Are You Ready to Revisit an Old Topic of Mine Yet?

The Case For Secession

Where liberty dwells, there is my country.

–Benjamin Franklin

I have written about this on the Rio Norte Line, and, most times, I am met with opposition from both sides of the political divide.  To my friends on the Right, I say: understand your sentimental attachment to the memory of America, but you are not using sound logic.  The nation you pine for is no more.  And to those on the Left who seek to control as many people as possible, I say: it is not the place of any person to control the conscience of another and no intention can or will ever be noble enough to change this truth.  Sadly, the two sides – liberty vs. tyranny – are growing farther and farther apart, to the point where I no longer believe they can be reconciled.  Therefore, I have grown more and more convinced that the only hope of man preserving the lamp of individual rights and liberty on the face of this earth lies in secession of those States which still embrace the founding principles and ideals of America from those States which seek to control them.

I have come to the conclusion that the ‘Red’ States should be given a chance to vote on secession.  I came to this conclusion for many reasons, but mostly, because I am sincere in my belief that no person has the right to control another.  So long as we are not actively causing harm to another person or their property, or the society in general, we should seek to allow maximum liberty and to exercise minimal control over others.  Sadly, a growing number in this country no longer agree with this foundational American value.  What’s more – and what’s more ominous – is that the government is now using our tax money to indoctrinate our children to believe that the government should be in control of everyone – for the good of the whole.  And to go one further, the government is now using its power to attack those who oppose big, controlling government.  In effect, the government that swore to protect freedom-loving Americans is now using their money to attack them and their children.  This is precisely what these two stories represent:

Here me out, read the rest…

51 thoughts on “Are You Ready to Revisit an Old Topic of Mine Yet?

  1. I am one of those who agrees with secession, but also has both a sentimental and pragmatic attachment to the United States. I suspect many who recognize that the current federal system is hopelessly mired in its own tyranny have the same considerations. One, it is the country of our birth, of our parents’ birth and we don’t want to see it divided up and consigned to the dustbin of history, though we suspect that if it continues the way that it is currently going, its people will end up enslaved and the country we are nostalgic for will die a much less dignified death. Many of us also are from other states than the state we currently live in, which means that at some point we will have to decide what “country” we will belong to and we’ll then have to let go our attachment to the other, where our parents or siblings might still live.That’s the sentimental attachment part.

    Now for the pragmatic part. I think Alaska would do okay as our own nation provided (and it’s a big proviso) that the blue states did not embargo our food. You could bring us to our knees in a short period of time if we couldn’t use our resource wealth to secure food because our ground is cold and our growing season is short. Excepting that, unlike many other states, Alaska has the means to support itself as an independent entity. We could probably even hire an army to protect us from every other nation that would like our resource wealth. Our main weakness is food and a supply chain that is reliant upon two “blue” states — California and Washington.

    Most other states do not have billions of dollars in savings and centuries of natural resources to sell. They might be able to grow their own food, but their national guard is inadequate against an actual army or they have no oil or refineries to turn that oil into gasoline and heating oil. What happens to them once they secede? If Mexico turns its eye on New Mexico, for example, what exactly does New Mexico do without a federal government to ask help from?

    And, there is also the practical consideration that the debt of the United States is not going away if we secede. In fact, it’s likely our creditor nations will demand repayment in full immediately and that might be a problem for states that are already struggling.

    • Aurora,

      This is the price of s\liberty: a willingness to sacrifice. Yes, States would have to make changes, but note: they would NOT have to honor ANYTHING the USA passed as they would no longer be part of that country. So, the US debt would be THEIR problem — not that of the States. Now would the States be responsible for the entitlements the US imposed on its people as the States would no longer be part of US law.

      Yes, I understand what this would mean for the US. Tough. They made their bed. Maybe the implications would give them pause enough to correct their ways. if not, let China reposes the Blue States. As I said, THEY made that bed — the rest of us should not be forced to lie in it with them.

      As for Alaska: you guys have enough oil to stay free. So does Florida, only most Floridians don’t know that. In fact, most Red States would be OK — once they took their resources back from the feds and got back to learning how to sustain themselves rather than suckling at the federal tit.

      • Not worried about Alaska. Food is really our only large worry. We can buy ourselves a lot with our resource wealth. Not so sure about red states like Arizona, however. I know, it wouldn’t really be my place to worry about Arizonans in that scenario, but I think it’s one of those things that ought to be examined in considering secession. The concept is easy and attractive. The implementation is likely to be messy and painful.

