Militia (United States)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The role of militia, also known as civilian military service and duty, in the United States is complex and has transformed over time.^[1] The term militia can be used to describe any number of groups within the United States. Types of militia within modern US:

• The organized militia created by the Militia Act of 1903, which split from the 1792 Uniform Militia forces, and consist of State and Federal militia forces, notably the National Guard and the Naval Militia^[2].
• The reserve militia^[3] or unorganized militia, also created by the Militia Act of 1903 which presently consist of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who are not members of the National Guard or Naval Militia. ^[2]
• Extralegal Militia.^[4] Private militia forces, which are made up of non-officially organized individuals who have formed para-military organizations based on their own interpretation of the concept of the militia. These militia assert^{[citation needed]} that private militia are supported by the common law and the intention of the Constitution.

Contents 1 Etymology 2 History 2.1 Colonial Era, pre-1774 2.2 Revolutionary War (1775-1783) 2.3 Confederation period (1783-1787) 2.4 Constitution and Bill of Rights (1787-1789) 2.4.1 Political opposition to a standing army 2.4.2 Political shift from States' power to Federal power 2.4.3 Political debate regarding compulsory militia service for pacifists 2.5 Federal period, War of 1812 (1790-1860) 2.6 Civil War 2.7 The Klu-Klux conspiracy and the Negro Loyal League 2.8 Spanish American War 2.9 World War I 3 Organized militia 4 The Reserve Militia/unorganized militia 5 Extralegal/private militia organizations 6 List of militia in the United States 6.1 U.S. Federal militia forces 6.2 U.S. States' militia 6.3 Extralegal / private militia 7 See also 8 External links 9 References 9.1 Historic 9.2 Scholarly 9.2.1 Critical of contemporary private miltias 9.3 Critical of government (works which influenced private-militia ideology) 9.3.1 Artifact

[edit] Etymology

The English term "militia" is derived from Latin, which formed it from two Latin roots:

• miles /MEE-lace/ : a fighter or warrior
• -itia /EE-tee-ah/ : a state, quality, or condition

In its original Latin, militia meant "the state, quality, or condition of being a fighter or warrior." It might have been thought of as "the combatant condition", "the fighter frame of mind", "the militant mode", "the soldierly status", or "the warrior way".

In common usage, "militia" are a body or reserve of private persons who have taken up arms to respond to a violent emergency. The act of bearing arms contextually changes the status of the person from peaceful citizen to warrior citizen. The militia might be thought of as the sum total of persons undergoing this change of state, and capable of undergoing this change of state.

[edit] History

[edit] Colonial Era, pre-1774

The early colonists of America considered the militia an important social structure, necessary to defend their colonies from Indian attacks. All able-bodied males were expected to be members of the local militia. During the French and Indian Wars, town militia formed a recruiting pool for the Provincial Forces. The legislature of the colony would authorize a certain force level for the season's campaign, based on that set recruitment quotas for each local militia. In theory, militia members could be drafted by lot if there were inadequate forces for the Provincial Regulars; however, the draft was rarely resorted to because provincial regulars were highly paid (more highly paid than their regular British Army counterparts) and rarely engaged in combat.

In September 1755, George Washington, then adjunct-general of the Virginia militia, upon a frustrating and futile attempt to call up the militia to respond to a frontier Indian attack:^[5]

"...he experienced all the evils of insubordination among the troups, perverseness in the militia, inactivity in the officers, disregard of orders, and reluctance in the civil authorities to render a proper support. And what added to his mortification was, that the laws gave him no power to correct these evils, either by enforcing discipline, or compelling the indolent and refractory to their duty" ... "The militia system was suited for only to times of peace. It provided for calling out men to repel invasion; but the powers granted for effecting it were so limited, as to be almost inoperative.^[5]"

See New Hampshire Provincial Regiment for a history of a Provincial unit during the French and Indian War.

