Please secede, please
The Middlebury Institute has promoted Vermont secession. Nothing they have provided shows a grasp of the intricacies faced in this process even if it passed.
Today, Vermont is a cassava root ahead of being a Third World Nation; if not for the earmarks dragged in by Sen. Leahy, it would be one.
These numbers below are probably close, given the level of education in this country.
Secession, Ignorance, and Stupidity:
A recent Zogby/Middlebury Institute poll shows that 22% of Americans believe that “any state or region has the right to peaceably secede and become an independent republic.” Belief in states’ and regions right to secede was especially common among blacks (40%), Hispanics (43%) and people aged 18-24 (40%). Interestingly, Political liberals (32%) were more likely to believe in a right to secession than conservatives (17%). 18% of respondents say they would support a secession movement in their own state, including 24% of southerners.
Constitutional law professor Ann Althouse claims that these poll results show that “all these people [who believe in a right to secession] have the law wrong and don’t seem to know the basics of the history of the Civil War.” She concludes that the pro-secession survey respondents are “fascinatingly stupid.” [snip]
I certainly agree with Ann that much of the public is shockingly ignorant about American history and constitutional law. This is one aspect of the more general widespread political ignorance that I have often written about on this blog and elsewhere (e.g. here and here). At the same time, I don’t think that ignorance is necessarily a sign of stupidity. [snip]
I agree with Althouse, fascinatingly stupid is a mild term however. I think the largest majority of them are clueless to what will be in order.
Unlike Althouse, I would encourage them to secede while they still know everything. And once out they cannot return. Citizenship is revoked.
First lets look at the demographics and their political suasion (this is important): from above
- Blacks–40%
- Hispanics–43%
- 18 to 24–40%
- Political liberals–32%
- Conservatives–17%
There are two groups, which I suspect fit in the prior numbers but listed separately:
- Own state respondents–18%
- Southerners–24%
The odds are good that each group has their own ideas as to how and where to form their country. This may cause some discombobulation in some areas for an unknown duration. For the sake of this discussion, all is amicable; selection and agreement is with minimal delay. People leave who wish to and others arrive all done equitably.
Government
With your own country, you need to form a government and some form of document of guidance. This will be by ballot or bullet. Given the liberal’s past history and for that matter most of the world, I’ll let you guess which method forms the ruling body.
Monetary system
Every country needs to have a means of settling internal debts, trade on the world markets and negotiate as something other than a third world nation. Or did these secessionists think they would use Sam’s money? It doesn’t work that way; you are a sovereign nation, act as one. All we have to do is change the color of the currency, declare the old valueless and issue the new in our banks. Don’t be stupid and think the Government hasn’t all ready printed the necessary notes. Those from the military remember MPC’s being changed to shut down black markets overnight.
Infrastructure
Roadways, airports, hospitals and rail lines are in place. All the new country needs is to equip and staff the existing structures and maintain them. Who says the professionals doing this work now are going to stay there. How will they be paid, housed, fed?
Forget keeping the National Guard equipment, guardsmen stay if they wish, but they are no longer paid nor receive any federal benefits if they do. Why should they, now they are foreign troops.
Business and Industry
Whether you have any industry and business depends on the tax structure. The tax structure depends on the country’s monetary system. If you cannot pay the employees in something other than rubles, your industry moves. No industry, what do you trade for things you need?
Basic services
Most of the listed above believe they will get the same basic services they get now: socialized medicine, welfare, WIC, food stamps, public schools Section 8 housing, police, fire and emergency response and working telephones. Yeah, think about that, working phones,
I encourage the above groups to opt for nationhood; pure emotion drives it and it drives it right into the Swamp of Stupidity.
If this should happen, we need to know who occupies what areas. All borders with new nations are fortified like the Korean 38th parallel until and if treaties are negotiated.
(Political liberals)
New England–The Democratic Republic of Gated Communities (Might contain NYC, Long Island and NJ)
Who will mow the lawns and plow the snow, I haven’t an idea. After seeing what happened in South Africa, nobody but the swells will live there. That is all ready graven in liberal stone.
(18 to 24)
Southern CA—High Kingdom of Surf
Dude, like it will be soooo tomorrow and full of tatts.
It will be until we shut off the water for non-payment and shut off the power so they can conserve to their heart’s content.
(Hispanics)
Florida—Sovereign State of Sunny Sombrero
They can mow lawns, pick oranges and smuggle illegals to surfeit.
(Blacks)
Louisiana—Chocklit Empire
With Chief Nagin as the Wonka Man and Jesse “Fillin’ Man” Jackson as Minister of Appointees with Al ‘Mouth’ Sharpton as Minister of Graffiti, a government with portfolio is formed. This former state, having been run by liberals and Donks for years won’t know the difference except there won’t be any money.
