Ten Reasons for Secession

By J. Michael Hill

A 2009 Zogby poll revealed that about one out of every five Americans believe that States have a right to peaceably secede from the United States and become independent republics. A similar percentage says that they would support a secession movement in their own State.

The greatest support for secession came from the South, where almost 26% of those polled supported a peaceful break with Washington, DC.

What is behind this increasing support for secession and independence? Perhaps the answer is this: hard reality has finally trumped the myth of a sacred, indivisible union. In other words, many citizens are beginning to see the hand writing on the wall, and the message is alarming.

There are at least ten good reasons for Southern secession in early 21st-century America:

1.  The U. S. government is an organized criminal enterprise; secession is the only way to return to legitimate government.

2.  The U. S. economy is failing; secession makes economic sense.

3.  The South’s unique history and culture is worth protecting.

4.  The criminal nature of the bank bailouts and the Fed.

5.  A dysfunctional national electoral system, secession may be the only way to restore integrity to elections.

6.  Third World immigration into the South, secession removes the federal government's interference and lack of performance.

7.  Organic community vs. the globalism of the elites.

8.  The implementation of an American police/surveillance state.

9.  The Christian South v. secular America, secession provides the opportunity to return to Our Founding Principles.

10.  Because we think we can rule ourselves better than we are being ruled by DC, secession is a path to American Liberty.

Can you think of some other reasons for secession?

About the Author:  Dr. J. Michael Hill, a former professor of History at Stillman College, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, is president of the League of the South. 

You may learn more about the League at www.dixienet.org

Southern Responses to South Carolina's Secession

HOW SECESSION IS REGARDED.; IN BALTIMORE. IN NEW-ORLEANS. IN MOBILE. IN MONTGOMERY. IN PENSACOLA. IN WILMINGTON. IN PORTSMOUTH. SECESSION IN MISSISSIPPI. MISSISSIPPI AND KENTUCKY. AFFAIRS IN VIRGINIA.

The New York Times
Published December 22, 1860

BALTIMORE, Friday, Dec. 21.

South Carolina's secession produced not the slightest sensation here, one way or the other. People seemed relieved and cheerful, and the streets were gaily crowded and business was better. The prevailing sentiment seems to be that if the North now does right, and makes honorable, manly concessions, indicating an absolute determination to cultivate friendly feelings, and will repeal the obnoxious laws, the other Southern States will cheerfully meet them. W.

NEW-ORLEANS, Friday, Dec. 21.

A general demonstration of joy on the secession of South Carolina occurred here to-day. One hundred guns were fired and the Pelican flag unfurled. impromptu secession speeches were made by leading citizens, and the "Marsailles Hymn" and polkas were the only airs played. A bust of CALHOUN was exhibited decorated with a cockade.

An actor announced the secession of South Carolina last night from the stage of the Varieties. It was received with enthusiasm.

MOBILE, Thursday, Dec. 20.

The secession of South Carolina was celebrated here this afternoon by the firing of a hundred guns, the cheers of the people, and a military parade. There is great rejoicing.

The bells are now ringing merrily, and the people are out in the streets by hundreds, testifying their joy at the triumph of secession. Many impromptu speeches are being made, and the greatest excitement everywhere exists.


MOBILE, Friday, Dec. 21 -- P.M.

There is an immense secession meeting here to-night. The wildest enthusiasm is displayed. The oldest men are taking a prominent part in the proceedings.

Many places are illuminated in honor of South Carolina to-night.

MONTGOMERY, Ala., Thursday, Dec. 20.

Gov. MOORE has ordered one hundred guns to be fired at noon to-morrow, in honor of the secession of South Carolina.


PENSACOLA, Fla., Thursday, Dec. 20.

The secession of South Carolina is greeted with immense enthusiasm here. One hundred guns are being fired in honor of the event.

WILMINGTON, Friday, Dec. 21.

One hundred guns were to-day fired in honor of the secession of South Carolina.

PORTSMOUTH, Friday, Dec. 21.

Fifteen guns were fired to-day. The Palmetto flag was displayed at Norfolk.

WASHINGTON, Friday, Dec. 21.

A dispatch from the editor of the Mississippian and State Gazette, published at Jackson, to the Mississippi delegation in Congress, dated this, evening, states that Mississippi has elected Delegates to the State Convention in favor of separate State Secession by a very large majority -- say seventy in the Convention of one hundred delegates, and by a popular majority of 30,000 votes.

LOUISVILLE, Ky., Friday, Dec. 21.

Hon. W.S. FEATHERSTONE, Commissioner from Mississippi, had an Interview with Gov. MAGOFFIN, at Frankfort, yesterday. The result of it is not yet known. He arrived here to-day.

NORFOLK, Va., Thursday, Dec. 20.

A large meeting of citizens was held at Ashland Hall last night. Resolutions were adopted recommending the holding of National and State Conventions; opposing coercion; favoring the arming of the State, and declaring against the opening of the African Slave-trade.


Here is a link to the above article in The New York Times Archive:  http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30A1FFD3859127A93C0AB1789D95F448684F9&scp=17&sq=secession,%20south%20carolina&st=cse

An Introduction to the League of the South

What is The League of the South?

by Dr Michael Hill - LS President

Most organizations founder because they lack self-definition and a definite goal. The League of the South is a Southern Nationalist organization whose ultimate goal is a free and independent Southern republic. To reach this goal, we intend to create the climate for a free South among our people by 1) de-legitimating the American Empire at every opportunity; 2) by proving our willingness to be servant-leaders to the Southern people; and 3) by making The League of the South a strong, viable organization that will lead us to Southern independence.

While our overall strategy--short, medium, and long range--is determined by the President, the Board, and our State Chairman, our tactical operational focus is on the local level. We intend to form active chapters in every county in every Southern State, and as many chapters as possible in non-Southern States. We also encourage individuals and families to personally secede from the corrupt and corrupting influence of post-Christian culture in America. We call this "abjuring the realm," and it's a real and dramatic first step all of us can take by simply withdrawing our support of and allegiance to a regime that has imperiled our future.

While we seek to use shame and contempt to de-legitimate the institutions controlled by the Empire, we must not stop there. We must create our own parallel institutions to which our people can attach their loyalties. A good example of this is the move out of the "public" schools and into home schooling or the establishment of our own private academies. Also, the League sponsors weekend Hedge Schools and week-long summer institutes to educate our people.