        I do disagree with you that the “red states” don’t owe the debt. In perfect honesty, our political representatives in DC voted for a lot of that debt. The GOP were as guilty of overspending as the Dems and red states received lots of nice projects just as much as blue states did. Morally and ethically, we the people owe the money. Pragmatically, I suspect the IMF or whatever UN-type organization makes such rulings, will rule that the states several owe the money even if we separate from the US. It doesn’t take a lot of economic smarts to recognize that the red states are the resource banks and therefore, the loans are worthless if we secede, so it’s likely that our national creditors (China, Japan) will demand payment as soon as the secession starts.

        Alaska can afford to offer a settlement and hire an army or three to protect us. Can Florida?

          • Aurora,

            Never said I wanted to do it on the fly. Notice, I keep pointing to the States and votes by the people of the States. I am leaving the details to those better situated to deal with them than I :*)

        • Aurora,

          If not to renounce the debts and commitments with which we disagree, then why secede if not to break with and wash our hands of the way the nation has been run?

          And, if you think secession will be messy, what do you think following the path we are currently traveling is going to be? 🙂

    • Aurora,

      This may sound Odd to you ….. but it is MY own Sentimental feelings about America that makes me want to see Secession succeed !

      A succession of States and or (Counties within States) that unite under the Constitution as written and in the Principle of her True Liberties for Individuals and States.

  2. “In effect, the government that swore to protect freedom-loving Americans is now using their money to attack them and their children.”
    Check the inflammatory video of the parent being removed from the Common Core meeting for I’m not sure what exactly, if you haven’t seen it already. Must Joe say more?

    As much as it pains me to say it, and as much as I would hate to see this happen, I agree. I don’t see any possible way that either side can be reconciled. Which ever motion one side makes, is going to be met with equal opposition by the other side. In my opinion, I think this is making the USA prime real-estate for the Antichrist to eventually take American under his control. (I know melfamy and Karl will move to pick my thoughts apart right away, so if either of you is still reading this comment, you can go ahead skip on down the thread) and I would take it a step further and say that it will probably be on a road paved by Jonah Goldberg’s liberal fascists, er nice fascists, err Progressives; who I would argue are winning over the balance of power if they haven’t done so already. The only thing to complete the picture is the perfect dictator that we can all rally behind in our journey “forward”, and most of us know who that will actually be. Plainly, the state of our union makes me feel like the world’s greatest nihilist. My apologies if a fallacy or two resides in this comment.

    • Libercrite,

      When the Roman republic fell, it was controlled by a dictatorship that operated behind a mask. For years before the mask was finally taken off, the people lived under the ILLUSION that the Senate still mattered when they knew it didn’t.

      I submit that this is where we are today. When Obama doesn’t get what he wants, he merely signs an executive order or directs a bureaucracy to implement his will via “regulation.” That is tyranny — pure and simple.

    • Walter E Williams said back in 2010 that we ( the two ideological sides ) are Irreconcilable.

      You cannot reconcile Freedom versus Tyranny……. Your Life and Your Property Versus People who want your property and want to Control your Life.

      ( Melfamy and Karl are idiots and purveyors of ridicule and hatespeech……nothing more….pay them no mind in your fight ).

  3. Only “Red” states?? Why not, all states? In fact, I would like to see the Nation of Long Island (NY).
    I continue to wear the Bonnie Blue on my jacket.
    I am tattooed with the Stars & Bars.
    Only “Red” states?

  4. if secession were to happen it would hasten the demise of capitalism.
    1. the global capitalist system would collapse
    a)more resources would be dedicated to war
    b)population growth would further decrease
    2.the war would lead to a collapse of the bourgeoisie state
    a)you would have the red-state bourgeoisie in a war against the national bourgeoisie
    b)this interwar bourgeoisie war would have the effect of alienating the proletariat who will asks themselves “why do I wanna fight in a war just so the bourgeoisie can have a flat tax and no public healthcare and no OSHA and EPA regulations.
    c) If such a situation started to develop many people would flee the secessionist states which already have the highest levels of poverty and crime among the states. The flight of the working poor will decrease the productive capabilities of the secessionist.

    All in all think this through before you support these ideas. I would like to see a write-up of the secessionist plan succeeding. Mark Steyn has said if America falls so will the entire western world. I think secession is one of the many ways America can fall.

