The Principle of Secession
What is Independence?
Obviously, we think this is an important concept, so much so that it is the central theme of our site. But what does it mean? Let’s take a look at the dictionary first:
freedom from the control, influence, support, aid, or the like, of others.
It seems pretty simple, doesn’t it? Would anybody disagree with the notion that we should be free from the control of others? Of course not. To suggest otherwise would imply that we are the property of others, that we are subjects or slaves.
The other parts of the definition all rest on the freedom from control: influence of others isn’t always a bad thing. It is good to sometimes seek advice or guidance from someone else. However, you are still free to choose what to do with that advice, and so you are free to choose how you will let that influence affect you, so long as you are free from control. The same is true of support, aid, or the like. So a more simple definition of independence, cutting down to the root of the issue, would be:
freedom from the control of others.
But why does this simple idea go out the window when we start talking about government?
There are many potential answers to this question. Our society seems to have a general premise that the government is our safe keeper, and without it we would be animals in the wilderness, and utter chaos would rule. Some treat government as if it represents a balance of power against the “corporations” (themselves government enabled entities) who they say would take over and act as governments themselves if it weren’t for our elected representatives. The Founding Fathers treated government as a necessary evil, that if properly limited could serve to protect our rights, but we all know that lasted about 5 minutes.
So why is it that we would all react with disgust if we saw a person leading around his slaves and making them do his bidding, but we react with joyful celebration when we see the government do the same thing? (Democrats celebrating the enslavement of doctors, for example, or Republicans celebrating the enslavement of the pot smoker.)
Well this is the question of our times and for people who have traveled the philosophical and political journey that leads to Independence it is extremely difficult to understand how anyone could believe that control is OK in the hands of the government, while not OK for anyone else. Hopefully our efforts on this site can expose people to the reality that government is coercion and control of others, and that as such it is evil. Hopefully we can inspire a renewed interest in Independence, so that as the current status quo collapses upon itself, a free society can emerge.
By Russell D. Longcore
When secession finally occurs in the first American state, it will come first from the New Barbarians, not from the state house.
This article explores the definition of the word “Barbarian,” and how I perceive that secession will be moved forward into reality by the New Barbarians.
I am one of the New Barbarians.
From Wikipedia: “Barbarian” is a pejorative term used to refer to a person who is perceived to be uncivilized. The word is often used either in a general reference to a member of a nation or ethnos, typically a tribal society as seen by an urban civilization either viewed as inferior, or admired as a noble savage. In idiomatic or figurative usage, a “barbarian” may also be an individual reference to a brutal, cruel, warlike, insensitive person. The primary function of the word “barbarian”, and its cognates, is to differentiate members of one’s own society from people perceived as being outside of it, and to posit that one’s own culture is superior.
In history, the Barbarians were the Germanic tribes that overthrew the Roman Empire. Rome had become an empire covering most of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, and the cost of their armies and wars was bankrupting the government. Rome had conquered these vast areas, and conscripted many of the tribal warriors into the Roman armies. But the barbarians never lost their identification with their tribes, and eventually the Visigoths sacked Rome in 410 AD.
The present American society’s elected ruling class is filled with “the cream” of our civilization from bottom to top. But smelling of cologne and wearing expensive suits, they pillage, sack and destroy our free enterprise system through taxation and regulation. So they operate like barbarians under the cover of respectability and the citizens’ acceptance of their roles in the American government. They are the old guard, much like Rome at its end. Bloated, corrupt and hopelessly overextended, the ruling class can see their demise just over the horizon. But they cannot wrap their brains around a solution that includes the breaking apart of the United States of America by secession.
You think that the power structure of Washington doesn’t see the end coming fast? Watch this video from Ready.gov, a division of FEMA.
Dear readers, that “world upside down” video is not just about a tornado or hurricane. It is easy to see how this Public Service Announcement is meant for the coming economic collapse. If the very government causing all of this chaos is telling you openly to prepare for disaster, perhaps you should listen? There is another Ready.gov PSA I just saw in the past few days that is not available to post quite yet. It features a husband and wife being interviewed about how much food they have in the house to survive on in an emergency. They very matter-of-factly state that they have a little rice, some beans, a few cans of tuna, and some canned tomatoes. They seemed blithely unconcerned.
Do you still believe that the ruling class in any state government will voluntarily band together and secede from the Union? Think about all of the ways that Washington taxes and spends. Now consider that most of that taxation and spending is entirely unconstitutional. Now consider that Washington taxes and then sends hundreds of billions of dollars back to the state governments annually so the money can be spent on the local level. From roads to public safety to welfare payments to mortgage guarantees to myriad other programs, your state and local governments are complicit in the crimes of Washington. They are accessories after the fact. If someone steals property and you receive it, you’re as guilty as the perpetrator.