At present, the League is more concerned with resurrecting our cultural base than with entering into the political arena. Once our Southern culture is re-established, then the political issues will begin to take care of themselves. Good leaders flow naturally out of a healthy culture; however, power-hungry, self-seeking politicians are all we can expect from the debased cultural climate we have today.

The League of the South seeks leaders who have the hearts of servants. The Bible tells us clearly that no man can lead until he is willing to serve his fellowmen. When you join our organization, we expect you to begin immediately serving our cause and our people. We will show you how.

Our revised website, www.dixienet.org, is a cutting-edge, interactive site filled with a wealth of information. We are presently working on an operations manual for new members and local officers. New members are provided a list of State Chairmen for our organized States. We strongly advise our new recruits to contact their State or local officers, offer your talents, and make plans to attend your local and State chapter meetings. There you will be shown how to put the League's strategy into effect by means of our tactical operational plan. You also will meet our leaders, get to know other members, and become part of a real community dedicated to a noble cause. If you live in a State or locality that does not have an organized chapter, this website has a document (listed as "How to Form A County Chapter" under our Introduction on the Main Menu) that shows you how to form and run a local chapter.

All League members receive the Southern Patriot newsletter every other month. Read it closely to keep abreast of League activities and projects.

By joining The League of the South you have placed yourself among a group of men and women who are not content to sit by and allow their land, liberty, and culture be destroyed by an alien regime and ideology. You have joined an active organization that knows where it wants to go and how to go about getting there. The League is no place for the lazy or the faint-hearted. We would love to welcome you to our growing band of Brothers and Sisters. Please join us today.

For Southern independence,
Michael Hill
President

Editor's Note:  I am not a member of the League of the South, nor have I ever attended any of their meetings.  However, I find this article very interesting and informative.  Perhaps you, as a reader of the Confederate Digest blog, will also  find it interesting.  You may learn more about the League of the South at their website: www.dixienet.org.

The South Rises Again

National Post (Canada)
By Peter Goodspeed

They held a ball in Charleston South Carolina last week to celebrate the onset of the bloodiest war in U.S. history.

Men in frock coats and militia uniforms joined women in silk hoop skirts to sip mint juleps, as a band called “Unreconstructed” played “Dixie” and a squad of historical reenactors staged a replay of the Dec. 20, 1860 signing of South Carolina’s Ordinance of Secession, which severed ties with the Union and paved the way for the American Civil War.

The 150th anniversary of South Carolina’s secession is the first in a long list of Civil War memorials scheduled to be staged over the next four-and-a-half years that could end up re-opening old war wounds.

Festive and defiant, in character with the Old South, Charleston’s Secession Ball sparked a revival of an old debate about whether the most deadly conflict in U.S. history, which claimed a total of 620,000 lives, was fought over slavery or states’ rights.

It also has echoes of contemporary U.S. politics, where organizers of the ball — sounding like a collection of red state Republicans and Tea Party movement supporters, say it was “a way to honour the brave South Carolina men who stood up to an over-domineering federal government, high tariffs and northern states that wanted to take the country in an economic direction that was not best for the South.”

Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/Civil+South+rises+again/4027610/story.html#ixzz19HIJC

Happy Secession Day!

The broadside shown below was published in Charleston, South Carolina 150 years ago - Dececember 20, 1860. It was an insert in the Charleston Mercury and measured 12" x 24". Printing began approximately 15 minutes after the secession ordinance passed, making South Carolina was the first state to secede from the United States of America.

Here is the text:

CHARLESTON MERCURY EXTRA:

Passed unanimously at 1.15 o'clock, P.M., December 20th, 1860

AN ORDINANCE

To dissolve the Union between the State of South Carolina and other States united with her under the compact entitled 'The Constitution of the United States of America.

We, the People of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled, do declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained,

That the Ordinance adopted by us in Convention, on the twenty-third day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-eight, whereby the Constitution of the United States of America was ratified, and also, all acts and parts of Acts of the General Assembly of this State, ratifying amendments of the said Constitution are hereby repealed; and that the union now subsisting between South Carolina and other States, under the name of 'The United States of America,' is hereby dissolved.

THE UNION IS DISSOLVED!

Resolution from the Third Southern National Congress

Third Southern National Congress in Session - Dickson, Tennessee

It was my privilege and honor to be a Tennessee delegate to the Third Southern National Congress which was held November 12-14, 2010, at the Montgomery Bell State Park near Dickson, Tennessee.  The following resolution was debated, refined, and presented by the Congress, with 150 Southern men and women delegates representing the 14 Southern states.

We, the Delegates of the Southern States

IN CONGRESS ASSEMBLED, MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS:

In the year of our Lord 1789, the newly independent and united States of America formed a federated Republic by agreeing to create the Federal government for the mutual benefit of the sovereign States and their Peoples. The original Constitution of the united States was meant to embody the will of the several States and their Peoples, uniting them in a common political and social contract amongst and between themselves, and also between the States and the central government, which was the fiduciary agent and servant of the several States which created it.

After independence, and in full possession of the sovereign powers afforded them as free and independent States by the Law of Nations, which rests on the Laws of Nature and Almighty God, the original Thirteen States delegated to the central government specifically enumerated powers. They also limited those powers by Amendments IX and X of the Bill of Rights, an inseparable part of the political and social contract uniting the States. They explicitly reserved to themselves or their Peoples all sovereign powers not specifically granted to the central government they had created.

Therefore, the Federal Union was a voluntary, delimited association of the free and sovereign States and their Peoples for the sole purpose of protecting life, liberty, and property. However, many Founders, especially the Anti-Federalists who were mostly Southerners, warned that the United States Constitution contained the seeds of despotism by creating a strong central government. Their warnings have come true. Embarking on a systematic transformation of the original federated Republic, the central government began to usurp the rights and powers of the several States. This transformation began soon after adoption of the Constitution, was consolidated by the Northern victory over the South and the violent suppression of her right to self government in 1865, and has accelerated unto the present day. This process has changed the original federated Republic into a centralized, unitary state ruled by a consolidated central government which claims for itself virtually unlimited powers, just as leading Southern statesmen predicted.