[edit] Revolutionary War (1775-1783)

Just prior to the American Revolutionary War, October 26th, 1774, after observing the British military buildup, the Massachusetts Provincial Congress found their militia resources to be short, ""...including the sick and absent, amounted to about seventeen thousand men...this was far short of the number wanted, that the council recommended an immediate application to the New England governments to make up the deficiency...", resolving to better organize the militia^[6]:

"...they recommended to the militia to form themselves into companies of minute-men, who should be equiped and prepared to march at the shortest notice. These minute-men were to consist of one quarter of the whole militia, to be enlisted under the direction of the field-officers, and divide into companies, consisting of at least fifty men each. The privates were to choose their captains and subalterns, andthese officers were to form the companies into battalions, and chose the field-officers to command the same. Hence the minute-men became a body distinct from the rest of teh militia, adn, by being more devoted to military exercises, they acquired skill in the use of arms. More attention than formerly was likewise bestowed on the training and drilling of militia."^[7]

They were also known as the "valiant farmers" who fought against the British at the battles of Lexington and Concord. It was not until "...three days after the affair of Lexington and Concord that any movement was made towards embodying a regular army." ^[8]

Some militia units appeared without adequate arms, as evidenced in this letter from John Adams to his wife, dated August 26th, 1777:

"The militia are turning out with great alacrity both in Maryland and Pennsylvania. They are distressed for want of arms. Many have none, we shall rake and scrape enough to do Howe's business, by favor of the Heaven."^[9]

[edit] Confederation period (1783-1787)

The Articles of Confederation provided for States militia, which could only be activated upon ratification of 9 of the 13 States, severely restricting federal power.

Politically, the militia was highly popular during this period, though to some extent, based more on on pride of victory in the recent war than on the realities.^[10] This skepticism of the actual value of relying upon the militia for national defense, versus a trained regular army was expressed by Gouverneur Morris:

"...An overweening vanity leads the fond many, each man against the conviction of his own heart, to believe or affect to believe, that militia can beat veteran troops in the open field and even play of battle. This idle notion, fed by vaunting demagogues, alarmed us for our country, when in the course of that time and chance, which happen to all, she should be at war with a great power."^[11]

Robert Spitzer, citing Daniel Boorstin, describes this political dichotomy of the public popularity of the militia versus the military value: "While the reliance upon militias was politically satisfying, it proved to be an administrative and military nightmare. State detachments could not be easily combined into larger fighting units; soldiers could not be relied on to serve for extended periods, and desertions were common; officers were elected, based on popularity rather than experience or training; discipline and uniformity were almost nonexistent."^[10]

General George Washington defended the militia in public, but in correspondence with Congress expressed his opinion of the militia quite to the contrary:

"To place any dependence on the Militia, is, assuredly, resting upon a broken staff. Men just dragged from the tender Scenes of domestic life; unaccustomed to the din of Arms; totally unacquainted with every kind of military skill, which being followed by a want of confidence in themselves, when oppsed to Troops regularly train'd, disciplined, and appointed, superior in knowledge and superior in Arms, makes them timid, and ready to fly from their own shadows...if I was called upon to declare upon Oath, whether the Militia have been most serviceable or hurtful upon the whole, I should subscribe to the latter."^[12]

Shays' Rebellion. A Massachusetts militia that had been raised as a private army defeated the main Shaysite force on February 3, 1787. There was a lack of an institutional response to the uprising, which energized calls to reevaluate the Articles of Confederation and gave strong impetus to the Constitutional Convention which began in May 1787.

[edit] Constitution and Bill of Rights (1787-1789)

The delegates of the Constitutional Convention (the founding fathers/framers of the United States Constitution) under Article 1; section 8, paragraphs 15 and 16 of the federal constitution, granted Congress the power to "provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining (regulating/training) the Militia," as well as, and in distinction to, the power to raise an army and a navy. The US Congress is granted the power to use the militia of the United States for three specific missions, as described in Article 1, section 8, paragraph 15: "To provide for the calling for of the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions." The Militia Act of 1792 clarified whom the militia consists of; " Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act."

