0 votes

How about secession instead of returning to the Constitution?

A lot of people on here seem to be in a trance about "returning to the Constitution."

My question: why not focus on secession instead? That is, why not get away from the federal government that the Constitution created?

Why? Well I think this is a numbers game... getting politicians into office that would follow the Constitution would take massive electoral victories in 2010 and 2012. If the number of people eligible to vote is approximately 150 million...we would need at least 51% of that.

Secession, on the other hand, could be done in NH for example with support by at least 51% of their population of 1-2million.

Why not work in the area where we have a realistic chance? Work smart not hard!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Good point

If we got back to the constitution it would be a temporary fix.

Would a state have any claim to the constitution if it seceded and was brought back into the Union by force? (Theoretical question, since our current claims to the constitution are ignored.)

Defend Liberty!

One of the few sane posts

... on what to do, if anything at all.

As far as returning this Socialistic mob (American People) back to a Constitutional Republic is like getting a Ron Paul elected. Not going to happen. R3volution yes, but probably Socialistic.

Does anyone think Benjamin Franklin was just whistling "Dixie" when he told Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia Outside Independence Hall when
the Constitutional Convention of 1787 ended, when she asked, "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it."

When is the last time you heard this country called a Republic ?

Just another fabricated

Just another fabricated quote. If not, well... Ben Franklin IS a liar. A "republic" is ran by the people! Not a centralized group. Now, how are the people in control, when only a centralized group had the powers of taxation, law making, and complete control of the Supreme Court!

How?

The pledge of allegiance. We

The pledge of allegiance. We won't have a socialist revolution because it will be obvious by the time the system collapses(or if it does, I could see the elites bringing in Ron Paul Republicans to fix things like in Atlas Shrugged) that socialism is the problem. Our choices will be Fascism or Constitutionalism.

Ventura 2012

German Fascism

... was closer to Russian communism than to any other non-communist system (National-Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei). BTW, Adolf says when he comes back, "No more Mr. Nice guy!"

My point is the nationalism

My point is the nationalism that fascism brings, not the economic intricacies. Of course, communism in Russia was nothing like any theoretical communism.

Ventura 2012

I'm not in a trance, but I

I'm not in a trance, but I would like to see a federal government based on a strict interpretation of Constitutional principles. If this were done, the change in government and indeed in the larger society would be profound.

Your point I perceive to be a part of a continuum...if we don't succeed with the original goal, others need to be examined. Some here might consider secession to be impractical, but I think it is a possibility that also should receive consideration. And if a state like NH really *did* secede, we'd be seeing pretty quickly just how many people take the ideas of liberty seriously. I'd expect a goodly number to be busily packing their bags for the move to a land of freedom :)

May we all live in interesting times...

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson

Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem. ("I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude"). Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 30 January 1787.

Secession Not Practical Now

I've nothing against the concept, but it's now unconstitutional (Texas v White). Before the "Civil War" there had been no ruling by the Supreme Court.
If any state seceded the Feds would simply jail those responsible by sending in the military. Those who violently resisted would be guilty of treason as defined by the Constitution (bearing arms against The United States).
Only by amending the Constitution is secession possible. The states have the constitutional power to achieve it, providing they have the will.
First amend the Constitution, then secede. The Constitution could be amended to allow the expulsion of a state(s) as well.
Making the USA a true federation, what it was in the beginning, would work just as well.

There was a Fox News video

There was a Fox News video on YouTube a while back (it was probably linked here at the DP but I doubt I would be able to find the link) where various state legislators were interviewed regarding the secession movement. I'm pretty sure the legislators interviewed were from Ohio, Indiana and Texas but the story referenced other states as well.

I recall the legislator from Texas stating that Texas will be enacting legislation which will absolutely forbid the State from recognizing any federal legislation that is not constitutional.

I believe that is the right step, definitely good to go this route ahead of any possible secessions.

Imagine if Texas did pass such a law and began enforcing it. I would very seriously consider moving to that State and I'm sure many others would consider doing the same as well.

Once other States learn that by protecting the rights of the people that they will be supported by those people, the movement (to respect the Constitution) will grow and expand beyond Texas.

...

OK, Texas says federal legislation is unconstitutional,

and the Supreme Court of the United States says it is. Guess who prevails?

State sovereignty

should suffice...

O.P.O.G.G. - Fighting the attempted devolution of the rEVOLution
Ron Paul 2012...and beyond
BAN ELECTRONIC VOTING!!

Probably the Only Solution

Unfortunately, there is no way this country is returning to a Constitutional government. There are not enough people who (a) understand the role of a limited government and (b) care enough to do anything about it. It will never happen.

Although the odds of secession are slim too, it's probably the only solution.

People dont have to

People dont have to understand to be manipulated into voting the way we want. ex. wave the flag and say founding fathers and the bloodthirsty neo-con voters will come running, as long as we have worked our way up the GOP ladder enough to deprive them of a warmongering option in the primaries. Take the conservative dems who are just ignorant but not evil along with the independants, and we have probably 60-70%.

People don't have to care, because its those that vote and do care that run the show.

Ventura 2012

No one expected it to happen

No one expected it to happen to the USSR, but it did. Perhaps secession will not happen by design but by circumstance.

Secession: It's what's for breakfast.

I've never really agreed with the people who urge us to "Take back Washington, D.C.!" or "Take back Congress!"

My response is, "Take it back? I never wanted it in the first place! Keep it!"

Freelance copywriter/editor who gets the "freedom message"!
Visit: http://www.DavidBardallis.com

I hear ya

My response is, "Take it back? I never wanted it in the first place! Keep it!"

I never would have supported ratification of the Constitution if I was alive back in the 1780's.

You would have been hung

You would have been hung from a tree in 1777 for being a tory, like your master Lew "Revolutionary War was Unjustified" Rockwell.