With both national Parties in collusion, today’s Washington-based regime has destroyed all pretense of constitutionally limited government and replaced it with an oligarchy ruled by crony capitalists, the big money cartel based on Wall Street, banks and corporations, the major news and opinion media, and misanthropic globalists bent on radical dreams of a New World Order.

The central government of the United States consistently violates the Constitution, including the protections of the Bill of Rights. Its despotism has grown to gargantuan proportions since the terror attacks of September 2001, a convenient pretext for undeclared, perpetual, impotently pursued wars. It has exploited the so-called War on Terror to create a surveillance-and-police state ruled by fear and by criminalizing of dissidents and patriots, especially Southerners who dare to defend their tradition of limited government and ordered Christian liberty.

Under the mask of promising financial security and prosperity to all, the fiscal and economic policies of the central government instead foster dependency and debt-slavery. The central government has granted to a private banking cartel, the Federal Reserve, an outrageous monopoly to create public money. The Federal Reserve’s fiat money violates the moral requirement of an honest unit of exchange, undermining the irreducible standard of morality necessary to civil society. This dishonest money threatens us with hyper-inflation and the future collapse of the currency, reducing to penury all Americans whose life savings and assets are denominated in U.S. dollars.


The central government is allied with and controlled by the financial cartel and powerful corporations. It rewards them for exporting America’s true wealth-producing enterprises and employment offshore, and empowers the banks to rob us through money creation and bail-outs, the greatest acts of mass plunder in history. Its confiscatory income tax and the hidden tax of inflation rob us of what little wealth remains. The government’s wealth transfers to its politically-favored clients foster a soul-crushing dependency. Today more than half the people of the Southern States derive their income from the central government, directly or indirectly, even though Federal money de-capitalizes and eventually impoverishes those who receive it. Profligate Federal spending indentures our children to foreign financial interests, only to support the continued immorality of the welfare-warfare state; and places all us at risk of economic ruin and political servitude.

This pattern of repeated abuses and usurpations evinces a clear design to reduce the American People generally, and Southerners in particular, under absolute despotism, accompanied by poverty, dependency, and servitude.

THEREFORE, WE THE DELEGATES TO THE THIRD NATIONAL CONGRESS,

do hereby resolve and declare:

that the central government of the United States, by defaulting on its obligations to protect the inalienable rights of the People to life, liberty, and property, is in breach of the Constitution the basis of our fundamental social contract that once bound the People and the several States to the Federal Union;

that the central government no longer serves the States and their People as their agent for ensuring justice, but instead has become the purveyor of mass injustice, tyranny, oppression, and violence; and is the manifest enemy of dignity, freedom, prosperity, and a decent moral order;


that the central government pursues the destruction of a distinctly Southern culture and identity, traducing our heritage, distorting our history, and attempting to coerce us into becoming supine subjects of an Empire that is alien to our hallowed traditions and well-being;

that the central government is not worthy of the respect, much less the obedience, of any People who claim the title of free men and women.

TRUSTING IN ALMIGHTY GOD AND IN THE JUSTICE OF OUR CAUSE, we further resolve and declare that all free Southerners should consider their States and the People of their States absolved of any moral obligation of obedience to the unlawful acts of the central government of the United States. In such circumstances, we encourage all Southerners to devote their primary efforts to their States and local communities in order to reconstitute a free, just, and prosperous civil society.

Adopted 13 November 2010 by the Third National Congress at Dickson, Tennessee

To learn more about the Southern National Congress (SNC) you may go to their website:  www.southernnationalcongress.org 

Washington - An Organized Criminal Enterprise

Statement from League of The South, http://dixienet.org/New%20Site/lsstatement10232010.shtml


In the wake of the League’s 17th annual national conference, we believe it is time to restate the obvious for those who still don’t “get it” yet: the US government in DC is an organized criminal enterprise. Despite being founded on the “principle” of limited government, it has its tentacles in virtually every aspect of our lives all over our beloved Southland. It has become Godless and is rapidly approaching bankruptcy. Something must be done quickly to free us from this monster.

Don’t tell us to wait until the November elections—the GOP is not our savior. Rather, it is only the other side of a counterfeit coin. After all, who started this corrupt bailout business in September 2008 in the first place? Obama was merely a candidate at the time, though he has certainly continued to advance the Bush policies of allowing the banksters to continue their crime spree unabated.

The "Tea Party", while showing some promise in the beginning, is now being predictably absorbed by status quo Republican politicians. These are people who think reducing government spending by a meager 1-3% is acceptable, but they aren’t even serious about accomplishing that much. It is all a ruse to get re-elected, and unfortunately the bulk of “conservative” America will fall for it yet again.

The Republican Party’s “Pledge to America” is another fraud that is carefully written not to set measurable goals or bind the Republicans to any sort of consequences if (or more accurately, when) they fail to fulfill their promises. A major GOP victory in November will be a devastating setback because conservative voters will think they have “won.” Consequently, they will continue to serve the Federal regime while they wait in vain for their anointed Republicans to bring some kind of meaningful reform to Washington, D.C. Even if today’s Republicans were to faithfully deliver on every single principle mentioned in their “pledge," it would only be a fraction of what needs to done. It would take many decades of sweeping electoral victories in both houses of Congress and the presidency to undo the monstrosity that has been created over a period of 150 years in D.C. Oh, and let’s not forget that all of this will also require the blessing of the US Supreme Court. These are events, of course, that will never occur in the current political system.

Finally, the mainstream Republican Party has no interest whatsoever in curbing the insatiable appetite of the United States government to occupy and control other nations. Irrational fear of the Islamic terror threat has prompted far too many Americans to endorse a perpetual military occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, with the prospect of war with Iran and possibly Pakistan on the horizon as well. The magnitude of resources consumed by the war machine that is the US military will continue to drag down our economy; yet among all the outrage within the Tea Party and its supporters about government spending, we hear very little about reducing the US military presence in foreign lands.

We at the League of the South believe all peoples are entitled to the right of self-determination even those who do not share our Southern cultural values. The people of Iraq and Afghanistan should be free to decide for themselves what government they will have, just as the people in Dixie have the same God-given right. This is why we advocate peaceful separation from the United States government. In a free and independent South, although we would pity other Americans who remained subjects of the United States government, we would not set out to make enemies of them.