[edit] Political opposition to a standing army

At the time of the drafting of the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, the popular political sentiment in the newly formed United States included a strong suspicion of standing armies, though this opinion was certainly not universal. This political belief has been identified as stemming from the memory of the abuses of the standing army of Oliver Cromwell and King James II, in Great Britain in the prior century, which similarly had resulted in a push for the rights of a militia to oppose the power of a standing army, upon the 1688 Glorious Revolution of William III which led to the drafting of the English Bill of Rights of 1689.^[13]

During Congressional debates, James Madison was among the strongest proponents for the creation of a militia in lieu of a standing army:

The highest number to which a standing army can be carried in any country does not exceed one hundredth part of the souls, or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This portion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Besides the advantage of being armed, it forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. The governments of Europe are afraid to trust the people with arms. If they did, the people would surely shake off the yoke of tyranny, as America did. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors."- (Source I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789)

Tench Coxe, a prominent American political economist (1755-1824) who attended the earlier convention in Annapolis, explained (in the Pennsylvania Federal Gazette on June 18th, 1789) the founders' definition of who the militia was and why they chose to create it as follows:

The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ...the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.

The militia, who are in fact the effective part of the people at large, will render many troops quite unnecessary. They will form a powerful check upon the regular troops, and will generally be sufficient to over-awe them.

Whereas civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as military forces, which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.

[edit] Political shift from States' power to Federal power

A major factor in the debate with the Constitution and the Second Amendment to the Constitution revolved around the issue of transferring militia power held by the States' (under the existing Articles of Confederation), to Federal control. The new Constitution effected a dramatic shift of military power from being militia based and predominately controlled by the States' towards being controlled by the federal Congress and the federal President with the addition of federal army.^[10]

[edit] Political debate regarding compulsory militia service for pacifists

Records of the debate over the early drafts of the language of the Second Amendment included significant discussion of whether service in the militia should be compulsory for all able bodied men, or should there be an exemption for the 'religiously scrupulous' conscientious objector, ultimately with no exclusion of conscience being included in the final version.

The concern about risks of a 'religiously scrupulous' exemption clause was expressed by Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts (from 1 Annals of Congress at 750, 17 August 1789): "Now, I am apprehensive, sir, that this clause would give an opportunity to the people in power to destroy the constitution itself. They can declare who are those religiously scrupulous, and prevent them from bearing arms. What, sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. Now it must be evident, that under this provision, together with their other powers, congress could take such measures with respect to a militia, as make a standing army necessary. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins."

[edit] Federal period, War of 1812 (1790-1860)

In 1794, a militia numbering approximately 13,000 was raised and personally led by President George Washington to quell the Whiskey Rebellion in Pennsylvania. From this experience, a major weakness of a States' based citizen militia system was found to be the lack of systematic army organization, and a lack of training for engineers and officers. George Washington repeatedly warned of these shortcomings up until his death in 1799. Two days before his death, in a letter to General Alexander Hamilton, George Washington wrote: "The establishment of a Military Academy upon a respectable and extensive basis has ever been considered by me as an object of primary importance to this country; and while I was in the chair of government, I omitted no proper opportunity of recommending it in my public speeches, and otherwise to the attention of the legislature."^[14]

In 1802, the federal military academy at West Point was established, in part to rectify the failings of irregular training inherent in a States' based militia system. ^[14]

In the War of 1812, the United States militia were routed by British regulars, and it was determined that militia were not adequate for the national defense. Military budgets were greatly increased at this time, and standing armies rather than militia were deemed better for the national defense.

During this inter war period of the Nineteenth Century, the States' militia tended towards being disorderly and unprepared.

"The demoralizing influences even of our own militia drills has long been notorious to a proverb. It has been a source of general corruptions to the community, and formed habits of idleness, dissipation and profligacy. ... musterfields have generally been scenes or occasions of gambling, licentiousness, and almost every vice. ... An eye-witness of a New England training, so late as 1845, says, "beastly drunkenness, and other immoralities, were enough to make good men shudder at the very name of a muster."^[15]

Responding to criticisms of failures of the militia, Adjunct General William Sumner wrote an analysis and rebuttal in a letter to John Adams, May 3rd, 1823:

"The disasters of the militia may be ascribed chiefly to two causes, of which the failure to train the men is a principle one; but, the omission to train the officers is a so much greater, that I think the history of its conduct, where it has been unfortunate, will prove that its defects are attributable, more to their want of knowledge or the best mode of applying the force under their authority to their attainment of their object than to all others. It may almost be stated, as an axiom, that the larger the body of undisciplined men is, the less is its chance of success;..."^[16]

Joseph Story laments in 1842 how the militia has fallen into serious decline:

