Interesting comment. I am researching this in more depth as a result. Thank you. Two nits, or slight overstatements: > The US Constitution also clearly identi

Interesting comment. I am researching this in more depth as a result. Thank you. Two nits, or slight overstatements: > The US Constitution also clearly identifies the President as Command in Chief of the militia Is not quite true. He is the commander of the army and navy. For the militia, the exact text is: "of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States" The second part is important. The militias are normally independent of the president. However, they can be called into service of the president. > the powers of Congress to call forth & organize the militia This is power shared with the states, in a relatively complex and ill-defined way: "reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress" But yes, the goal was largely to prevent something akin to the military-industrial complex. My general read was to vest power federally, when being used in accordance with rule-of-law, but to put in power structures where the members and officers of the militia would ultimately be loyal to the people / the states. E.g. make rebellion easy if used beyond the scope of the Constitution.