Enemy of the People is a play written by Henrik Ibsen, in which the protagonist is a doctor who discovers that the water supply for newly constructed mineral baths has been polluted by waste from the local tannery. When he attempts to warn the local citizenry of the danger, he is treated as a pariah by the everyone who has invested in the baths or is depending upon them to reverse the economic fortunes of the town. Ultimately the doctor and his family are, in effect, forced to flee the town he loves after he is labeled an “enemy of the people” by all those who do not want the truth about the contaminated baths revealed.

But in the last few days an “enemy of the people” has come to acquire a new meaning, one having absolutely nothing to do with a 19th Century work of literary fiction, and everything to do with your (now much reduced) rights as a free citizen of these United States:

The compromise legislation, which is racing toward the White House, authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights.

This dangerous compromise not only authorizes the president to seize and hold terrorists who have fought against our troops “during an armed conflict,” it also allows him to seize anybody who has “purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.” This grants the president enormous power over citizens and legal residents. They can be designated as enemy combatants if they have contributed money to a Middle Eastern charity, and they can be held indefinitely in a military prison.

I believe that this legislation, now all but assured of passage by Congress without any amendment to ameliorate its worst excesses, is far worse than Professor Ackerman describes in that portion of his op-ed I have excerpted above. There is no provision in the bill that I have seen which defines what constitutes the type of conduct necessary to qualify someone as having “purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.” Therefore, I doubt this language is limited to contributions to charities with ties to suspected terrorists. Arguably, the definition is open ended, and its meaning is one which is at the discretion of the executive branch (i.e., President Bush).

Literally, we are now all at the mercy of this rogue President. Who can predict what limits, if any, he will place on the exercise of this power so wantonly surrendered to him by Congress. I cannot. But I have my suspicions.

(Continued, with an Update, below the fold)
For starters, perhaps anyone who leaks information about secret government surveillance programs. Or maybe anyone who leaks classified intelligence estimates which paint a less rosy picture of the War on Terror than the one Tony Snow is designated to dispense each and every day to a subservient White House Press corps. Or perhaps, anyone who aids in the dissemination of such state secrets, like journalists, news organizations and even liberal bloggers. Or maybe anyone who is foolish enough to protest the war, or our dear leader, in public.

In truth, we don’t know what this administration might consider constitute acts which “materially supported hostilities against the United States.” The phrase is too vague and ambiguous to provide me any comfort. It can mean whatever the people who have the power to enforce this law want it to mean. And that means whatever Bush or Cheney or Rumsfeld or Rove decides is in their best interest that it mean. And if you are deemed to be an “enemy combatant” it won’t matter if your ancestors came over here on the Mayflower, if you were sworn in as a naturalized citizen last Friday or if you are here illegally. In each case you will be treated the same.

You will be arrested, but not charged. You will be detained, but not offered a trial (or at least not a real trial, a trial by a jury of your peers as specified in the 6th Amendment). You will have no recourse to the federal courts to protest your innocence. You will be, for all intents and purposes, a cipher, a nowhere man or woman, without any rights, without any dignity, subject to daily abuse, humiliation and even torture at the whim of your jailers.

You see it now? Each of us, everyone who opposes this administration, is now a potential Enemy of the People. All it takes is for the “Decider” or his minions to determine that your actions pose a threat to them. And presto chango, you lose everything that matters to you. Your life, your liberty, your family, your friends. You will disappear into the bowels of the State Security Apparatus never to be seen or heard from again.

For they own us. We no longer live in a free society. The times, they are a changin. Better get used to it, because it’s only going to get worse.































Update [2006-9-28 19:14:39 by Steven D]: I’m not the only one wondering who will get tagged with the enemy combatant label.

So … is it possible that one day in the not-so-distant future, federal agents will start snatching up environmental activists (who allegedly are or support terrorists) and locking them away indefinitely without trial?

Perhaps I’m being cynical, or paranoid. But let me ask you: is there enough paranoia and cynicism in even the blackest human heart with which to properly assess America’s current ruling party?