Secession: an academic discussion

[BigRed]

Happy Secession Day (aka Independence Day)

Best wishes to you and yours as we remember and celebrate that time in our shared history when 13 colonies declared their sovereignty as free and independent States (plural) and seceeded from Britain. "In Congress, July 4, 1776 The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of...

www.indianagunowners.com

 

[jamil]

How far into the scotch are you?

 

[BigRed]

The Prospects for Soft Secession in America | Jeff Deist

In 1930, Columbia professor Karl Llewellyn published The Bramble Bush, his famous tract on how to think about and study law.

mises.org

A good article worth the read.

A wise and observant man pointed out to me on several occassions that every secession of any kind began in the heart and mind of the man that chose to walk away from some thing that was inconsistent with his beliefs, values, and principles.

This article touches on that by illustrating a secession has already begun.



ETA: One particularly insightful observation by the author:

"We don’t vote our way out of this. We attempt to separate, to unyoke ourselves politically."

 

[ditcherman]

^Long, but good read.
I want to believe that there are enough Americans left with our exceptional (ism) spirit that when they stand for what they believe, it won’t even look like a secession.
They can’t control us if we don’t let them.
You know, academically speaking.

 

[BigRed]

Indeed.

In a recent "second amendment thread" regarding Ohio and other States submitting comments on braces, somebody asked:

"Does anyone really think that any kind of secession will A) ever take place for real and B ) ever allowed to take place?"

Heck, it is already underway.

 

[NKBJ]

Where we are now really does remind me of things said decades ago by David Wilkerson, Dumitru Duduman and others, including some soviets (some being defectors and some not).

 

[Leadeye]

Unlike the lead up to the civil war there isn't one unifying issue that would drive people into this.

 

[Hawkeye]

Unlike the lead up to the civil war there isn't one unifying issue that would drive people into this.

Well, except the general overreach of unelected Federal bureaucrats. And the Left-coasters in Congress constantly attempting to dictate policies to the rest of us.

 

[NKBJ]

Overreach is the same issue as last time. And, just like last time foreign agents are promoting the division. Have no idea whether we'll collectively be stupid enough to divide again but it wouldn't surprise me. Last time the European great houses would have had us were it not for President Lincoln and the royals of Russia.
We don't have anything like either one of them this time around.

 

[BigRed]

Interview with a Confederate soldier.



Take from it what you may if you spend a whole 18 minutes paying attention.

I do have a question.

Have the rights and powers reserved by the States and the citizens of those States grown, or have they diminished?

 

[Magyars]

Interview with a Confederate soldier.



Take from it what you may if you spend a whole 18 minutes paying attention.

I do have a question.

Have the rights and powers reserved by the States and the citizens of those States grown, or have they diminished?

The answer is obvious!

 

[BigRed]

The answer is obvious!
View attachment 162628

Indeed.

Still worth listening to one of the guys that lived it.

 

[Magyars]

Indeed.

Still worth listening to one of the guys that lived it.

Thanks, that was interesting.
1865, when we went from
The united States
To
The United States.....

 

[BigRed]

Thanks, that was interesting.
1865, when we went from
The united States
To
The United States.....

Indeed.

I would submit what has been forgotten is a union of consent. Currently, it is a union by force.

 

[KLB]

Thanks, that was interesting.
1865, when we went from
The united States
To
The United States.....

It went from The United States are to the United States is.

 

[BigRed]

Disunion Then and Now – Abbeville Institute

www.abbevilleinstitute.org

 

[NKBJ]

And then somewhere along the line it went to Inc. and an eternal state of emergency.

 

[jamil]

Interview with a Confederate soldier.



Take from it what you may if you spend a whole 18 minutes paying attention.

I do have a question.

Have the rights and powers reserved by the States and the citizens of those States grown, or have they diminished?

I assume this was posted in evidence that the cause of the Confederate States in the Civil War was states’ rights.

Your question at the end, though, has nothing to do with the truth value of the cause of the Civil War. It stands on its own, and is a valid question, on its own.

The cause of the civil war, to the rank and file men who fought in the trenches was pride. The interviewee himself said that at the time he did not have the words to say what it was. It was later that it became states rights.

It was pride. I don’t mean in a bad way. That’s what it was for General Lee. It wasn’t about states rights to him either. He was fighting for his state. That was his home. He, like the interviewee, did not fight for the preservation of slavery. They fought because it was their home.

The states’ rights the Aristocrats were fighting for was the right to own slaves. Their sentiments were expressed all over their own literature, for decades prior to the civil war, and if they had really given even half a casual **** about states rights they wouldn’t have tried so hard legislatively to take away states’ rights if states they disagreed with all those decades leading up to the civil war. But no. They only gave a **** about THAT state right because not having the right to own people would change their very way of life. They couldn’t see a future without it.

The cause on the side of the north is similar. They didn’t take up arms to free the slaves. They fought as citizens of their states. Both were pawns of oligarchs and ideologues. The cause of ending slavery was just. The leaders of both sides failed the nation and their people.

The result of all that is very similar to what we see happening now. The political elites convince the rank and file citizens about some righteous cause, and maybe some of those causes are indeed righteous. But the motivation and battle cries keeps them elite.

Now, about the question, yes, the US suffered a great casualty in lost federalism. Most people now think federalism is an old idea and that, aside from the blood of brothers, is the createst cost of the Civil War. Slavery could have ended without war if leaders didn’t suck so bad.

 

[Leadeye]

I don't know how the legal aspect of it works out, but i could see parts of states leaving to become parts of other states rather than independent countries. West Virginia being the only example I can think of. Are there federal laws that fix the boundaries of the states today?

 

[Leadeye]

I assume this was posted in evidence that the cause of the Confederate States in the Civil War was states’ rights.

Your question at the end, though, has nothing to do with the truth value of the cause of the Civil War. It stands on its own, and is a valid question, on its own.

The cause of the civil war, to the rank and file men who fought in the trenches was pride. The interviewee himself said that at the time he did not have the words to say what it was. It was later that it became states rights.

It was pride. I don’t mean in a bad way. That’s what it was for General Lee. It wasn’t about states rights to him either. He was fighting for his state. That was his home. He, like the interviewee, did not fight for the preservation of slavery. They fought because it was their home.

The states’ rights the Aristocrats were fighting for was the right to own slaves. Their sentiments were expressed all over their own literature, for decades prior to the civil war, and if they had really given even half a casual **** about states rights they wouldn’t have tried so hard legislatively to take away states’ rights if states they disagreed with all those decades leading up to the civil war. But no. They only gave a **** about THAT state right because not having the right to own people would change their very way of life. They couldn’t see a future without it.

The cause on the side of the north is similar. They didn’t take up arms to free the slaves. They fought as citizens of their states. Both were pawns of oligarchs and ideologues. The cause of ending slavery was just. The leaders of both sides failed the nation and their people.

The result of all that is very similar to what we see happening now. The political elites convince the rank and file citizens about some righteous cause, and maybe some of those causes are indeed righteous. But the motivation and battle cries keeps them elite.

Now, about the question, yes, the US suffered a great casualty in lost federalism. Most people now think federalism is an old idea and that, aside from the blood of brothers, is the createst cost of the Civil War. Slavery could have ended without war if leaders didn’t suck so bad.

This^

The civil war was the worst failure of leadership in the history of the country. Self serving leadership and a crazy news media were the drivers of that war. Sometimes I think what we need is some sort of Thunderdome for those people to sort their differences out.