I'm just going to roll in here and educate, since all I ever hear on the matter of secession is rhetoric, usually with very heavy political bias, and none of that is meaningful in any way.
So, let's settle this:
1) Secession, even through violence, is literally how the United States came to be, and a concept so imperative and fundamental to the US, that it is paragraph #2 of our founding document:
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness…..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.”
- Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1776 (emphasis added)
2) Thomas Jefferson - y'know, the guy they call "The Father of the Declaration", one of the primary authors of the Constitution, and the 3rd president of the US - REPEATEDLY made it clear that secession is absolutely fine, and always a better option than violence:
"...but determined, were we to be disappointed in this, to sever ourselves from that union we so much value, rather than give up the rights of self government which we have reserved, & in which alone we see liberty, safety & happiness."
- Jefferson to James Madison, August 23rd, 1799
"Whether we remain in one confederacy, or form into Atlantic and Mississippi confederacies, I believe not very important to the happiness of either part."
- President Jefferson, in a letter to Dr. Joseph Priestley, January 29th, 1804
"The future inhabitants of the Atlantic & Missipi [sic] States will be our sons. We leave them in distinct but bordering establishments. We think we see their happiness in their union, & we wish it. Events may prove it otherwise; and if they see their interest in separation, why should we take side with our Atlantic rather than our Missipi [sic] descendants? It is the elder and the younger son differing. God bless them both, & keep them in union, if it be for their good, but separate them, if it be better."
- President Jefferson to John C. Breckinridge, August 12th, 1803
"If any state in the union will declare that it prefers separation with the 1st alternative, to a continuance in union without it, I have no hesitation in saying, “Let us separate.”
- Jefferson to William Crawford, June 16th, 1816
I could go on, but I hope that at this point, nobody remains naive enough to believe that Jefferson would not condone secession.
3) "But correspondence does not constitute legal precedence!", you cry; that's ok, we've got that too:
“Do in the name and in behalf of the People of Virginia declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the People of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression and that every power not granted thereby remains with them and at their will”
- Virginia ratification of the Constitution
There can be no doubt here, that this means "if the 10th amendment is violated, we can reclaim our sovereignty".
Rhode Island has a similar clause with stronger language. NY has a watered-down version. The fact is, without the 9th and 10th amendments, and those clauses, those three states would never have joined the Union. Madison and Hamilton wrote the Federalist Papers entirely as a plea to draw those states and others in. About half the states wanted no part of a compact of any sort, precisely fearing the government would metastasize into what it has become. The existence of that language in even one ratification provides precedence of application to all of them, the same way case law is applied to other similar contract disputes: if it’s accepted as law in one place, it can be applied elsewhere in identical circumstances. This is a primary function of our justice system.
4) Moving along, nobody until Lincoln ever even seriously questioned the legality of secession. It was a given. In 1812, at the Hartford Convention, the entirety of New England seriously considered seceding, and there was massive public support for such a move.
5) Fundamental contract law, going back centuries, establishes infinite legal precedent to step away from a deal in which the terms of said contract have been virulently violated by the other party. The Constitution is nothing but a contract between the states and federal government to accomplish a handful of explicit goals, with an entire section devoted to overtly pointing out that it is ONLY for those goals and reaffirming certain “unalienable rights”; the moment the federal government violated that contract - which didn't take long - every state instantly became legally justified in exiting the deal, because one party - the US government - violated the terms. This is simply how contracts work, and anyone who has a problem with it likely also feels triggered by the fact that 2+2=4. Such people should not ever be taken seriously, because they have no grasp of reality.
The fact that in the same breath people can praise the USA and disavow the notion of secession is utterly bewildering. The two are intrinsically intertwined; one cannot exist without the other. Which is why the entire concept of the US died with Lincoln, and has only plummeted downward since. To be very clear, for those unaware - “State” is 100% synonymous with “country”, e.g. “The State of Israel”, or the fact that all countries in the United Nations are referred to as “member States”.
The entire existence of the US is on the back of a violent coup against a government THOUSANDS of times less oppressive than the modern United States. Taxation in 1776 was entirely in the form of tariffs. Personally, I'm far from wealthy, and my income tax per year while living in NYC took 33%, which does not take into account thousands more dollars in sales taxes and other taxes I had to pay while living there, plus tolls (another form of taxation). And even this doesn't take into account the cost of goods being artificially inflated by the taxes on production and freight, which are owned by people also paying employment taxes, payroll taxes, and various business taxes. In contrast, those colonial era tariffs were relatively tiny. A tax worth $8/pound of tea resulted in the Boston Tea Party. In NYC today a single pack of cigarettes has $5.85 in taxes. This exorbitant price is the result of legislation so flagrantly in violation of every aspect of the Constitution that the entire legislature of NYC should be tried for treason.
Without the right of secession, and assuming you don't condone a violent coup, there is only one conclusion you MUST face: we are all prisoners and slaves to politicians, who have unlimited and arbitrary control over every aspect of our lives and dollar we make, with no recourse but to leave our own land (they'll tax you when you sell your property and belongings, of course).
Make no mistake: our current system of taxation is slavery. Have you ever wondered why taxes are taken out per paycheck, and not in one lump sum? Because the government knows you’ll shoot someone who steals your car, but you’ll shrug off losing a $10 bill every week. The very definition of “slavery” is a master entity who reaps all the rewards of your work and keeps you producing under threat of violence. Living in NYC, just counting income tax alone, I effectively did not make one single penny between January 1st and approximately May 1st, despite working 60-90 hours every week across multiple hourly jobs. I do not care how much you are willing to pervert the English language - you simply cannot deny that is the definition of “slavery”.
To reiterate, Abraham Lincoln not only did not free anyone from bondage; instead, he made every single American a slave to an omnipotent central government willing to end 800,000 lives to ensure that everyone remains a slave. What a hero Abraham Lincoln was - one man responsible for killing more Americans than every other war in American history combined! Slavery is unforgivable, but you’d be fighting an uphill battle contending it isn’t worse to outright kill 2.5% of a population consisting of about 32,000,000 people. Without the right to walk away from the Union peacefully, we are only left with revolt or being driven out of our homes at gunpoint.
If you disagree with the inherent and thoroughly proven legality of secession, congratulations, you're a puppet; a fool; and you're wrong. Facts are not subject to veracity based on opinions, nor are they up for debate. The States signed a contract with the federal government, and the federal government has - on thousands of occasions - violated every word within said contract. This is domestic abuse, and the horrifying truth is that walking away from the abuser is always extremely difficult, but no one would knowingly force a victim to stay with his/her abuser. However, it must be done. We are being violated, demonized, imprisoned, robbed, and often outright beaten by a government that has long since torn up its copy of our contract, and it’s time we finally and conclusively walk away.
Comentários