It is impossible for Washington to do what it does without the voluntary cooperation of the 50 state governments. Do not kid yourself. What the states do is entirely voluntary. The state politicians might bitch about unfunded mandates or DC regulations or Supreme Court rulings, but states have ALL the power to resist or just simply stop the Washington madness. But the states do not stop it. What does that tell you?
The ruling class, from bottom to top, cannot fix America. Consider:
1. They cannot forsake fractional reserve banking (counterfeiting).
2. They cannot reign in spending because of entitlement programs.
3. They cannot increase interest rates to curb inflation since that would make the debt payments balloon upward.
4. They cannot stop allowing the Federal Reserve to control the money supply (more counterfeiting).
5. They cannot fund the outstanding and future pension commitments, and cannot cover the pension defaults.
6. They cannot stop selling Treasury bonds to borrow more money, and cannot prevent the inevitable default of the bond market.
7. They cannot cease military expansion and war.
8. They cannot prevent the collapse of the US Dollar as world reserve currency.
9. They reject free-market solutions for all problems, and continue to fiercely defend Keynesian economics.
10. States are so inured to Federal funds that they are unwilling to even try to control Washington.
Witness all the cities, townships, counties and states that are functionally bankrupt. They can thank their betters in Washington for a fiat money system and decades of inflation for their present situation. And they can look in the mirror to see who enabled Washington to become the most criminal government in history. Yes…even more criminal than the USSR. The Soviets did not defraud the entire population of the planet with fiat money. Washington did.
The concept of state secession will have to come from the grassroots…the ordinary people…the great unwashed…the New Barbarians. Politicians are not leaders. My opinion is that a person cannot voluntarily agree to work in a criminal enterprise without becoming a criminal. (Ron Paul, call your office.) And while we all love a story of a bad boy turned good…or of a missionary to the heathen…we cannot expect government shills to voluntarily bite the hand that feeds them and promote a philosophically opposite concept. A few solons might get religion about secession, but I believe that most will oppose it. And the ones that do convert to the church of secession should be watched very carefully, since it would appear that they are simply trying to lead a new parade by running out in front of it. If a politician wanted to convince me of his altered beliefs, let him switch to secession now…while it’s still wildly unpopular.
The New Barbarians will develop as a tribe, rising voluntarily from the citizenry, with individual liberty, property rights and sound money as the organizing and sustaining principles of the tribe. (I wrote about tribes HERE.) For the purpose of this article, the word “tribe” is defined as “a social group comprised of numerous families, clans, or generations together with dependents or adopted strangers, all having a common character, occupation, or interest.” I am not suggesting that the New Barbarians will adopt all the characteristics of tribes. But I am suggesting that the New Barbarians will forsake the old ways of the US Constitution, and begin thinking as a single nation instead of a 50-state confederation. Most of the Constitution doesn’t apply to a single sovereign nation.
Think about secession for just a moment. There is no perceivable benefit for ANY present American state to continue as a member of the United States of America. I issued a challenge long ago for any reader to prove JUST ONE benefit of statehood. I’m still waiting. Yet, ALL of the unsolvable problems created by Washington and enabled by the States EVAPORATE at the moment of secession. No US taxation, no US regulation, no US national debt, no US wars, no more interference from Washington. In one instant, that state’s hard drive is wiped clean and they get to invent THEIR OWN new operating system.
The Founding Fathers of the mid-18th Century were the New Barbarians of their time. Their numbers were small. Their cause was individual liberty and property rights, and to be thirteen sovereign nations. Only 56 men signed the Declaration of Independence. It’s commonly accepted that those in favor of throwing off the tyranny of King George numbered less than 10% of the population of the 13 colonies. The rest of the colonials waited to see who won, and supported the winner.
The archetype of the New Barbarian is Daniel Miller, president of the Texas Nationalist Movement. Miller has been working for years for Texas Independence, not as a cause célèbre, but as a holy calling. He is a businessman from Nederland, Texas, dedicated to convincing his fellow Texans that their state’s highest purpose is as a new sovereign nation, not as just another American state. He crisscrosses Texas, speaking to home meetings as well as big crowds, reminding Texans of their heritage and culture, and offering the hope that Texas could actually escape from America and its coming catastrophic collapse and become a nation once again. In my opinion, the name of Daniel Miller should be at the very top of any list of potential first Presidents of a new Texas nation. Guys like Rick Perry and Ron Paul have careers as part of the problem, not as part of the solution.
