Here is a detailed article exploring how the Overton Window has shifted regarding the military — from the Founders’ vision of a citizen militia to today’s globally deployed, permanent standing army — and what America’s early leaders warned would happen if such a transformation occurred.
From Militia to Military Machine: How the Overton Window Moved and What the Founders Feared
“A standing army is one of the greatest mischiefs that can possibly happen.”
—James Madison
The transformation of America’s defense force from militia-based defense to a permanent military-industrial complex is one of the most significant shifts in U.S. history. It represents not just a logistical change, but a philosophical and constitutional betrayal — one that the Founders explicitly warned against.
This change was not accidental. It was a slow, strategic shift in the Overton Window: what society deems normal, acceptable, and even necessary.
I. The Revolutionary War Model: Citizen Militia Over Standing Army
What was normal (1770s–early 1800s):
- Defense was local and decentralized
- Every able-bodied man was expected to defend his community and nation
- Armies were temporary, formed only in wartime
- Distrust of standing armies was widespread
Foundational Ideal:
A free people should never be ruled or intimidated by a permanent armed force under federal control.
II. What the Founders Said About Standing Armies
The Founders understood from history — especially from Rome and Britain — that standing armies are tools of tyranny. Here’s what they said:
George Washington (Farewell Address, 1796):
“Overgrown military establishments are… particularly hostile to republican liberty.”
James Madison:
“The means of defense against foreign danger have always been the instruments of tyranny at home.”
“No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”
Thomas Jefferson:
“I am for relying on militia rather than standing armies.”
Alexander Hamilton (despite his Federalist leanings):
“If standing armies are dangerous, they are to be feared in proportion as they are powerful.”
These warnings were not paranoid — they were grounded in history. Standing armies often serve the executive branch, not the people, and enable:
- Martial law
- Coup d’états
- Suppression of dissent
- Foreign adventurism and imperial overreach
III. The Overton Window Shifts (1800s–2000s)
| Era | Public Attitude | Military Policy | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1776–1820s | Skeptical of standing armies | State militias, temporary forces | Republic-focused defense |
| Civil War Era | Necessary evil during crises | Federally managed conscription | Beginning of centralization |
| WWI–WWII | Patriotic mobilization | Draft, large-scale build-ups | Rise of permanent institutions |
| Cold War (1947–1991) | Existential threat logic | Standing army + global bases | Normalized global militarism |
| War on Terror (2001–present) | Fear-based submission | Massive funding, endless wars | Military-industrial dominance |
IV. Eisenhower’s Warning: The Military-Industrial Complex
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence… by the military-industrial complex.”
—Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961
Eisenhower, a five-star general turned president, saw the writing on the wall:
A permanent war economy, private defense contractors, revolving doors between generals and weapons manufacturers — all culminating in a military that drives policy, not the other way around.
V. The Dangers of the Permanent Military State
- Erosion of Civil Liberties
- Surveillance justified by “national security”
- Posse Comitatus weakened (military roles in domestic law enforcement)
- Endless Wars
- Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria — wars not declared by Congress but perpetuated by executive power and defense contracts
- Blowback and Global Resentment
- U.S. military presence in over 750+ bases across 80+ countries fosters resentment and instability
- Domestic Militarization
- Police departments armed with military gear
- “Warrior cop” mentality replaces community policing
- Protestors treated as enemy combatants
VI. What the Founders Would Do Today
If the Founders saw the modern Pentagon budget, drone assassinations, and biometric surveillance, they would not see a “strong America”—they would see a tyranny in camouflage.
They would:
- Reassert constitutional war powers in Congress
- Abolish permanent peacetime military structures
- Restore the militia model with local accountability
- Dismantle the military-industrial financial pipeline
- Warn against the idolization of the military as “untouchable”
Conclusion: A Nation Adrift from Its Principles
The shift from a citizen militia to a standing army with global reach mirrors the broader transition from a republic of liberty to an empire of control. This was not what the Founders envisioned — in fact, it was what they feared most.
Today, the Overton Window has moved so far that questioning military budgets, overseas bases, or defense contractors is often labeled “unpatriotic.” But real patriotism defends liberty, not militarism.
“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
—Goethe