There's more.  To read the entire statement go to http://dixienet.org/New%20Site/lsstatement10232010.shtml

Happy Secession Day

By Thomas J. DiLorenzo

Perhaps the best evidence of how American history was rewritten, Soviet style, in the post-1865 era is the fact that most Americans seem to be unaware that "Independence Day" was originally intended to be a celebration of the colonists’ secession from the British empire. Indeed, the word secession is not even a part of the vocabulary of most Americans, who more often than not confuse it with "succession." The Revolutionary War was America’s first war of secession.

America’s most prominent secessionist, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration, was very clear about what he was saying: Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and whenever that consent is withdrawn, it is the right of the people to "alter or abolish" that government and "to institute a new government." The word "secession" was not a part of the American language at that time, so Jefferson used the word "separation" instead to describe the intentions of the American colonial secessionists.

The Declaration is also a states’ rights document (not surprisingly, since Jefferson was the intellectual inspiration for the American states’ rights political tradition). This, too, is foreign to most Americans. But read the final paragraph of the Declaration which states:

That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British crown and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved; and that, as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and do all other things which independent states may of right do (emphasis in original).

Each colony was considered to be a free and independent state, or nation, in and of itself. There was no such thing as "the United States of America" in the minds of the founders. The independent colonies were simply united for a particular cause: seceding from the British empire. Each individual state was assumed to possess all the rights that any state possesses, even to wage war and conclude peace. Indeed, when King George III finally signed a peace treaty he signed it with all the individual American states, named one by one, and not something called "The United States of America." The "United States" as a consolidated, monopolistic government is a fiction invented by Lincoln and instituted as a matter of policy at gunpoint and at the expense of some 600,000 American lives during 1861–1865.

Jefferson defended the right of secession in his first inaugural address by declaring, "If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left to combat it." (In sharp contrast, in his first inaugural address, Lincoln promised an "invasion" with massive "bloodshed" (his words) of any state that failed to collect the newly-doubled federal tariff rate by seceding from the union).

Jefferson made numerous statements in defense of the defining principal of the American Revolution: the right of secession. In a January 29, 1804 letter to Dr. Joseph Priestly he wrote:

Whether we remain in one confederacy, or form into Atlantic and Mississippi confederacies, I believe not very important to the happiness of either part. Those of the western confederacy will be as much our children & descendants as those of the eastern, and I feel myself as much identified with that country, in future time, as with this; and did I now foresee a separation [i.e., secession] at some future day, yet I should feel the duty & the desire to promote the western interests as zealously as the eastern, doing all the good for both portions of our future family which should fall within my power.

In an August 12, 1803 letter to John C. Breckinridge Jefferson addressed the same issue, in light of the New England Federalists’ secession movement in response to his Louisiana Purchase. If there were a "separation" into two confederacies, he wrote, "God bless them both, & keep them in the union if it be for their good, but separate them, if it be better."

So on July 4 stoke up the grill, enjoy your barbecue, and drink a toast to Mr. Jefferson and his fellow secessionists. (And beware of any Straussian nonsense about how it was really Lincoln, the greatest enemy of states’ rights, including the right of secession, who taught us to "revere" the Declaration of Independence. Nothing could be further from the truth.)


July 4, 2006

Thomas J. DiLorenzo is professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland and the author of The Real Lincoln; Lincoln Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed To Know about Dishonest Abe and How Capitalism Saved America. His latest book is Hamilton’s Curse: How Jefferson’s Archenemy Betrayed the American Revolution – And What It Means for America Today.


Copyright © 2006 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Is it legal for a state to withdraw from the Union?

By Bill Miller
http://www.secessionuniversity.com/

Chief among the top five most frequently cited arguments against the right of a State to withdraw from the Union are ill-defined assertions that, “It’s illegal for a State to secede,” or “Only Texas has the right to secede.” These, and other such vague pronouncements, all imply the same thing; that for some unspecified reason—more than likely it’s just an assumption—but nevertheless, the opponents of secession claim it’s just plain illegal. Nothing specific mind you, just that it’s illegal. Even Abraham Lincoln, without providing specifics, said during his address to the emergency secession of Congress on July 4, 1861:

The States have their status IN the Union, and they have no other legal status. If they break from this, they can only do so against law, and by revolution.

So how does one counter such ambiguous arguments, arguments without any logical reasoning that can be specifically addressed and rebutted? Perhaps the best response is provided by simply reviewing the fundamental rights and principles our States have always had to peacefully withdraw from the Union.

There are three grand principles our States can call upon—either one of which can be used to justify secession. If one of these principles does not seem to fully justify secession, then another one will do. Again, it only takes one of the three to get the job done. The first of these principles is based on the Constitution, and if the Constitution prohibits a State from seceding.

Is secession legal per the Constitution?

The Constitution is nothing more than an agreement (sometimes referred to as a Compact) between the States, but this agreement does not address the withdrawal of a State from the Compact nor does it contain any terms and conditions should a State choose to withdraw. Generally, if an agreement is without a termination clause, then it is considered an agreement at will, and therefore any party to such an agreement can leave with only a reasonable notification of intent to withdraw.

Furthermore, the Constitution specifically lists in Article I, Section 8, all delegated authority assigned to the federal government, and it’s important to note that approving the withdrawal of a State was never a power delegated to the federal government. Therefore, the federal government is absent any authority to dictate the terms of withdrawal from the Union, and as such, the States, and the States alone, decide the issue for themselves, as further guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment.

Also, there is no underlying tenet of contract law requiring a party to remain committed to an agreement that has been repeatedly violated as has our Constitution. The unauthorized actions of the central government today bear little resemblance to the limited authority delegated by our Founders in 1787. Who can reasonably deny that our States are not well within their right to withdraw from such a dysfunctional and out-of-control agreement?

These three fundamental principles: the Tenth Amendment guarantees to each State, the Constitution being a “contract at will,” and the repeated and frequent violation of the terms of the Compact are enough to insure that a State has the unfettered right to decide for itself if it is to remain a party to the Compact. But if one is not fully convinced that the Constitution allows for a State to secede from the Union, then either the Declaration of Independence or a State’s sovereign authority can be asserted as the controlling elements of State secession.