"And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burdens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our National Bill of Rights.^[17]"

[edit] Civil War

Following the Confederate taking of Fort Sumter, which marked the beginning of the Civil War, President Lincoln called up States' militia to retake the seized Federal property and found that the militia "...strength was far short of what the Congressional statute provided and required."^[18]

[edit] The Klu-Klux conspiracy and the Negro Loyal League

Post civil war racial militia conflicts. [2]

[edit] Spanish American War

Failure of the militia to meet expectations in the Spanish American War.[3]

[edit] World War I

The Plattsburg Movement. The Hays Law. ^[19]

[edit] Organized militia

The United States National Guard and Naval Militia, created by the Militia Act of 1903, was a federalized portion of the State militia which were converted into regular troops kept in reserve for the United States Army. The National Defense Act of 1916 [4] placed all state militia units under the National Guard. This act was later amended in 1933 under the National Guard Mobilization, Act][5] to place all National Guard units under the control of the United States Army, making them regular troops and effectively ending their status as constitutional militia forces under Article 1, section 8, paragraphs 15,16, of the Federal Constitution and the Second Amendment of the Federal Constitution.

The current United States Code, Title 10 (Armed forces), section 311 (Militia: Composition and Classes), paragraph (a) states: "The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard." Section 313 of Title 32 refers to persons with prior military experience who could serve as officers. These persons remain members of the militia until age 64. Paragraph (b) further states, "The classes of the militia are: (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."[6].

The National Guard is the largest of the organized federal reserve military forces in the United States. The National Guard is classified (under title 10, see above) as the organized federal militia as it is under both federal and state control, and both the President of the United States and state governors can call upon it. Since the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, many National Guard units have served overseas (under the Total Force Policy of 1973 which effectively combined the National Guard with the armed forces making them regular troops.) This can lead to problems for states that also face internal emergencies while the Guard is deployed overseas. To address such issues, many of the states, such as New York and Maryland also have organized state "militia" forces or State Guards which are under the control of the governor of a state, however many of these "militia" also act as a reserve for the National Guard and are thus a part of it (varies from state to state depending on individual state statutory laws). New York and Ohio also have active naval militias, and a few other states have on-call or proposed ones. In 1990, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case of Perpich v. Department of Defense that the Federal government has plenary power over the National Guard, and greatly reduced (to the point of nonexistence) the state government's ability to withhold consent to Federal deployments and training missions of the National Guard.[7]

Numerous states have their own Guard units separate from the National Guard; some authorized by the states themselves, like the Alabama State Defense Force. Others simply are acknowledged by the state as their official State Guard. These units have no affiliation with the National Guard.

[edit] The Reserve Militia/unorganized militia

All able bodied men, 18 to 45 of age, are ultimately eligible to be called up into military service and belong to the class known as the Reserve Militia, also known as the unorganized militia.

[edit] Extralegal/private militia organizations

Within the United States there are political organizations that call themselves "militia" or "unorganised militia"(as a reference to the term in various colonial writings), and claim legitimacy based on Article 1, section 8 and the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution, the militia act of 1792, Title 10 section 311, and a concept of an armed citizenry that they perceive in the common law. Some of these groups refer to themselves as citizen's militia, [8] others refer to themselves as simply militia, [9], many use the term "unorganised militia" and others do not use the term "militia" at all, [10] though most espouse similar ideological beliefs.

These private "militia" groups have not been formally called into service by the Federal congress. They are not linked to a state or federal government organization or military force, nor are any they known to be registered with the Civilian Marksmanship Program. These organizations are known to speak out against the political actions of many State governments and the Federal government, due to what they consider to be unconstitutional (or non-constitutional) federal statutory laws, policies, treaties with foreign powers, and many federal agencies. Educational, fitness, training and commissioning standards for these private militia are minimal when compared to the Regular Army, National Guard or Reserve Forces.

These private militia are believed to have been spawned from the independent survivalist movement, tax-protester movement and other movements in the subculture of what is collectively called the "Patriot" movement in the United States. A few small private-militia groups developed within the United States during the 1970s and 1980s, but the movement experienced a wave of growth in the 1990s for various reasons including the Gordon Kahl, Ruby Ridge, and Waco incidents and the passage of the Brady law, and the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.

