Secession: Paths To Freedom

[grarpamp]

Three Reasons To Start Taking Secession Seriously

And further consider that secession, freedom,
exists at the individual personal level...

https://mises.org/wire/three-reasons-start-taking-secession-seriously

https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/new-initiative-explores-deep-persistent-divides-between-biden-and-trump-voters/
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/clinching-victory-president-elect-biden-declares-time-heal-america-n1247013
https://d2r6h7ytneza1l.cloudfront.net/title/6abe5378-f05c-48dd-b851-d63a6b9e1ab1/mason&morgan_excerpt.pdf
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/poll-seccession
https://johnzogbystrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/4th-issue-FINAL.pdf
https://mises.org/wire/idea-secession-isnt-going-away
https://www.mediamatters.org/dennis-prager/youtube-dennis-prager-says-there-might-be-secession-united-states
https://johnzogbystrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/4th-issue-FINAL.pdf
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/iowa-rep-steven-holt-52-25-of-trump-supporters-favor-secession-to-preserve-the-principles-of-our-republic/ar-AAPpL1m
https://www.wonkette.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-promotes-national-divorce-between-maga-normal-people
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6VANItcxso
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/10/no-red-state-rebels-there-will-be-no-secession.html
https://mises.org/wire/if-america-splits-what-happens-nukes
https://mises.org/wire/nationalism-national-liberation-lessons-end-cold-war
https://mises.org/wire/greatest-thing-roman-empire-ever-did-was-go-away


Last month, the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia
released a new study which showed that, at least among those polled,
“roughly 4 in 10 (41%) of Biden and half (52%) of Trump voters at
least somewhat agree that it’s time to split the country, favoring
blue/red states seceding from the union.”

Moreover, majorities in both groups agreed there are “many radical,
immoral people trying to ruin things” and that “it is the duty of
every true citizen to help eliminate the evil that poisons our country
from within.”

On might conclude that people who think that things are generally
going well in a country aren’t so concerned with “the evil within”
that they think it’s time to “split the country.”

It seems that President Biden has been unable to “unite” the country
after all, in spite of his promises that it’s “time to heal in
America” and that he will "be a president who seeks not to divide, but
to unify." Rather, it appears the country embraces a hard divide over
a variety of issues with vaccine mandates and parental rights in
public education being only the most current ones.

At this point, there’s no reason to believe these divides are simply
going to go away. Secession is likely to become even more mainstream
as has been occurring in recent years, and as the old "liberal
consensus" of the mid-twentieth century recedes ever more into the
distant past. Moreover, opponents of secession are clear that they’re
not willing to tolerate a separation that would allow Americans in
neighboring jurisdictions to embrace other models of society or
governance. But in the real world, major political changes can come
suddenly and in unexpected ways. In 1987, most Soviet still assumed
the USSR would continue to exist for many more decades—if not
centuries. Because of this, now is the time to begin asking the
difficult questions about secession and how military and financial
questions can be addressed.

Considering all this, we see three main reasons why it is increasingly
unwise to ignore secession as a serious possibility.

Secession Went Mainstream

The first reason we must now take secession seriously is that it’s no
longer a topic of discussion among the most radical.

In 2014, for example, a quarter of those polled said they thought
their state should secede. By 2018, 39 percent were saying they think
a state should “have the final say” as to whether or not that state
remains part of the United States. In 2020, more than a third of those
polled said states have a legal right to secede.

Mainstream conservatives increasingly suggest the possibility, from
Rush Limbaugh to Dennis Prager. Indeed, just last week, Prager
admitted that secession offers a chance to live in a country that
better reflects one’s own values. Should secession happen, Prager
said, “ I would live in a state governed by Judeo-Christian values
versus one governed by left-wing values.” Even elderly conservatives
are started to grasp the idea: separation brings choice, and choice is
better than ossified notions of “patriotism.”

Indeed, it appears it’s no coincidence that older conservative
operatives like Prager have been among those who are late to warm to
the idea of secession. According to Zogby’s 2020 poll on secession,
favorable attitudes toward secession decline as the polled group gets
older. In the 18-29 year-old group, a majority (52 percent) think
states have a legal right to secede. In the over-65 group the number
is only 23 percent. In other words, the dogma of national unity is a
dogma of older generations. Not only is secession increasingly
mainstream, it may be the wave of the future as well.