Is secession legal per the Declaration of Independence?

The Declaration of Independence (aka Declaration of Secession) established the right of the people to withdraw from a government not effecting their safety and happiness as one of our Natural God-given rights as so stated:

… that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government …

This natural God-given natural right as proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence enshrines our inherent right to secession. If you believe the colonies were justified in declaring their independence from an intrusive overbearing government in 1776, then you should also acknowledge that our States continue to enjoy that same right today. But if you believe that this unalienable right no longer applies, then the ultimate right of secession can be claimed with asserting a State’s sovereign authority.

Is secession legal per the sovereign authority of the States?

Abraham Lincoln explained it best when he once suggested that sovereignty was, “A political community, without a political superior.” Taken together with the fact that the States created the federal government (not the other way around), the States are therefore in control of the sovereign power—a power without any other higher authority exercising control over their decisions. In short, the States, as the political superior, control their own destiny; they are not under the control of the federal government, an entity the States created when they established the Constitution, and an entity the States can likewise dissolve.

Simply stated, since the States are the superior sovereign entity, the inferior party, the federal government, has no authority to countermand any State decision, such as secession. Even if the Declaration of Independence had not enshrined the inherent right of secession, or if the Constitution contained language prohibiting secession, the sovereign superiority of the States would control and allow the States to decide the issue of withdrawing from the Union.

So, there you have it; there is no doubt a State has a right to withdraw from the agreement they entered into when they joined the Union. That is unless you don’t believe in either the rule of law, our God-given unalienable rights, or the sovereign authority of our States and their people.

See the original article here:  http://secessionuniversity.com/2010/05/21/is-it-legal-for-a-state-to-withdraw-from-the-union/

Every State a Sovereign Nation

US States Renamed for Countries with Similar GDPs

One of the arguments I hear occasionally against secession - whether in 1861 or 2010 - is that the individual states of the U.S.A. are too small to function effectively as sovereign nations. A study of the above map shows just how absurd that argument really is.  Here each of the fifty states is compared with a country of the world that has a similar economy or annual GDP.  The GDP, or Gross Domestic Product, represents the market value of all goods and services produced within a country in a year.

In reality, the United States of America has become altogether too large and too diverse to work well as a single, centralized nation/state. Each of the fifty states needs to reclaim it's individual sovereignty - beating back the illegal usurpations of the leviathan federal government. We already have in place a Constitution which severely limits the centralized powers in Washington, D.C. What's needed are more elected representatives who will read and heed the Constitution so wisely given us by our Founding Fathers.

Follow the link below to find my source for the map: http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2007/06/10/131-us-states-renamed-for-countries-with-similar-gdps/

Have you Considered Secession?

The source of this poster is unknown.  If it belongs to you, please inform me and I will give proper credit or remove it at your request.

Cowardice in State Government

By Russell D. Longcore

The United States was organized with a Federal structure. Under that structure the national government was supposed to have two overriding dicta: to safeguard the States from foreign invasion and domestic violence, and provide a Republican form of government to the States. (Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution)

It should have been pretty easy to protect the States. A wide ocean on the east and west, and peaceable borders on the north and south do the government’s job for them without spending a penny. So, they should have been focusing all their attention on providing the states with a Republican form of government. Instead, what we have now is a fascist police state.


I don’t think that qualifies as a Republic.

A republic is a representative democracy, as opposed to a direct democracy. The key word is “representative.” The states were supposed to be the pre-eminent players. In the beginning, the Senate chose who would be President of the USA, and the Senators were there in Washington to represent the interests of their states.

Over the past 200 years, Washington has turned the government we were promised into the government we were trying to prevent. Could any absolute monarchy or dictatorship be any worse than what we have now? King George didn’t lay on a combined tax burden nearing 50% and trillions in debt.

The states of the Union have become little more than big counties, subservient geographic entities owned by Washington. For reasons too numerous to list here, the states allowed Washington to usurp nearly all of their power. The fecklessness of every state’s political leaders mocks this nation’s Federal system, and has destroyed the most important checks and balances against Federal tyranny.

Make no mistake. No one truly expects the Federal Government to check and balance itself...where would be its motivation to do that? No, the final arbiters were supposed to be the states.

The states had many arrows in their quivers to control the Federal Government. One of the most effective should have been nullification. Simply put, if Washington enacts laws that the states interpret as unlawful, the states could ignore the new laws like they never happened. Modern states are unwilling and afraid to use nullification against Washington.

Another strong arrow used to be withholding funds from Washington. But with the enactment of the income tax, that arrow was broken, and Washington takes the tax money directly from the people.

I say all of that about the states of the United States in general, but specifically as it relates to monetary policy in America. The US states have allowed...even empowered...Washington to destroy the monetary system of the USA through the Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking.

The Federal Reserve, a consortium of PRIVATE banks, prints counterfeit currency for the Federal Government. Fractional reserve banking laws allow all the rest of the other banks to counterfeit by creating credit (money) out of thin air.

State political leaders are so clueless and visionless that they have laid down and allowed Washington to endanger the very economic security of each American state through the institutional counterfeiting of the Federal Reserve and all other American banks.

These are some of the reasons that I am not encouraged and excited to know that 39 states have passed some type of 10th Amendment resolution, thereby taking a position that they might just do something in the future, by God. The steely resolve is inspiring, isn’t it?

But where is the state legislature and Governor that will notify Washington that there is a new “nullification sheriff” in town? When will some state begin nullifying the laws coming out of Washington, and refusing to allow them to be obeyed in that state? When will a state refuse to enforce Federal legislation? When will a state slap the cuffs on a Federal law enforcement officer who is trying to enforce Federal law in a state that has nullified Federal law?

Where is that state that will be true to its origins, and allow nothing but gold and silver coin (specie) as tender in payment of debts (Article I, Section 10)?

As a beginning step, how about if a state stops tax withholding and makes the payment of state income and property taxes mandatory in gold or silver coin or electronic gold? That would begin inculcating the citizens in a small way to once again consider gold and silver coin as money. I realize this idea doesn’t work in Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming, since none of them have a state income tax. But it would work for their property taxes, and both will work everywhere else in America.

Any state could facilitate the exchange of Federal Reserve Notes for specie by making such transactions exempt from sales tax. The exchange of FRN currency for specie, which are both legal money, are in essence a “currency exchange,” no difference substantively from changing dollars to Euros, Yen or Pesos.