Behavioral scientist, Mark Pitcavage, describes this private militia of the late 1990's:^[20]

"The militia movement is a right-wing movement that arose following controversial standoffs in the 1990s. It inherited paramilitary traditions of earlier groups, especially the conspiratorial, antigovernment Posse Comitatus. The militia movement claims that militia groups are sanctioned by law but uncontrolled by government; in fact, they are designed to oppose a tyrannical government. Adherents believe that behind the "tyranny" is a left-wing, globalist conspiracy known as the New World Order. The movement's ideology has led some adherents to commit criminal acts, including stockpiling illegal weapons and explosives and plotting to destroy buildings or assassinate public officials, as well as lesser confrontations."

Private-militia activities range from organized lawful protesting of government policies to criminal activities including the illegal modification and manufacture of firearms and explosives. However, the majority of private-militia groups are non-violent^{[citation needed]} and only a small segment of the private-militia actually commit acts of violence to advance their political goals and beliefs.

A number of leaders of these groups, such as Lynn Van Huizen of the Michigan Militia Corps-Wolverines, have gone to some effort to rid their ranks of radical members who are inclined to carry out acts of violence and/or terrorism. Officials at the FBI Academy classify private-militia groups within four categories, ranging from moderate groups who do not engage in criminal activity to radical cells which commit violent acts of terrorism.

Private-militia anxiety, paranoia of Globalism, and millenarianism relating to the year 2000 were based mainly on a political ideology, as opposed to religious beliefs. Private-militia leaders espoused the idea that the year 2000 would lead to political and personal repression enforced by the United Nations and countenanced by a compliant U.S. government. This ideology centers around what is known as the New World Order (NWO) conspiracy theory. Other issues which have served as motivating factors for the private-militia movement include gun control, illegal immigration, the incidents at Ruby Ridge (1992) and Waco (1993), the publishing of the controversial novel Unintended Consequences by John Ross (1996), the Montana Freemen standoff (1996) and the restriction of land use by federal agencies, as well as present and past circuit and Supreme Court decisions regarding both the constitution and its amendments (specifically the first 10).

[edit] List of militia in the United States

[edit] U.S. Federal militia forces

• United States National Guard
• Naval Militia

[edit] U.S. States' militia

• Virginia Militia
• State Defense Forces
• Texas State Guard
• New Hampshire Militia
• Connecticut Governor's Guards

[edit] Extralegal / private militia

• Mississippi Minuteman [11]
• Colorado Minutemen [12]
• North Carolina Citizen's Militia [13]
• Triangle Civilian Irregular Defense Group [14]
• Militia of Montana [15]
• Michigan Militia [16]
• Indiana Militia Corps [17]
• Texas Constitutional Militia [18]
• Texas Emergency Reserve
• Unorganized Hawaii State Militia
• Connecticut 71st Militia [19]
• Terrain Militia 08th MS Team, Freeburg IL
• California State Militia
• KISSATA [20]
• Ranch Rescue
• Klu Klux Klan [21]
• The 51st Missouri Militia

[edit] See also

• Project Megiddo
• Irregular military
• Nauvoo Legion
• Turner Diaries
• New World Order (conspiracy)

