On the Verge of Democide

Rallying the Anglosphere to Prevent Mass Murder in Zimbabwe Before it’s to Late

The Blogosphere is alive with posts here, here, and here (among many others) condemning the actions of Robert Mugabe who, having wrecked the economy of Zimbabwe, suppressed the opposition, and rigged elections is now beginning a systematic rurualization program reminiscent of Cambodia under Pol Pot. If he is not stopped mass starvation is going to stalk his country.

After the holocaust we said “never again”, but again and again governments have turned on their people and used starvation, guns and other implements of death to massacre their own people while the world looked on. After each new democide we said “never again” and added “this time we mean it.” Unfortunately this has not stopped democide. Now in Zimbabwe it is about to happen again.

It is clear that if we wait for the governments of the world to put a stop to the emerging democide in Zimbabwe, we will be waiting for ever. Unless we organize to stop it, the time democide will “never again” happen will be never. Only by arming the people of Zimbabwe can we stop this atrocity in the making.

The right of the English Speaking People to own arms to defend themselves against oppression is well established. Beginning with the Bill of Rights of 1688 and continuing into the U.S. Bill of Rights and the Bills of Rights of the States of the U.S. the right is enshrined in many Anglsophere Constitutions.

The right of the English Speaking People to revolt against oppressive governments was first enshrined in Magna Charta and was no where better said than in Article 10 of the New Hampshire Constitution, “Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.”

We have been discussing the ongoing crises in Zimbabwe for several years now. The talk has gone on long enough. The question we must now face is weather we wish to be complicit by omission in the coming democide. If we really mean “Never Again!” the time for idle talk is over and the time for action has come.

I propose the formation of a international committee to stop this democide in its tracks. The committee would raise money to a) publicize the plight of the Zimbabwean people b) organize protests outside Zimbabwean embassies world wide, c) buy small arms and ammunition for distribution to the people of Zimbabwe so they can resist and over throw the murderous Mugabe regime and d) buy food for distribution to the people of Zimbabwe to ameliorate the coming famine.

I hereby nominate: Glen Reynolds of Instapundit, who has kept the issue before us by linking to many stories about the crises; Perry de Havilland of Samizdata, who has written many articles about the crises; Michael J. Totten, who has been a blogosphere leader in promoting democracy; and Rudolph J. Rummel, the leading scholar of democide, to be the first members of the board of directors of an International Committee for the Relief and Liberation of Zimbabwe. I volunteer, if no one better can be found, to be the organization’s executive director.

I believe we need to find other people for the board of directors. One of the famous Nazi hunters or an important Holocaust scholar would be useful. A famous leader of the anti communist revolution such as Vaclav Havel or Lech Walesa would be another good idea.

We should also have an advisory board of the leaders from the various international organizations such as the International Society for Individual Liberty, the International Democrat Union, etc. This would give us increased institutional support..

There are many details that need to be worked out, but I think that if we put our minds to it, we can build an organization that will stop the looming democide in Zimbabawe.

I realize that I am an extremely new member of the blogosphere and that it is rather forward of me to make this proposal and to put well known bloggers in the hot seat by nominating them to lead this movement. However, some one has to make this proposal if we are going to do something about the Zimbabwe crises. I hope this post I taken in this spirit, as the beginning of the discussion of how to stop the coming democide in Zimbabwe.

Thomas for Chief Justice

One of the most important principals of the english speaking nation is the Rule of Law. The courts are never so important as when the government wants to userp power to itself that it was never granted. The government of the United States has done so repeatedly under the guise of regulating interstate commerce. The Supreme Court of the United States unfortunatly let the federal government get away with another such power grab in Gonzales v. Raich, decided on Monday. Three justices decented from this decision. Justice O'Conner, Justice Thomas, and the Chief Justice of the United States. Both O'Conner and Thomas wrote opinions. O'Conner's here.

But the better of the two opinions was by Justice Thomas. It begins, "Respondents Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been bought or sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no demonstrable effect on the national market for marijuana. If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything–and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers."

Thomas concludes "The majority prevents States like California from devising drug policies that they have concluded provide much-needed respite to the seriously ill. It does so without any serious inquiry into the necessity for federal regulation or the propriety of “displac[ing] state regulation in areas of traditional state concern,” United States v. Lopez. 514 U.S. 549, at 583 (Kennedy, J., concurring). The majority’s rush to embrace federal power “is especially unfortunate given the importance of showing respect for the sovereign States that comprise our Federal Union.” United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers’ Cooperative, 532 U.S. 483, 502 (2001) (Stevens, J., concurring in judgment). Our federalist system, properly understood, allows California and a growing number of other States to decide for themselves how to safeguard the health and welfare of their citizens. I would affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals. I respectfully dissent."

This is the sort of coragious opinion that Thomas turns in 9 times out 10 when the stakes are high. I think he deserves more than another member of the court to be made the next Chief Justice of the United States. Not that the president or congress would tie their own hands that way, but we can hope.