The numbers of New Barbarians will explode after the economic collapse in America. There are only a few of us that are presently ideologues promoting secession. But once America descends into chaos, those that rejected the concept of secession will still be looking for answers that work…not more of the same. And they will be desperate, not willing or able to wait for government to offer some lame-assed pseudo-solution, or another Ponzi scheme to replace the one that just collapsed. At that point, the tribe will grow very quickly. Mass migrations of people will occur, as individuals and families pack up and move to the new nations.
One of the topics that most proponents of secession will not talk about is defending a secession by militia. I’m not saying that secession has to be done by some form of physical force, but I’m also not saying that military defense won’t be required. I keep the collapse of the Soviet Union foremost in my mind. Here was a purely communist 15-republic Union that simply dissolved in 1989. The giant Red Army did nothing. The Kremlin was powerless to stop secession. I believe that Washington will likewise be powerless to stop American states from secession. But I believe that DC will only be powerless after the dollar collapses.
The push for secession will come up from the people, not down from the politicians. Political power only acknowledges superior force. If the politicians fear the People, they will carry out the will of the People. When the People fear the government, there is only tyranny.
Secession is the only hope for humanity. Who will be first?
DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.
© Copyright 2011, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
One-in-five Americans believe individual states have the right to break away from the country, although a majority doesn’t believe it will actually happen.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 21% of American Adults think individual states have the right to leave the United States and form an independent country. Most (64%) believe states do not have this right, while 14% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
However, only 29% of adults feel it’s at least somewhat likely that some states will try to leave the United States over the next 25 years or so. This finding includes 13% who believe it’s Very Likely. But 62% say it is not very or not at all likely that some states will secede from the union. These findings are nearly identical to those found last year.
Just 19% believe it’s at least somewhat likely that the United States will split up into regional groups of states in the next 25 or so years, down from 23% a year ago. Seventy percent (70%) say this outcome is not likely. These results include eight percent (8%) who believe it is Very Likely the country will break up into regional groups and 27% who say it is Not At All Likely to happen.
Seventy-three percent (73%) think it would be bad if the United States split up into regional groups of states. Just eight percent (8%) feel that would be a good thing, while 19% more are not sure.
The survey of 1,000 Adults was conducted on May 30-31, 2011 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
Men are more than twice as likely as women to believe states have the right to secede. But there’s virtually no disagreement between the two over the likelihood of states breaking away either individually or in regional groups.
Republicans and adults not affiliated with either major political party believe more than Democrats that states have the right to secede and that some are likely to do so in the next few years. But, still, a majority of all three groups view secession as unlikely.
There’s also little partisan disagreement that it would be a bad thing if the United States split up into regional groups of states.
In the midst of the legal battle between the U.S. Justice Department and the state of Arizona over the latter’s new immigration law, 67% of Likely U.S. Voters said a state should have the right to enforce immigration laws if it believes the federal government is not enforcing them. However, voters are still divided over whether the federal government or individual states should be the primary enforcers of immigration laws.
Polling in April found that 41% of Likely Voters believe the federal government should establish a single standard for all health care regulations. However, slightly more voters (45%) say states should be allowed to establish their own individual standards for health care regulation.
More voters than ever oppose the new law’s requirement that every American must have health insurance and think states should have the right to opt out of some or all of the health care law.
In April 2009, a comment from Texas Governor Rick Perry was widely interpreted as suggesting voters in that state might consider secession “if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people.” At that time, 31% of Texas voters said the state had a right to secede from the union and form an independent country. But if put to a vote, 75% preferred to remain in the United States.
MoveOn.org President Eli Pariser recently gave a TED talk based on his book, The Filter Bubble.
Pariser has discovered that search engines, social networks and various content providers are filtering out news and ideas that may not appeal to us, based on our individual search histories. This is happening and it is not making us more “well rounded.”
Interestingly, Pariser is concerned that partly because we are becoming more isolated within these “filter bubbles” of friendly data, we are losing our sense of national identity, our sense of civic responsibility and our connection to each other. We only see the kind of information we “like,” and we aren’t likely to be challenged. He says we’re back in the early 20th century again, back when newspapers were the gatekeepers of information and they slanted the news as they saw fit.
For a moment, somewhere in the mid-20th, journalists appointed themselves as guardians of Truth and Objectivity—but they were never truly objective. Who ever is?
Pariser appeals naively to Google and other companies to engineer a new kind of “journalistic integrity” into their search engines, for the national good. The problem is that these massive companies have a global clientele, with global interests. They are not rooted in blood or soil or culture. Globocorp’s sole responsibility is to its bottom line, and it must follow profit wherever it may lead. A company like IKEA, Panasonic, or Coca-Cola takes an interest in many, many nations, and is loyal to no people or place. Corporations make calculated gestures when necessary, but Pariser is not appealing to a Hearst, he’s appealing to an international legal machine.
