his time in the legislature (as a Member of the NC House, not as the House doorman) Mr. Clampitt was a primary sponsor of a bill that would remove the provision in the North Carolina Constitution preventing the state from seceding from the United States of America. So I have a few questions for Mr. Clampitt, so we citizens of House District 119 might better understand his view of an independent Republic of North Carolina, or whatever he might want to call this new sovereign nation.

1. How long would it take, and how much would it cost, to erect and man border checkpoints at every highway, road, rail crossing, and other point of entry into this new nation?

2. How long would it take, and how much would it cost, to issue passports to every citizen of the new nation? And in a related matter, exactly who would be citizens of the new nation?

3. How should the new nation deal with property of the United States of America that exists within this new nation? I imagine that the people of the United States would be intent on keeping Fort Bragg, Marine Corps installations along the coast, Seymour Johnson AFB, the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, the Blue Ridge Parkway, and other such property.

4. In the likelihood that the United States of America would use its military power to enforce its property rights, how should the new nation raise an army and other armed forces to deal with that?

5. Would foreigners from the United States of America entering the Republic of North Carolina require visas? Who would issue those visas? Would we have normal diplomatic relations with the United States of America?

6. Should the new nation enter into some kind of free trade agreement with the United States of America?

7. How much would a wall cost along the border with the United States, to keep illegal aliens out of the new nation?

I'm sure Mr. Clampitt and other proponents of secession have thought about these, and many other questions.

The Right of Representation in the Legislature

In the stifling summer humidity of Philadelphia a couple of centuries ago, a group of men put their John Hancock’s (one of them literally) on a document that many Americans claim to hold dear. Those brave and principled men pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor when they declared war against King George III.

The Declaration of Independence lists charges and specifications against the King’s government. In one of those counts of the indictment, the Declaration enumerates the right of the people to representation in the legislature. They described that right to be “inestimable to the people and formidable to tyrants only.” They charged the King specifically with denying that right to large groups of colonists by doing things like not notifying delegates of times and places for meetings and votes on important issues.

Fast forward to September 2019.  The North Carolina General Assembly, which should have come home in early July from their 2019 work, remained in session, as Republicans in the House and the Senate did not have the votes to override Governor Cooper’s veto of the state budget. The leadership (Phil Berger and Tim Moore) had rejected overtures from the governor to negotiate on Medicaid expansion, teacher and state employee pay raises, and other items important to the people of our state.

But House Speaker Moore had a clever plan. He told his Democrat counterparts in the House there would be no vote on the morning of September 11, allowing Members to attend 9/11 commemoration events. Then the House Republicans met anyway, called for the vote, and overrode the Governor’s veto.

What does that have to do with the Declaration of Independence? Well, Rep. Kevin Corbin (R-Macon) was an eager participant in the shenanigans on September 11 that denied the citizens of the 119^th House district (Haywood, Jackson, and Swain) our right of representation in the legislature. And now Mr. Corbin is seeking to represent the 50^th Senate District, which includes all of House District 119.

Mr. Corbin, please explain why you want to be our Senator, after denying us our right to be represented in the NC House on September 11, 2019. I’m sure you’ll say that what you and Speaker Moore did on September 11 was perfectly legal within the rules of the House. But We the People see your house rules the same way those delegates in Philadelphia saw King George III’s house rules. And we know exactly what you think of the residents of House District 119.