Ventura 2012

I raise you one.

I would have never supported the constitution. Period.

Allow me to intercede for the life of this Tory, 2bfree...

Pray, delay the hanging. I wish to meet with you again on Mr. Jefferson's birthday, to give you your proper raiment of tar and feathers.

A quote from a long-ago thread, 2bfree:

"Yeah, you're all about freedom as long as it requires someone to rule over you. Which is the exact opposite of freedom. We should have just stayed in England."

Ah, yes, another one who wouldn't have fought the American Revolution.

See you on April 13th.

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson

Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem. ("I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude"). Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 30 January 1787.

They should build a great

They should build a great wall around it and keep them in there.

atrickpay: I agree with you in "spirit"

I know what you are saying here

I think secession is just as un-certain as constitutionalism.

In the short to medium run -- people would sell their left ear-lobe to avoid that.

Why do we have to move from where we are (toward Constitutionalism or away from it)?

Counter-Economics effects a gradual economic-individualist cleansing without violence.

You only need 10,000,000 to change all of America -- this is not un-realistic a number to attain. We have 2,000,000 waiting in the wings.

Secession requires "leadership" and that's not "anarchist" is it?

Octobox

counter-economics

Please tell me more about this. What is it?

LimeLemon: Counter-Economics

It begins by realizing that the individual is not the worker, not the property owner, not the voter, and not the student -- these people have no rights.

The individual is the consumer -- it is the consumer (ultimately) that drives our desire to work and learn -- the worker is a consumer, the owner is a consumer, the student and voter are all consumers; but the consumer does not have to to be any of those.

The only inescapable activity is consumption; consumption of: knowledge, tools, products, services, food, water, oxygen, and resources -- we consume 24hrs of the day.

Consmptions means: "to use and to waste"

Coming to that realization we then know that to "vote" is to "abdicate authority" -- We can't however, deny that we have no consumer-authority.

Workers - Producers - Students - Bums all seek the ballot box -- that's how collectivist steal power from the consumer (or individuals); so to engage in ballot boxing is to "abdicate" authority -- no matter how good or noble the intentions.

We must think then -- how do we regain power?

How do we "support" the destruction of the individual (make a list):
1) Voting
2) Consumption
3) We pay taxes

That's it -- that we vote, we pay taxes, and the way we consume.

Can't win by voting (because that's collectivist - futile - hijackable)

So -- we go to consumption and taxes

#1 Buy Local (services and products -- breaks link to corporatism - lobbyist)
#2 Buy Organic Foods (local as much as possible - breaks link to corprate argiculture and Monsanto lobby)
#3 Develop Passive Income Streams (don't report all of your income) -- Get to the point where you are 80% under-the-table.
#4 Hire handy men (under the table) or do the work yourself
#5 Save all "wealth" in gold-silver -- Any "wealth" held by Wallstreet aids Wallstreet and the money machine (regardless of commodity). If you can't bury it in the back yard don't buy it
#6 Start purchasing co-ops and storage clubs -- store "real" commodities and fuel
#7 Bring back the Granges

If 10,000,000 people in the 80K and above bracket did this it would break Lobbyist, the Fed, and Washington's back.

Octobox

Thanks

Here's a post by Kinsella along the same lines.

Counter-economics (aka agorism) is dangerous

I don't want so start selling marijuana for example. Dangerous. If I get caught I'll be put into slavery (ie. "go to jail").



---

"The primary reason why the individual citizens of a country create a political structure, is a subconscious wish or desire to perpetuate their own dependency relationship of childhood."
- William Cooper

counter-economics is not "necessarily" agorism

Slavery is 100% taxation

You are in 80% taxation -- you are 80% enslaved!

You don't have to sell marijuana to be an agorist, hahahaha.

I'm not an Anarcho-Capitalist (not 100% so) so, Agorism is means to get us into A-Cap and that's not my goal.

A-Caps believe the "individual" is the property owner (most rights are attributed to him) -- Whereas Mises believed the consumer was the individual and I agree 100% with that.

There are no "enforceable" rights in a free-society -- not by army or court or police. Self-Rule means self-protection and some level of lawlessness.

The wild-wild-west was not as murderous as it is today.

I want everyone wearing two guns (one concealed) and a samurai sword on their back. For crime and high fashion reasons, smile.

Octobox

Please read this article

Please read this article about a conceptual 50-state secession plan... very thought provoking!

http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2008/tle485-20080921-03.html

---
"Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils." -- General John Stark.

---
"Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils." -- General John Stark.

Thx

I'll check it out.

secession ready states

The whole secession idea needs to be relooked at from a geopolitcal perspective. The real likelyhood of anything happening in this diretion is slim, however if it did, the best place to have it take place would be at the extremities of the Union/empire. Places like Alaska, Hawaii, have no other borders with states and wouldn't disrupt interstate commerce in the case of an independent state. Texas would be next as a Southern extremity, as would Maine (an Eastern extremity). Florida as well, but highly highly unlikely. Texas, Alaska, and Hawaii (and Puerto Rico) all already have secessionist movements and it wouldn't take much to push the populace over in those areas. I really feel for it to have any shot it would have to be done in one of these states.

Add New Hampshire to that

Add New Hampshire to that list. NH, like Maine, has seacoast and a border with Canada. I think NH also has many economic catalysts that could produce a vibrant sovereign-state if the movement for secession gained momentum here.

...BUT, there's the Maine Problem. If NH secedes, Maine would be cut off from the federal union, but there are ways to deal with this:

a. Maine could also secede
b. Allow open transport through NH and collect tolls
c. Blockade Maine as a bargaining tool

If 51% of the people in NH have brass balls, this can happen.

---
"Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils." -- General John Stark.

---
"Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils." -- General John Stark.