I keep hearing people say that secession is illegal and that those who support it are terrorists, anarchists, and even worse. We are a Republic governed by our Constitution, our government was purposely restrained, and it gave the states the right to secede at anytime.Our Republic was not created on the terms by which we are now governed; just because presidents, politicians, and activist judges have changed the rules for generations doesn't change what the Constitution was or make it go away. No matter how much they wish it would.
We are America, if our politicians cannot or will not recognize that Texas may decide to peacefully take back its Independence. This is not a few people with extreme beliefs, the Texas Nationalist Movement has around 250,000 members. These are the people who are willing to admit their beliefs and pay membership dues. How many are silent belivers.
If Texas did delcare its independence, I wonder how many other states would follow suit? This is no longer a Southron/Northern issue. States all over the Union are standing up to tyranny.
4 comments:
From the Debates on the adoption of the federal constitution in Pennsylvania:
"There necessarily exists, in every government, a power from which there is no appeal, and which, for that reason, may be termed supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable. Where does this power reside? To this question writers on different governments will give different answers. Sir William Blackstone will tell you, that in Britain the power is lodged in the British Parliament; that the Parliament may alter the form of the government; and that its power is absolute, without control. The idea of a constitution, limiting and superintending the operations of legislative authority, seems not to have been accurately understood in Britain. There are, at least, no traces of practice conformable to such a principle. The British constitution is just what the British Parliament pleases. When the Parliament transferred legislative authority to Henry VIII., the act transferring could not, in the strict acceptation of the term, be called unconstitutional.
To control the power and conduct of the legislature, by an overruling constitution, was an improvement in the science and practice of government reserved to the American states.
Perhaps some politician, who has not considered with sufficient accuracy our political systems, would answer that, in our governments, the supreme power was vested in the constitutions. This opinion approaches a step nearer to the truth, but does not reach it. The truth is, that, in our governments, the supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power remains in the people. As our constitutions are superior to our legislatures, so the people are superior to our constitutions. Indeed, the superiority, in this last instance, is much greater; for the people possess over our constitutions control in act, as well as right."
The argument that secession is somehow "illegal" is one of the dumbest arguments I've personally ever heard. What is worse is that only a few years ago (after the election of the supposedly ultra conservative Bush) there were a lot of leftists beating the drums of secession. So I guess to a leftist secession is "legal" if leftists are pursuing it for leftist causes. Otherwise, no cigar. But anyway...
One of the first and fundamental principles of American constitutional government is voluntary political union. Which, ummm, implies the right to secession. Now, I'm not particularly inclined to be enslaved by anyone, dead or living. And if I enter into contract with one or more other parties, and those parties violate the clear terms of the contract in spite of my appeals to abide by them, then eventually I'm no longer going to feel bound to the contract because it has effectively been nullified by the other party. That's what this idea of secession is all about.
Moreover, we can argue about the terms, and that in itself could be grounds for secession. I mean, if we can't agree on what the terms mean, then what kind of contract do we have but one that is null and void? Indeed, declaring secession to be "illegal" is itself grounds for secession. I'm not aware of any formal declaration of the kind, but if it should come it would be nothing less than an act of totalitarian aggression, and absolute grounds for secession.
Call Me Mom,
Great comment and great points. Reading it made me think of this: What happens when you take the Constitution out of the picture as Obama has? Then you are left with the people against the government. I wonder if that is where we are at right now.
There is no government that can stand the test of time because there is no government that is truly for and by the people. The people are the backbone of every government and the backbone of government is always broken when the people have had enough and risen up.
We used to have the unique and only government that was truly established by and for the people, but the government has risen its ugly head once more in our great Republic just as the anti-federalists warned. We must now decide if we are going to let it devour every last shred of freedom and liberty or are we going to muzzle it and put it in its place. We are quickly coming to a breaking point where secession will be the only way to reset an out-of-control fed and begin from scratch with a new government; the way it was meant to be.
There are upcoming elections whose outcomes are going to be vital to our Republic's future. There can be no more lazy, tolerant, and uneducated voters sitting out elections because they are comfortable with the lives and possessions they have. If we lose these elections this time, life and possessions as we know it will vanish, right along with our Constitution and what was left of America.
Terry,
Also, during the process of selling the Constitution and the Union the Southern states were told they could secede at any time they felt the federal government got out-of-control. Why would sovereign countries (states) agree to the control of a Union after a bloody revolution if they did not retain their power and the right to leave if it became like a monarchy again?
The whole point was to have a small federal government to promote a common currency, defense, and to enter into treaties with foreign nations; that was it. Jefferson repeatedly remarked that the federal government was already too big during his time.
The Dems have always proven that the only thing that matters to them is what they want, and that what they want is power and secular anarchy; hell on Earth. They will never accept anything Godly, good or principled. They will always twist anything good into a warped, mutated, and grotesque version and try to pawn it off of weak-minded, middle-of-the-road heathens.
What has happened to the American Union is exactly what happens when conquerors re-write history and rule over the conquered. No matter what side of the War of Northern Aggression (Civil War) you are, or were, on this holds true. The only way to quell a revolution and a conquered enemy is to destroy every shred of truth about why they rose up to begin with, and then keep them under such bondage and fear that they would never dare rise up again. Show any opposition to your tyrannical government and you are labeled racist, extremist, terrorist, and outright traitor.
I never heard it better explained better than the way Daniel Miller explained it. No one would ever tell a battered woman that she cannot divorce her abusive husband because he might beat her for it (well, I bet liberals could find a way to justify that). No, any decent, civilized society would not only encourage this endangered woman to leave her abusive and out-of-control husband, but they would help provide her the escape she needed before he killed her.
That is the reason federalists had to make it very clear to the anti-federalists that the option to leave the Union was absolute and self-evident; because the anti-federalists knew the federal government would get too big. They knew they had the option, and we know it today despite what THEY want us to believe.
Post a Comment