One of the reasons that a gold/silver monetary standard would work so well for Texas is its petroleum exports. A New Texas with a gold standard would demand gold or silver specie as the only settlement of petro and natural gas transactions from any other country.

But you see, taking a position like that would directly challenge the power of Washington and the Federal Reserve. The paper money they issue says “this note is legal tender for all debts, public and private.” If a state refused to accept Federal Reserve Notes for payment of state income or property taxes, they might have a fight on their hands.

A principled stand like this over money might also help repudiate the scurrilous IRS case of Robert Kahre in Nevada (Google “Robert Karhe” and get ready to be outraged). Mr. Kahre is now beginning a Federal prison term for paying his employees’ wages by using legal tender gold coins. Kahre was acquitted on all 161 counts of tax law violations back in 2007. But the IRS tried him again (double jeopardy, anyone?) and a jury convicted him in 2009. Keep in mind that gold and silver coins are legal tender in the United States, just like Federal Reserve notes. But no one embarrasses the IRS, and Kahre’s acquittal did just that. He has now paid the price. His life as a free man is over.

State political leaders have no stomach and no backbone for a fight with Washington. Those American citizens in favor of state secession might look to these issues as a barometer of how their state political leaders would react to a political or economic meltdown. If a state won’t protect itself now, why should anyone believe that it will take principled stands later?

There is craven cowardice in the halls of state government in every state in the United States of America. Legislators and state executives go along to get along. Many look at state office as a springboard to Federal office. Few serve their constituents...most serve Washington, the Federal Reserve and banking interests.

“So that’s how liberty dies...to thunderous applause.”
Princess Padme, watching the Senate in Revenge of the Sith

Copyright © 2009, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Secession: Timing is Everything

By Russell D. Longcore

Not so long ago, secession was a taboo subject for discussion in polite society. It was almost un-American to thoughtfully consider a state leaving the Union for any reason. Everyone thought that Lincoln’s War settled that issue. But today’s America is a seething cauldron of resentment toward Washington and the "Mobocracy Looter Minions" that populate the District of Columbia and its suburbs.

If you watch any news service for seven days, you’ll learn that the dollar is weak and growing weaker. You’ll learn that other nations are preparing to disconnect from the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. And you’ll learn that America is in big trouble, at home and around the world. (Wonder why Chicago didn’t get the Olympics? What countries like the USA right now?)

Over half of the American states have passed legislative resolutions exerting their rights under the Tenth Amendment. That’s nice, and symbolic...and somewhat unusual for slaves to stand up to the plantation owner. But it’s not really necessary.

So when is the best time to actually pull the trigger and secede from the United States?

I believe that states should be making concrete plans right now for secession. States already have intricate plans in place in case of natural disasters and such. Should not a state have a plan in place in case of political disaster?

 The United States Federal Government is a dying monster. But is still possesses political might, military might and potency. Dying monsters quite often thrash about and injure those that are too nearby. So at this point in time, while Washington still APPEARS viable, state secession would not seem to be a wise move.

After all, why would a state willingly take the chance of incurring the wrath of Washington? It would be like in the Tolkien movie "Return of the King," when the good guys presented themselves at the Black Gate to divert the gaze of Sauron’s all-seeing eye. Washington might turn its fury on a seceding state to make an example of it, in order to discourage any other state from trying secession.


Washington is working 24/7 to produce substantive changes in American governance and culture. And, at some point, some state might decide that enough is enough. But I believe that it will take an event that happens outside of Washington to bring about Washington’s collapse.

The most likely event is the worldwide rejection of the US Dollar as reserve currency, and the worldwide use of any other currency as reserve. Even the change of the dollar as the currency of choice of any major petroleum bourse will spell disaster for the dollar.


Iran has already formed an oil bourse, which uses the Euro, the Iranian Rial and a basket of other currencies as the settlement currency for petro transactions. Its first day of trading was Monday, October 26, 2009, on the Free Trade Zone Iranian island of Kish. Iran, having the world’s second largest gas reserves and third largest oil reserves, is trying to play a more active role in oil and petrochemical transactions in international markets.

Between the rejection of the dollar worldwide, and the selloff of US Government securities by nations like China, combined with runaway money printing by Washington and the hyperinflation that MUST follow, the dollar has nowhere to go but down...and precipitously.

The value of the dollar will tumble against other currencies...very soon. It will happen as other nations scramble to get rid of American currency and securities holdings and protect the very survival of their own nations. Washington has been passing bad checks for too long, and the nations are stepping to the pay window.

It is at this moment in time, when the dollar freefalls, that the states will have a golden opportunity to secede. States must do what it takes to assure their own survival, and not as a slave state to Washington. But a secession alone won’t solve anything. The heavy lifting just begins when a state secedes.

First there would have to be a Provisional Government installed until the formal government could be designed and brought into being as a legal entity. 

The very next thing that MUST be settled is the issue of money. If a new nation adopts the very same banking environment that America has right now, the new nation will be doomed to fail. The new nation MUST have a 100% gold/silver standard. It must also prohibit by law fractional reserve banking. Both government monopoly on monetary policy and fractional reserve banking are counterfeiting by another name. It must be prevented before it starts.

Monetary policy and banking worldwide is failing. A new nation needs to go another way, and that way is to return to sound money. Most of the other challenges that a new nation would face will be easier if the new nation has money backed with precious metals at 100% reserve. But you cannot counterfeit your way to liberty and prosperity. 

Timing is everything. If states secede at the time that Washington is drowning in worldwide debt and the financial markets worldwide cause the collapse of the dollar, Washington may be powerless to stop secession. Ask Moscow how well they stopped the secession of the Western Soviet republics in 1989.

I know I’m getting to be "Johnny One-Note" about monetary policy, but that should tell you how crucial it is. Remember that no nation in the history of the world has survived that counterfeited its money. Not one. Ever.

But also remember that the Byzantine empire, on a gold standard, lasted over a thousand years...until it debased its own money.

Russell D. Longcore is President of Abigail Morgan Austin Publishing Company. He is married to "his Redhead" Julie, has three wonderful children and three even more wonderful grandchildren. Visit his secessionist website at: http://www.dumpdc.com.

