Secession today... what would happen?

[KC4RAN]

The US Civil War was fought because a group of states wanted to break away from the United States and form their own nation. The causes for this desire are many, and the list of reasons is long and complicated... but we all know the outcome. 4 years of a bloody internal war where we fought ourselves.

Just this last week, I saw a post talking about more modern secessionist movements, and it got me to thinking. We've seen countries break apart, new unions formed, countries split and renamed, everything you can think of.

But what would happen if today, a group of states really seriously wanted to break away from the United States of America? What would hapen if a group of states wanted to form their own 'more perfect union'? Could people handle it peacefully, or would war result? Could the Federal Government of the United States hold itself back from attacking this new union?

[W2ILP]

The Civil War was not really a Civil War. The south did not want to conquer the north, it just wanted to separate from the north. #Thus most southern historians call it the "War between the States". #

I don't think it could happen today because there are both red and blue states in the south as well as in the north and there is also a lot of cooperation between representatives in Congress that would prevent any separatist movement. #The reason that the Legislative branch of federal government was formed was to eliminate the possibility of having states leave the united states. #Before that happens states might be given leeway to compromise, as now has happened with many touchy issues such as same sex marriage and legal abortion which can differ in different states. #The big Congressional debates come up when it is not constitutionally clear as to what laws can be made and enforced by individual states or by the federal government. #The President...as commander and chief of the armed forces...as well as the National Guard...could defeat any state militia that might be formed...unless it can somehow take over control of the military in what is called a military cuoo. #This happens in South American nations ...but it is not as likely here and the reason is that banks and credit card issuers operate nationally and can not permit states to let citizens be freed from debts to banks in other states. #These interests did not exist in the way that they do today in the days of Lincoln. #There was not as much interstate financial commerce then...but their was some. #There was mostly direct bartering of products. Both the south and the north had to be financed and they were financed by different donors and different banks in most cases.

w2ilp (Interstate Linked Payoffs)...are stronger bonds than Federal Laws themselves. #Money talks louder than politics. # Wall Street is in New York...but the market can be played anywhere by brokers or Internet users in every state.

[kc0ukk]

We no longer function as a nation. We elect our politicians and the outcome is not accepted by those who voted differently.

The demands placed upon the citizens of this country exceed the demands placed upon serfs the in times past. Worse, the 'benefits' paid with the proceeds of these extortionist demands approach slow torture in nature.

There is a large segment of ths country who actively seek to enhance their own situation at the expense of others. They use our government and our courts as crowbars to exercise control over the lives of others. The government and courts are complicite in this arrangement.

In short, this government is no longer consensual. Secession is not unreasonable. It may be the end of the USA, but perhaps its spirit can live on in a lessor nation.

[KG6QHK]

Oh, this is rich. (SPELLCHECK ON)

Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps you'll remember this little tidbit:

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security".

Can anyone tell me where that is found?

Now, what would REALLY be interesting is if it actually happened. If enough people became disenchanted with our current government and decided that the time was ripe for change, and attempted to affect that change, what result would we see?

[kc0ukk]

Quote[/b] (KG6QHK @ Oct. 04 2007,23:08)]Oh, this is rich. (SPELLCHECK ON)

Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps you'll remember this little tidbit:

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security".

Can anyone tell me where that is found?

Now, what would REALLY be interesting is if it actually happened. If enough people became disenchanted with our current government and decided that the time was ripe for change, and attempted to affect that change, what result would we see?
The 'looters' couldn't survive without their serfs. They would kill the secessionists before letting them go. They would spout great speeches concerning freedom and liberty as they tighten their grip on your wallet and on your very life. They really do know what's right for this world; they need all of us so they can coast through this life. Just ask them.

[KC4RAN]

I guess I look at history and I see a Federal government that was originally founded to bring together a group of soverign individual countries (which is what the states were), and to define what exactly the Federal government was supposed to take care of. Everything else, EVERYTHING, was supposed to be the rights of the states - not the Federal government. That was the point of Amendment 10.