[edit] External links

• The Militia FAQ

[edit] References

1. ^ Spitzer, Robert J.: The Politics of Gun Control, Page 36. Chatham House Publishers, Inc., 1995. "
2. ^ ^{a b} Department of Defense, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Military compensation background papers, Sixth edition, page 229. Department of Defense, 2005.
3. ^ Beard, Charles Austin: Readings in American Government and Politics, Page 308. Macmillan, 1909. "Sec. 1. That the militia...shall be divided into two classes...the organized militia, to be known as the National Guard...and the remainder to be known as the Reserve Militia."
4. ^ Bellesiles, Michael A., Revolutionary Outlaws: Ethan Allen and the Struggle for Independence on the Early American Frontier, Page 77. University of Virginia Press, 1995.
5. ^ ^{a b} Sparks, Jared: "The Life of George Washington", page 70. F. Andrews, 1853.
6. ^ Sparks, Jared: "The Life of George Washington", page 134-135. F. Andrews, 1853.
7. ^
8. ^ Sparks, Jared: "The Life of George Washington", page 135. F. Andrews, 1853.
9. ^ Adams, John: Letters of John Adams, Addressed to His Wife, page 257. C.C. Little and J. Brown, 1841.
10. ^ ^{a b c} Spitzer, Robert J.: The Politics of Gun Control. Chatham House Publishers, Inc., 1995. "
11. ^ Sparks, Jared: The Life of Gouverneur Morris, with Selections from His Correspondence and Miscellaneous Papers. Boston, 1832.
12. ^ Weatherup, Roy G.: Standing Armies and the Armed Citizens: An Historical Analysis of the Second Amendment. Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly (Fall 1975), 973
13. ^ Spitzer, Ronald J.:The Politics of Gun Control, page 27. Chatham House Publishers, 1995.
14. ^ ^{a b} Cullum, George and Wood, Eleazer:Campaigns of the War of 1812-1815, Against Great Britain: Sketched and Criticized.. J. Miller, 1879.
15. ^ Beckwith, George Cone: The Peace Manual: Or, War and Its Remedies. American Peace Society, 1847.
16. ^ Sumner, William H.: An Inquiry Into the Importance of the Militia to a Free Commonwealth, Page 23. Cummings and Hillard, 1823.
17. ^ Story, Joseph: , page 265. A Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States. T. H. Webb & co., 1842.
18. ^ Burgess, John Williams: The Civil War and the Constitution, 1859-1865, Page 173. C. Scribner's Sons, 1901.[1]
19. ^ Perry, Ralph Parton: The Plattsburg Movement: A Chapter of America's Participation in the World War". E.P. Dutton & Company, 1921
20. ^ Pitcavage, Mark; Institute for Intergovernmental Research: Camouflage and Conspiracy. The Militia Movement From Ruby Ridge to Y2K. American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 44, No. 6, Pages 957-981, SAGE Publications, 2001.

[edit] Historic

• Federalist papers
• Anti-Federalist papers
• United States Constitution
• Militia Act of 1792
• Militia Act of 1903
• National Defense Act of 1916
• National Guard Mobilization Act of 1933
• Total Force Policy of 1973

[edit] Scholarly

• Samuel J. Newland The Pennsylvania militia: Defending the Commonwealth and the nation, 1669-1870 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dept. of Military and Veterans Affairs (2002)

[edit] Critical of contemporary private miltias

• Lamy, Philip. 1996. Millennium Rage: Survivalists, White Supremacists, and the Doomsday Prophecy. New York: Plenum.
• Stern, Kenneth S. 1996. A Force Upon the Plain: The American Militia Movement and the Politics of Hate. New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Gibson, James William. 1994. Warrior Dreams: Paramilitary Culture in Post-Viet Nam America. New York: Hill and Wang.
• Gibson, James William. 1997. "Is the Apocalypse Coming? Paramilitary Culture after the Cold War." In The Year 2000: Essays on the End, ed. Charles B. Strozier and Michael Flynn. New York: New York University Press.
• Levitas, Daniel. 2002. The Terrorist Next Door: The Militia Movement and the Radical Right. New York: St. Martin's.

[edit] Critical of government (works which influenced private-militia ideology)

• Larry Pratt Safeguarding Liberty: The Constitution and Citizens Militias Legacy Communications (May, 1995)
• Gary Allen, Larry Abraham, Senator John G. Schmitz, 1976 None Dare Call it Conspiracy Concord Press
• John A. Stormer 1968 The Death of a Nation Liberty Bell Press
• John A Stormer 1964 None Dare Call it Treason Liberty Bell Press
• G. Edward Griffith July 1964The Fearful Master: A second look at the United Nations Western Islands Publishing
• David M. Kirkham 1993 The New World Order: In Historical Perspective Wyoming: High Plains Publishing Company
• Jim Keith 1994 Black Helicopters Over America: Strike Force for the New World Order. Illuminet Press
• Mack Tanner Armed-Citizen Solution to Crime in the Streets: So Many Criminals, So Few Bullets. ISBN 0-87364-806-4

[edit] Artifact

• Leonard C. Lewin 1967 The Report From Iron Mountain: On the Possibility and Desirability of Peace (A hoax document written as a subtle satire widely believed to be authentic within many right wing political groups), Dial Press