In lieu of corporate benevolence, Pariser offers 10 ways for concerned readers to control their filter bubbles. Most people won’t bother. Most people simply don’t care. As Mark Zuckerberg said, “A squirrel dying in front of your house may be more relevant to your interests right now than people dying in Africa.”
Pariser mentioned in passing that the Internet’s “founding mythology” promised a world of people who were more connected to one another, but he complained that this hasn’t actually happened. It hasn’t happened because that’s only what people publicly say they want. What they privately, or subconsciously, desire is what these companies are giving them: new ways to separate themselves from others and form competing identity groups. Marketing people are better psychologists than psychologists.
Like Patrick Bateman, people say they care about “ending hunger” and genocide and so forth, but they don’t really care about people dying in Africa. Not in any personal, emotionally connected way. The concern they express is a social affectation. If Robin Dunbar is to be believed, we can’t care about people in Africa. Not really. It’s been found that, even on Facebook, most of us can only maintain a meaningful friendship with 150 or so people. Everyone else is a virtual friend—or a virtual stranger. Our brains are wired for small communities, not “one world tribe.”
We seek out ways to create in-groups and out-groups. Sometimes we do this playfully, as with sporting rivalries, though it is not unusual for sports fans to become violent or angry on behalf of their teams. Often we do it politically, ideologically, socially, racially, nationally. We form philosophical cliques and movements. East coast vs. West coast, South side vs. North side, Greeks vs.Trojans, boys against the girls, Democrats vs. Republicans, MoveOn vs. The Tea Party, Christians vs. Muslims vs. Jews, hip-hop vs. punk rock vs. emo, dog lovers vs. cat lovers, Ford vs. Chevy, and Mac vs. PC.
Online social networks have also created a pathway for otherwise average people to separate themselves from the social norms of their geographical location. The chubby check-out girl with the dark eyeliner at a Midwestern Wal-Mart is a Wiccan priestess by night. The guy stocking shoes is “kind of a big deal” on a video game message board. The Mexican buying wife-beaters is an illegal immigrant who “likes” La Raza on Facebook. The guy buying bullets is in a militia, or at least he wants to be. The couple buying soda might be furries.
The growth of the Internet has given heterodox ideologies a far bigger platform than a soap box, and it has spared the haranguing man a face full of rotten tomatoes—and a punch in the nose.
People want to feel different and special, but they also want to feel embattled. They want a compelling conflict narrative that gives their lives meaning, whether they are standing up for the “oppressed” or standing against the tide of unwanted change. Few want what Pariser called a “balanced diet” of information. They may not want junk food, but they know what they “like.” And they know what they “dislike.” They know who and what they want to “hide.”
It’s not just companies who create filter bubbles. We create them ourselves. We pick sides, we exclude, and we do it on purpose.
We choose to read news that appeals to our interests, caters to our biases and reaffirms our sense of group belonging. The carefully pruned newsfeed can become a self-reinforcing reality. A recent Fast Company article called it the “Balkanization of information.” Most of us want to hear voices that “sound very much like our own.” We want to hear the refrains, we want to recite The Law. (Are we not men?) When we venture outside our tribal bubbles on patrol, we don’t go to learn—like chimpanzees, we look for weak, easy targets to pick off. No one on the far right reads The Huffington Post to learn. People on the far left don’t read Alternative Right to understand.
The “uniters” of the world wring their hands because they think this divisiveness is dangerous. They’re right. It is dangerous. They think it robs us of our “humanity.” I disagree. I say it reveals our humanity. It reveals what we are and what we have always been—competing contingents of naked apes with interests of our own.
The mechanized slaughter of the world wars and the advent of the atomic age inspired the hymns of multiculturalists who believed that we could all live together as noble savages in peace and harmony. We sung the hymns, but nothing happened. It’s the same as it ever was. Multiculturalism has failed.
The future is tribal. The time has come to start choosing sides again. And with our allies, far and wide, we will live in our information bubbles, and we will bump against others who are living in theirs.
What is culture, anyway, if not a tribal bubble?
See the award wining city outside Atlanta that privatized municipal services. After decades of paying taxes that was mostly spent on blacks in Atlanta, this unincorporated area of Fulton county finally gained the right to start it’s own city. It’s policy of privatizing services has created a model city with no debts!
Fueled by white flight from Atlanta, Sandy Springs now has 100,000 people and is 80% white. Atlanta is only 36% white.