Over time, however, the Federal government has granted itself more and more powers over the individual states, shifting the balance of power immensely over to the Federal side. The states were supposed to be able to decide their own fate and their own regional laws, but more and more the Federal government is suing state governments to force some level of 'national consistency'. At some point, we will end up with the Federal code being the only law of the land, and even local governments will run as extensions of the Fedreal government.

That wasn't how it was originally intended to be. The 10th Amendment makes that clear.

If I look at the nation as 50 individual soverign states, and I imagine the resources of each one, I have to wonder... what would truly happen from an economic standpoint if each individual state could operate as an independent entity, or if a group of states could operate under some collective cooperative agreement that they decided benefitted them more than staying with the Federal government.

OK so you don't get Federal funds, but you also don't have the requirements that go with those Federal funds. If you want to build neighborhood schools and let parents choose the best school, you can. All of the things that the Federal government said "You must do XYZ or we remove ABC funding", you can now do because you're no longer receiving any of that Federal money.

Each state could levy whatever taxes each one felt appropriate, and the Federal government would no longer get the lions share. Each state could levy whatever tarrifs it felt necessary to protect it's strengths and interests.

Each state could decide on its own about immigration and the policies around it. No more worrying about 'offending' someone by deporting them. Wanna deport em? Here's a bus ticket.

On the flip side, each state would be responsible for totally funding it's own defense. However, much of this already exists. Each state has a National Guard group I believe, and IIRC, that's what the National Guard was created for. It is what the State Militias once were, but much more organized and permanent.

Each state would have to pay for it's own large projects directly, like highways. All schools would be paid for by local or state funds, not Federal.

Some states would benefit more than others, the 'weaker' ones would have to band together with the 'stronger' ones in some sort of alliance... but it could be done.

I see the United States and the documents that formed it as a contract. As time went on, more and more entities decided to join in on the contract. But it's just a contract, and those that once wanted 'in' may one day want 'out'.

We saw what happened the last time a group wanted 'out'. Would the President of the United States of America order a military invasion of a group of states that properly went through a vote, their State Legislatures voted to remove themselves from the United States?

[W0MT]

Quote[/b] (KG6QHK @ Oct. 04 2007,23:08)]Oh, this is rich. (SPELLCHECK ON)

Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps you'll remember this little tidbit:

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security".

Can anyone tell me where that is found?

Now, what would REALLY be interesting is if it actually happened. If enough people became disenchanted with our current government and decided that the time was ripe for change, and attempted to affect that change, what result would we see?
Your quote, of course, is from the Declaration of Independance.

The likelyhood of any state or states trying to secede today is virtually zero. There may be groups within some states who think they want to do this but not an entire state and certainly not a majority of any state.

And KC4RAN, before you pontificate on what the Constitution says and doesn't say, I suggest you read it first. Here is just one of your statements that is wrong:

"On the flip side, each state would be responsible for totally funding it's own defense. However, much of this already exists. Each state has a National Guard group I believe, and IIRC, that's what the National Guard was created for. It is what the State Militias once were, but much more organized and permanent."

Go read Art. I, Sec, 8, cl. 1 where the federal government shall "provide for the common Defence and general welfare of the United States."

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (W0MT @ Oct. 04 2007,11:15)]Quote[/b] (KG6QHK @ Oct. 04 2007,23:08)]Oh, this is rich. (SPELLCHECK ON)

Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps you'll remember this little tidbit:

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security".

Can anyone tell me where that is found?

Now, what would REALLY be interesting is if it actually happened. If enough people became disenchanted with our current government and decided that the time was ripe for change, and attempted to affect that change, what result would we see?
Your quote, of course, is from the Declaration of Independance.

The likelyhood of any state or states trying to secede today is virtually zero. There may be groups within some states who think they want to do this but not an entire state and certainly not a majority of any state.

And KC4RAN, before you pontificate on what the Constitution says and doesn't say, I suggest you read it first. Here is just one of your statements that is wrong:

"On the flip side, each state would be responsible for totally funding it's own defense. However, much of this already exists. Each state has a National Guard group I believe, and IIRC, that's what the National Guard was created for. It is what the State Militias once were, but much more organized and permanent."