        • Karl’s theory is the opposite of what would probably happen. He sees the cities as the source of wealth in this country, but he fails to account for the fact that this is done by govt. fiat — just as our founders said it would happen. And the result has been exactly what the founders said it would be, as well…

            • The secessionist states would most likely face economic sanctions and a blockade. The south has almost no manufacturing base. Except for building cars. Heavy machinery is still manufactured in the north. Caterpillar, New Holland, Terex, Bobcat and Navistar are northern companies.

              Can you explain to me how secession could work? I am curious to see another scenario where America becomes two.

              • Karl,

                Then the South will starve the North out. This time, it not only has the agriculture, it also has the industry and energy.

                I think your scenario is hopelessly flawed because you have a miopic view economics. For you, everything is about Capitalism (which is just freedom as expressed in the market, meaning you oppose liberty).

                You also have a total lack of understanding about human nature. It is why you have never and will never be correct in your assertions: you build your theories on false premises. In other words, you build utopias in imaginary clouds.

              • Sure, Karl. The way I see it is by a peaceful agreement (sans war) to divide America in to two factions: Progressive America and Constitutional America. I have trouble with dividing states by red or blue as there are (believe it or not) conservatives in blue states and vice-versa. It seems rational to me to let a person decide where he wishes his citizenship to be placed regardless of where he lives, and adhering to the laws of Progressive America or Constitutional America.

                Obviously, both sides would have to amend their constitutions, as PA wants to move closer to communism in theirs, and CA wanting to drop the progressive agenda from theirs. This would include all of these entitlement programs as well as quite a few govt. agencies. This leads me to believe that the majority of the FSA (free shit army) would become a citizen of PA.

                Businesses and corporations would be decided by the owner or majority whether they are P or C. An entirely new monetary system for each America, as well as an exchange rate, would have to come to pass. I highly doubt CA would go with a central banking system, nor the tax code as it stands.

                If this were to come to pass, I believe America would resemble East/West Berlin or North/South Korea. The only difference is that the individual, not the govt., gets to decide which side you’re on.

                • I would vote for a constitutional convention to dissolve the U.S and separate the lefties and righties. I actually like the idea. But so much of the secessionist speech seems to be focused on a unilateral secession. It may be that the majority might support a multi-lateral negotiated secession.

                    • Unfortunately …. it is often the Cities that are the Liberal Cesspools…..tghe Rural and Subrban counties are less so or Conservative.

                      So the secession will take the form of Spitting of the States themselves……For instance there are tons of Conservatives in the Counties in New York and PA……look at a 2012 voting map…….it is FULL of Red surrounding Islands of Blue which are located on the Cities.

                      The Cities literally Suck the money and lifeblood of the Red counties in this country…….as most of the 47 % that don’t pay any taxes and get subsidies live within the Urban zones…..not all to be sure…..but MOST.

                      So a Majority of Texas agrees with the Red counties in PA and NY and even Calif that are not in SF , LA, Pittsburg, Phila , NYC, Syracuse, Buffalo etc…

                    • I can’t forget Florida Kells…. I have cousins there…..And my wife love the place….although I’ve never been there…..

                      yet.. :- )).

          • It is a sad fact of capitalism that farmers are under-appreciated. In the U.S civil war the southerners had more access to the coast, and huge plantations and even slave labor and still lost. The south would be unable to prevent a northern sea-blockade. Whether by coincidence or plan. The biggest naval bases are in California and north of North Carolina. Also most of the south’s economic “growth” has been reliant on cheap labor and the food stamp and welfare subsidies of cheap labor by the federal gov’t. Take this away from the working poor and make them choose between migrating between the higher wage and more developed Federalies or stay in the low wage, no social safety net, poverty stricken State-ist. There would be a mass migration.

        • Secession in the way the Counties are doing it would NOT have to lead to war …. this is myopic thinking on the Left’s part.

          It is also a window into the Left, the Communist / Socialist mindset….they ALWAYS go to violence…Always. It is the very history of Socialism……..

          And you see it it in the Video above……the Left’s first reaction to anything is Violence….the Unions during the 2010 elections and TP meetings….the Threats at Pennsylvania polling places and on and on.

          Those who want to seceed are NOT talking violence….just separatio, going separate ways…….it is ENTIRELY the Gov’t, the Communists and the Liberals who threaten violence…..we need to be aware of this !! and make others around us aware of this Truth.

          • Don makes an excellent point: for those who love liberty, violence is always the last resort — and even then, only in self-defense. But for those who seek to control, violence — even the threat of violence — is always on the tip of their tongue and fingers.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.