Copyright © 2009 Russell D. Longcore. 

Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given. 

.

Secession Hill - Birthplace of the Confederacy

These simple monuments mark "Secession Hill,"  at the corner of Secession Avenue and Magazine Street in Abbeville, South Carolina.  It was here, on November 22, 1860, that the first meeting was held to launch South Carolina's secession from the United States of America. One month later, the state of South Carolina became the first state to secede.

Abbeville is also the birthplace John C. Calhoun, former Vice President of the United States and a noted states rights advocate.

The inscription on one pillar reads: 

THIS MEMORIAL

Was erected by

Abbeville Chapter,

United Daughters of the Confederacy

To commemorate the first organized meeting advocating the right of a state to secede from the Union.

This meeting was presided over by Thomas C. Perrin, with Judge D. L. Wardlaw, John A. Calhoun, Dr. J. W. Hearst, John Brownlee, Dr. J. H. Logan and J. Foster Marshall. Vice Presidents; James C. Calhoun and G. McDuffie Miller, Secretaries; A. M. Smith, W. M. Rogers and J. F. Livingston, Marshals of the day.

After prayer by Rev. North, Addresses were made by Hon. Thomas C. Perrin, Hon. A. C. McGrath, Gen. Milledge L. Bonham, Samuel McGowan, James N. Cochran and William C. Davis.

Edward Noble introduced resolutions of secession, which were advocated by Thomas Thompson and unanimously passed.

Thomas C. Perrin, Edward Noble, John A. Calhoun, Thomas Thomson, John H. Wilson, D. L. Wardlaw were nominated to represent the district at the convention called by the legislature.

November 22, 1860          November 22, 1927

"WE HAVE KEPT THE FAITH."

The second inscription reads: 

"LORD GOD OF HOSTS, BE WITH US YET,

LEST WE FORGET, LEST WE FORGET.

On this hillside in the rear of this memorial on November 22, 1860, the first organized secession meeting was held.

On that day the Ancient Artillery Company, the Southern Rights Dragoons, and companies of Minutemen from Abbeville, Greenwood, Cokesbury, Nineyt-Six, Bradley, Due West, Donalds, Wickliffe and Caohouns Mill marched in line together with an immense concourse of loyal citizens: Repairing to the grove. They there announced their intention of defending their sovereign rights guaranteed them in the Constitution of the United States.

Resolutions demanding the immediate withdrawal of the state from the Union were unanimously passed, and representatives to the convention called by the Legislature were nominated.

AND THUS SECESSION HAD ITS BIRTH.

"Ah! realm of tombs but let her bear

his blazon to the last of times,

No nation rose so white and fair,

Or fell so pure of crimes."

***

Four and one half years later, during the closing days of the War Between the States, Confederate President Jefferson Davis fled Richmond, Virginia and headed south, stopping for a night in Abbeville at the home of his friend Armistead Burt. There, on May 2, 1865, in the front parlor of what is now known as the Burt-Stark Mansion, Davis met for the last time with his cabinet and Council of War. There they officially acknowledged the futility of continuing to fight for Southern Independence and decided to disolve the Confederate government.

Thus, Abbeville lays claim to being both the birthplace and the deathbed of the Confederacy.

Jefferson Davis' Prophetic Words and State Secession Movements

After the War for Southern Independence, and the South's defeat by a vastly larger invading Northern army, Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America said:

"The principle for which we contend is bound to reassert itself, though it may be at another time and in another form."

"Truth crushed to the earth is truth still and like a seed will rise again."

It was the South that fought to uphold the principles of both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. The South stood on especially firm legal ground in defending the 10th Amendment to the Constitution: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Some say that the defeat of the Confederate States of America in the War Between the States settled the issue of secession once and for all. However, peace that comes through force and conquest is not true peace at all. It is subjugation. The nation with the biggest army is not always right. I find it interesting that now, on the eve of the sesquicentennial of the War Between the States, Jefferson Davis' words are proving to be prophetic.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports:

-

AUSTIN — As head of the Texas Nationalist Movement, Daniel Miller of Nederland believes it’s time for the Lone Star State to sever its bond with the United States and return to the days when Texas was an independent republic.

"Independence. In our lifetime," Miller’s organization proclaims on its Web site.
When Gov. Rick Perry suggested that some Texans might want to secede from the Union because they are fed up with the federal government, the remarks drew nationwide news coverage and became fodder for late-night comedians.

But to Texas separatists like Miller and Republican gubernatorial candidate Larry Kilgore of Mansfield, secession is no laughing matter. Nor is it exclusive to the nation’s second-largest state.

Fanned by angry contempt for Washington, secession movements have sprouted up in perhaps more than a dozen states in recent years. In Vermont, retired economics professor Thomas Naylor leads the Second Vermont Republic, a self-styled citizens network dedicated to extracting the sparsely populated New England state from "the American Empire."

And on the other side of the continent, Northwestern separatists envision a "Republic of Cascadia" carved out of Oregon, Washington and the Canadian province of British Columbia.

While most Americans dismiss the breakaway sentiments, sociologists and political experts say they are part of a larger anti-Washington wave that is rapidly spreading across the country.

-

There's more. Here's a link to the full story: http://www.star-telegram.com/news/story/1623872.html#

The Kentucky Secession Convention

Carrico Park Square, in the historic District of Russellville, Kentucky, marks the site where Kentucky seceded from the United States in order to cast its lot with the Confederate States of America. A monument on the square, pictured below, tells the story:

RUSSELLVILLE
SITE OF THE SOVEREIGNTY CONVENTION

HERE ON NOV. 18-20, 1861, DELEGATES FROM 68 COUNTIES
OF KENTUCKY IN CONVENTION, BY THE ANCIENT RITE OF SELF
DETERMINATION AND REVOLUTION, SET UP A NEWLY CONSTITUTED
STATE OF KENTUCKY. HENRY C. BURNETT, TRIGG, WAS PRESIDENT
OF THE CONVENTION, ROBERT McGEE, LOUISVILLE, SECRETARY
T.S. BRYAN, CHRISTIAN, AND THEODORE L. BURNETT, SPENCER,
ASSOCIATE SECRETARIES

Elected officials of the new Confederate State of Kentucky are listed:

George W. Johnson, Scott County, Governor
Robert McGee, Louisville, Secretary of State
John Burnam, Warren County, Treasurer
Josiah Pillsbury. Warren County, Auditor

Governor Johnson was killed the following April at the Battle of Shiloh
and was succeeded by Richard Hawes of Bourbon County.