Go read Art. I, Sec, 8, cl. 1 where the federal government shall "provide for the common Defence and general welfare of the United States."
If the state secedes from the United States, then it will be responsible for it's own defense, as it will no longer be a party to the law you quoted.

I was pointing out the pros and cons to secession...

[KC5CSG]

Our society has been trained to NOT think for itself anymore. The government thinks for us all now. It will never happen. Just look around you and this should be obvious.

Jerry

[KG6QHK]

Quote[/b] (KC5CSG @ Oct. 05 2007,10:56)]Our society has been trained to NOT think for itself anymore. The government thinks for us all now. It will never happen. Just look around you and this should be obvious.

Jerry
BINGO! You just touched on one of the MAJOR issues preventing any type of secession or coup from occurring; in that we as a nation have become so passive when it comes to our government, that we accept anything that they do as the "norm", and go about our lives like lemmings...

Mark my words. Sooner or later, this country is going to go into a state of meltdown, and it is then that strong, positive leadership will be most needed. Hopefully, it will be found...

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (KG6QHK @ Oct. 04 2007,15:19)]Quote[/b] (KC5CSG @ Oct. 05 2007,10:56)]Our society has been trained to NOT think for itself anymore. The government thinks for us all now. It will never happen. Just look around you and this should be obvious.

Jerry
BINGO! You just touched on one of the MAJOR issues preventing any type of secession or coup from occurring; in that we as a nation have become so passive when it comes to our government, that we accept anything that they do as the "norm", and go about our lives like lemmings...

Mark my words. Sooner or later, this country is going to go into a state of meltdown, and it is then that strong, positive leadership will be most needed. Hopefully, it will be found...
But will that leadership be supportive of change from the inside, or more drastic measures? It's obvious by the polls that people are fed up with the Federal government, at all levels, in all parties, and in all branches. To what degree people are willing to act on those feelings, who knows?

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (KG6QHK @ Oct. 05 2007,14:19)]Quote[/b] (KC5CSG @ Oct. 05 2007,10:56)]Our society has been trained to NOT think for itself anymore. The government thinks for us all now. It will never happen. Just look around you and this should be obvious.

Jerry
BINGO! You just touched on one of the MAJOR issues preventing any type of secession or coup from occurring; in that we as a nation have become so passive when it comes to our government, that we accept anything that they do as the "norm", and go about our lives like lemmings...

Mark my words. Sooner or later, this country is going to go into a state of meltdown, and it is then that strong, positive leadership will be most needed. Hopefully, it will be found...
Hopefully but doubtful. I'm sure not going to take that position. I'm too apathetic for the job.

LOL

[KI4PEQ]

Quote[/b] (W2ILP @ Oct. 04 2007,21:59)]The Civil War was not really a Civil War. The south did not want to conquer the north, it just wanted to separate from the north. #Thus most southern historians call it the "War between the States". #

w2ilp (Interstate Linked Payoffs)...are stronger bonds than Federal Laws themselves. #Money talks louder than politics. # Wall Street is in New York...but the market can be played anywhere by brokers or Internet users in every state.
Call it what it was..."The War of Yankee Aggression".

There was nothing civil about the so-called "Civil War".

[KC9JIQ]

another thing to consider is back then the states were much more independant from each other...

Today we got many services interconected thruout different states, it would be utter chaos, for example the electric grid, and pipelines/phonelines.

and notice that the North today gets most of it's heat thru pipelines that run thru southern states.... So if the southern states separate from the union, the south would require more states than the original war, but they would be a such a great advantage from the north, the texas oilfields, and probably help from mexico, can effectively "freeze" the north by merely shutting off their supplies of fuel!

It would certianly be a nasty war, but if it could be fought without destroying the entire infrastructure clearly the South has the advantage today. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[G0GQK]

Of what you are referring to is now being re-enacted by the parliament in Scotland. There are people in Scotland who firmly believe that they could survive within the EU as a separate independent country. The small matter that the government in London provides a huge amount of money to keep the country running is conveniently forgotten by those of the tartened tribes.

What could most probably happen is that Scotland would become a member of the British Commonwealth and the Enlish government would continue to give them revenue so that they could take our money in one hand and slap us with the other. Isn't democracy a wonderful thing !

G0GQK