1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Secession

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by vyo476, Oct 3, 2007.

  1. vyo476

    vyo476 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,401
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071003/ap_on_re_us/secessionist_movement

    An interesting article. I'm not sure how politically viable secession would be but it could, potentially, solve a lot of problems. It's not like we'd even have to fully dissolve the Union; a sort of mutual-defense pact could be retained.

    What do you think? What are the pros and cons? Would you be in favor of splitting up the Union? What would you like to see/expect to see in a post-Union United States?
     
  2. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    There has long been a separatist movement in Alaska. There is still an Alaska Independence Party and Wally Hickel an Alaska Governor from the early 90s was elected under the banner. Its movement of actual secession has died off considerably. I can see its merits in Alaska certainly. I think one thing that killed it, was that thier was thoughts of a civil war here. But also most Alaskans saw that the American Military presence that exsists here was completely necessary at the time due to the on-going cold war. But there was a desire to have more control over our resources, statehood here solved much of that.
    In general though, I think it would be very difficult to do. How would the federal government react? There seems no point in a civil war. But I guess if there were enough people in support of the issue in a given state, my main concern would be the retention of the civil rights ensured by the American constitution. If, say Alabama were to secede would the African American population lose the progress that has been made in the last 40-50 years?
     
  3. Truth-Bringer

    Truth-Bringer New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes indeed. I'd like to see a return to the articles of confederation and the end of federal tyranny.
     
  4. icono1

    icono1 Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Location:
    Bluegrass St.
    It would be nice to get the feds out of everyone's hair but sadly enough things seem to be going the other way.
     
  5. USMC the Almighty

    USMC the Almighty New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,070
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Articles? There's a new one. I often see people aspiring to return back to the Constitutional principles but rarely to the "Critical Period".
     
  6. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Well if not flat out sucession, but instead just a more efficient way to deal with the feds through the state and local level. All to often members of congress are to busy dealing with special interest groups to listen to thier actual constituents. Again here in Alaska, it happens all the time. Lawmakers from California making up bills about the use of our resources, where you can hunt wolves etc. I guess what it boils down to, is we need a restoration of more state's rights and to give our DC leaders a smack in the cheek to get them in line to listen to local concerns first.
     
  7. vyo476

    vyo476 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,401
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Actually, I was thinking along these lines too. I mean, if we're going to talk about secession, we'd have to talk about it logically, and logically speaking if we just sever all ties and declare total independence from each other right away we'd turn the former United States into one big mass of sitting ducks.
     
  8. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Total independence I dont believe would happen without a very bloody civil war, and I dont think the majority, or even a substantial minority want that. In reality it is more of a fringe movement trying to sneak out the back door. If the union were disolved I imagine the feds would bring in military force in an attempt to "restore order"
     
  9. Coyote

    Coyote Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,213
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Coyote died for your sheep
    Would that mean no Bill of Rights then?
     
  10. vyo476

    vyo476 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,401
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Most of the state constitutions have declarations of the rights of man in them. The only reason it was necessary to put one into the Constitution was because it, unlike the Articles, was seen as bringing together all the states into one country, rather than just loosely tying them together for common defense. A mutual defense pact doesn't need a Bill of Rights.
     
  11. Truth-Bringer

    Truth-Bringer New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
  12. Truth-Bringer

    Truth-Bringer New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In light of everything that has happened over the last 200 years, I'd say the Anti-Federalists were proven right:

    "The Way America Was Supposed to Be

    Posted by Bob Wallace

    One of my favorite sites is that of James P. Hogan. In this article he quotes one of my favorite writers, Richard Maybury.

    "According to the War Forecast Part One and Part Two (March 2004, reprinted from May and June 2002 respectively) posted in Richard Maybury's U.S. & World Early Warning Report, Washington has become the biggest loose cannon in history. It wasn't what those who shaped alliance of States that came into existence after 1776 wanted, and it didn't have to happen. What was a huge mistake will be undone, he says, and after a temporary period of confusion America will get back on track to being what it should have been in the first place."

    The Constitutional Convention of 1787 threw out the original Articles of Confederation and created the federal government as a new layer of government above the States in what Maybury describes as a disguised military coup. Patrick Henry and the other anti-federalists feared that the central government would become too large and powerful to control. It took a while, but following the dismantling of restraints in earnest under Lincoln, the behemoth grew, attracting power-seekers, to the point where it has been interfering in the affairs of other countries for over 100 years. U.S . troops were sent into foreign conflicts no fewer than 188 times during the 20th century--more than for any other nation. When fear and distaste for a government reach global proportions, the overwhelming likelihood is that one way or another it will "follow into oblivion the thousands of other governments that have disappeared over the ages." Americans will return to the Articles of Confederation or something similar, realizing that they don't need a federal government and never did. The Agriculture Department produces no food, the Transportation Department transports nothing, and the Education Department never taught anybody anything. After Washington is gone, farmers will continue growing corn, Detroit and Boeing will produce cars and planes, and teachers will arrive at the schools each morning.

    But who will defend the country? In Maybury's view, nobody would have the time or the resources to think seriously about invading it. The leaders of the 94 regimes currently run by US-supported crooks & tyrants will all be facing uprisings and civil wars and too preoccupied with survival. As for domestic issues, the European Central Bank provides a model of how the States between them would be quite capable of managing such obligations as bond repayments and Social Security -- although the initial panics could provide some excellent opportunities for investment.

    The article comments: "When Rome transitioned from its Monarchist Period to its Republican Period, monarchists saw this as catastrophe. For them it was, but for the rest of the population, new freedoms brought great abundance and a level of technological advancement previously unheard of." An inspiring thought. What might the world have looked like today if America had continued into its period of industrial and scientific growth guided by the original political philosophy of friendship with all nations and entangling alliances with none? An empire of liberty expanding outward across the Solar System, perhaps. A great theme for the setting of an alternate history novel."

    Link
     
Loading...

Share This Page