Meanwhile, members of Congress—including Iowa's Steven Holt and
Florida's Marjorie Taylor Greene—now openly speak well of secession.
They wouldn't say this unless they thought their constituents agree
with them.

Moreover, we might measure the growth of the secessionist position by
the number of pundits who now feel the need to condemn it. Once upon a
time, secession was regarded as so "out there" that it scarcely
deserved any attention at all. No longer. Nowadays, conservative
beltway pundits feel the need to go on rants about it on Fox News.
The Left’s Unionists Want to Run Your Life

A second reason to take secession seriously is the fact that the Left
doesn’t seem to be learning anything from the rise of separatism. Just
as many Americans appear to be embracing a posture in opposition to
rule from the center, the Left is doubling down on the idea that more
local autonomy is not to be tolerated.

A clear example of this is the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement
Act introduced in the US Senate. The legislation, if passed, would
give Washington vast new powers in regulating and controlling how
states conduct their own elections. Originally, of course, state
governments had almost total control in how elections were governed
and conducted within each state. This makes sense in a country that
began as a collection of sovereign republics. Just as EU member states
conduct their elections in a way that’s locally controlled, the same
was once true for the US. Over time—as in most areas—the federal
government asserted more control. But with the Voting Rights
Advancement Act, local control over elections would be virtually
abolished with most any changes subject to a federal imprimatur.

Naturally, opposition to surrendering state elections to federal
control is denounced as motivated by racism and other nefarious goals.
And this is reflective of the Left’s general opposition to secession
and decentralization in general. The idea is “we can’t let those
people run their own affairs because they’re sure to use local
prerogatives for evil.”

For example, when condemning secession in New York magazine,
Democratic strategist Ed Kilgore made it clear he has no intention of
letting people do much of anything without federal “oversight.” He
writes:

    So might we drift apart more or less peacefully this time around?
Possibly, but count me out when it comes to agreeing to a National
Divorce. …[H]ow could I happily accept the accelerated subjugation of
women and people of color in a new, adjacent Red America, any more
than abolitionists could accept the continuation and expansion of the
slavery they hated? Would it really be safe to live near a carbon-mad
country in which the denial of climate change was an article of faith?
And could I ever trust that a “neighbor” whose leadership and citizens
believed their policies reflected the unchanging ancient will of the
Almighty would leave our fences intact?

Kilgore can barely contain his contempt. He might as well be saying
"If those Red State troglodytes are allowed freedom, they’ll surely
embrace a racist and misogynistic dystopia that fills the air with
poisonous fumes. These are religious zealots, after all!"

Anyone who doesn’t want to live out his or her life as subject to the
whims of men like Kilgore should take his few moments of candor as an
ominous warning. These people will never “happily accept”
self-governance outside Washington’s purview because they quite
literally equate it with slavery and the hatred of women.

In other words, the more the Left condemns secession in detail—as they
must now do because dismissive scoffing no longer works—they only
provide additional reasons for why secession is likely the only real
solution to the national divide.
Now Is Time to Ask the Difficult Questions

Finally, the mainstreaming of secession means now is the appropriate
time to start asking the difficult questions about how separation
would actually take place.

For example, the issue of nuclear weapons cannot be ignored—although
the case of post-Soviet Ukraine shows it’s not as intractable a
problem as many suspect. Moreover, the question of the national debt
ought to be approached. It will likely also be necessary to admit that
under all realistic scenarios, a partial default is the likely outcome
either with or without secession. And finally, there is the problem of
“ethnic” enclaves. Historically, this always comes with secession, as
with the ethnic Russians in the secessionist Baltics or the
pro-Spaniard populations left behind throughout Latin America in the
nineteenth century. Moreover, how "complete" would this separation be?
It is entirely conceivable that a United States with two or more
self-governing pieces could nevertheless remain within under a single
head of state or within a single military alliance.

In real life, big political changes have a habit of occurring
regardless of what the official planners want, and what the official
plans say. That is, events have a way of overwhelming what the elites
think is the proper way of doing things. But fostering serious
discussion now could help avert at least some unpleasant surprises in
the longer term. On the other hand, living in denial about secession
won't improve things. And, of course, the matter of secession is not
"if" but "when." All polities come to an end at some point either
through disintegration or revolution. In many cases, the world
improves when old states like the Roman Empire collapse.  The fanciful
America-will-last-forever position is something that should seem
plausible only to small children or the hopelessly naïve.