The monument also lists the Council of Ten by name and county, followed by these words:

UNDER THIS NEW REGIME, THE SOVEREIGNTY OF OUR PEOPLE
FOUND A MEDIUM OF EXPRESSION FOR SYMPATHY FOR THE
SOUTHERN CAUSE IN WHICH THERE WOULD BE NO STIGMA OF
TREASON. SECTION 16 OF THE NEW CONSTITUTION LOCATED
THE PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT AT BOWLING GREEN.

Here are more photos from Carrico Park Square:

The monument was erected December 10, 1949, by the Kentucky Division of the United Daughters of the Confederacy.

Political Spin on a Union Monument

The inscription on the Union Soldiers and Sailors Monument, Oswego, New York, is typical of the political spin placed on such monuments in the North. The men from Oswego County who fought during the war of 1961-1865 were not "defending" the Union. The United States was not under attack.

The Confederate States of America no more wanted to conquer and rule the North than the American colonies wanted to capture Great Britain during the American Revolution. The conflict was entirely a "War of Northern Aggression," a term which is still in wide use in the South.

The southern states, which had a small minority of the nation's population and votes, were paying as much as 85 percent or more of the national budget through unfair trade tariffs. Abraham Lincoln, discounting the Southern vote, campaigned on a pledge to greatly increase those already lopsided taxes against the South. After he was elected, the southern states seceded, and did so with more just cause and with firmer legal standing than had the original 13 colonies when they seceded from Great Britain in 1776.

Upon taking office, Lincoln called for an army to invade the Confederate States of America. When almost all of his advisors were against the war, Lincoln responded, "If the South goes, who will pay for the government?"

I have visited and photographed scores of Union monuments but have never seen one which proclaims that the North fought to free the slaves. No one thought that to be the case at the time. In his campaign for president, Lincoln had been adamant that he had no intention of interfering with slavery where it was already in practice. After all, Slavery had been legally practiced in every northern state and the North was still in the process of gradually phasing slavery out.

The slavery pretense for the war was tacked on in what Lincoln called a "war measure," long after the war began. My own Confederate great grandfather, and two of his brothers, were all three killed by Union troops long before Abraham Lincoln gave his Emancipation Proclamation, which did not free a single slave, including thousands of slaves in several Union states.

Celebrate Secession

By: Rough 'Ol Boy

To honor the United States’ secessions (yes, that is meant to be plural; up until 1865, it was the “United States are” not the “United States is”) from the British Empire, the good folks at A Thousand Nations have been blogging on the topic of secession all week. You can find an index of posts here, and I highly recommend them, especially for those of you who have never given much thought to breaking up the United States into more manageable units.

Although those contributions to the debate are ample, allow me to offer my own take on why secession is still a good idea.

1) The most basic reason for supporting secession is that it makes government more accountable to the people it governs. The smaller a polity is, the easier it is for an individual’s objections to be heard whether that be through voting, petition, protest, etc. It also becomes harder for one group to oppress another the more they have to interact with each other. Dehumanizing some distant group is very easy; it is much harder to do with your next door neighbor. In the words of my all time favorite libertarian hero Karl Hess, “Adolf Hitler as chancellor of Germany is a horror; Adolf Hitler at a town meeting would be an asshole.”

But even if some Hitlerian figure were to take over an independent state or town, it is far easier to flee a small polity than a larger one. Getting out of the old Soviet Union was extremely difficult; getting out of Missouri, not so much.

2) The harmful effects of bad policies are seen and felt far more quickly the smaller the polity. A huge nation like the United States or China can easily persist in wealth (or even life) destroying policies for generations because their benefits are concentrated at special interest groups that agitate to continue the policies while the costs are dispersed onto the rest of the population. This is why our government subsidizes corn so heavily. But it would be nearly impossible for Iowa to continue those policies if it seceded. There would be fewer people to tax and more people expecting benefits, leading taxpayers to demand subsidy reductions and corn farmers to care less about keeping them as each individual farmer’s share of the loot would drop.

3) The United States long ago ceased to be anything resembling the republic the Founders envisioned. When the Constitution was ratified there 30,000 people for every representative in Congress, and for many of the Founders, like George Mason who spearheaded the drive for a bill of rights, this number still seemed high. But now with over 300 million people in the country, and the number of representatives capped at 435 there are almost 700,000 people for every representative in Congress–a number that will continue to grow. It may be absurd to believe that one person can represent 30,000, but that just makes it all the more absurd to believe one can represent 23 times that much. It is the equivalent of six people representing the entirety of the American population at the time of the Constitution’s ratification.

We can only restore the level of representation circa 1790 in two ways: expanding the number of representatives from 435 to just over 10,000 or by dividing the country up into smaller polities. The first option raises the obvious question of how an organization of 10,000 could function and where they could meet, but it would also make each representative’s power negligible in exact proportion to how much it would strengthen each citizen’s power to influence her representative, making the whole point moot. The only possibility for each American to live in a representative republic (that’s not my ideal, but I prefer it to the monstrosity we live in now) is secession.

4) Many of our states are as large as most other countries. There are more people in California than Canada; more in New York than Taiwan, Australia, or North Korea; more in Florida than the Netherlands; almost as many in Missouri as Ireland; and more in Texas than Austria, Switzerland, and Isreal combined. Furthermore, our state economies are even larger than our populations relative to the rest of the world. Check out this map to see what country the GDP of each state matches up with; it’s pretty mind boggling. New Jersey is on par with Russia; Nebraska with the Czech Republic; North Carolina with that supposed paragon of social democracy Sweden. The most common objection I hear to secession is that the states are too small to survive on their own, but that position has no basis in reality.

So given all this, why not secede? What exactly do we have to lose but trillions of dollars in debt, an overly aggressive foreign policy that does nothing to keep us safe, and federal taxes that are sure to only go higher? So citizens of America….uh, disunite?

Copied with permission from the Rough 'Ol Boy Blog

http://rougholboy.com/2009/07/celebrate-secession/