(Conservatives)
I haven’t a clue who these individuals are. Guessing says Bible people so
Del Rio, Texas.
If that is wrong, then the panhandle of Idaho. They’ll all fit and you’ll never see them again.
July 27, 2008 at 5:08 pm | Trackback
9 comments
Not that I’m advocating succession (I don’t believe in factionalism) but Vermont is one state that DOES have the right to succeed. It’s entry into the union was predicated on that condition. I’ve been told that this is also true for Texas, though I don’t know if that’s true. Vermont and Texas, however, are the only states in the union that were independent at any point after the United States was formed. (Oh, and Hawaii, which is a different circumstance).
As for the staff for transportation systems - don’t forget that the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Railroad Administration and the Federal Aviation Administration do not actually RUN and maintain the highways, the railroads and the airports (the air traffic control system being an exception) - those professionals are already employed the states. A greater problem how some states are in the way of roads and rail lines that go from one place to another. Of course Canada and the US have that issue (and don’t handle it so well) - to go from Halifax NS to Montreal, the straight route goes through Maine, but the through freight trains go around because the department of homeland security can’t get it together to facilitate reliable freight transport that doesn’t even get unloaded in this country. (which is another argument against succession - the last thing we need is more border crossing delays!!!) Buffalo-Detroit is another example.
Chris. when one talks about forming another country, you’re not going to walk off with movable assets. How many newly formed countries have a military force that can enforce their keeping items that belong to the United States?
Vermont would fall on its collectivist face right after secession. The only money keeping this place afloat is the influx of federal dollars and the earmarks.
These are not states seceding, but a variety of political groups that wish this outcome. What guarantee is there that the overtaken state(s) agrees and is willing to give wholly owned rail rolling stock and transportation items to them or any other state property not purchased outright.
Even if the banks are state chartered the currency used isn’t. That gets exchanged at rates set by the powers with the biggest stick. Who is going to mint coinage and set a value that meets consideration with the world financial community.
Professionals, by definition, get paid for their work. If the new sovereign country cannot meet this obligation, tell me how long they stay and work.
What will exist are new Third World Countries, just add the people.
Unless other cases have arisen to change this, the legality of secession was settled in Texas v. White (1869).
The case involved conditions imposed upon Texas in 1850, governing the disposition of US bonds given to Texas for border claims. The conditions extended from 1850 to 1864; and part of that period fell within Texas’ secession years, during which the state assumed it was no longer bound by the original conditions because it was no longer part of the Union.
A suit arose over the bond dispositions during the Civil War years, and it eventually got to SCOTUS in 1869. The Court held that secession was impossible (and referenced the Articles of Confederation as having create a “perpetual union”) and that The Constitution had created an “indestructible union”.
Texas hadn’t legally left the Union in 1862 and was bound by the bond terms even during the years it believed itself to be a member of the Confederacy.
I think I recall learning that Madison even anticipated the possibility of secession attempts in the 1820’s, and a large body of historical opinion arose around its legality. Today, we’re in a period of creeping authoritarianism and the collectivist demons are loose. Secession is impossible; violence isn’t.
VW:
I would assume that secession, if properly handled would involve a negotiated disposition of assets and liabilities between the parties involved. This assumes that the secession is handled peacefully, like the divorce between the Czechs and the Slovaks.
Hotspur:
You assume that fedgov would naturally fight to keep the recalcitrant states in the Union. I’m not sure that this is a given, if the state or states that are leaving are marginal economically or politically. If there is a conservative administration in DC, cooler heads might look it a positive if some of the more lefty areas are permitted to leave, thus clearing the Congress of idiots like Leahy, Kennedy and their other comrades, making things like tax, spending and regulatory cuts a lot easier.
If it was Mohammed Obamasiah’s Administration…well, it would be the productive, conservative areas of the country that would be looking to leave. Fedgov could not permit that, since the millions of bureaucrats, hack, bruthas and sistahs in the inna shitty depend on all that tax money.
Chairman Mao had the answer to the secession question.
“All change (power) comes out of the barrel of a gun.”
Liberals deal with change peacefully only if it going their way; otherwise it is 1917 again.
That’s an interesting supposition, Bryan. Secession proposed by liberals would be progressive, and the same thing proposed by conservatives would be reactionary.
VW:
That’s what I would presume, given the progs tendencies to view anyone and anything even slightly opposite to their ideology. The difference THIS time is that given the relative state of armed preparedness, it would be mostly their side that would be getting two in the hat.
Hotspur:
Of course, I’d give that new progressive government no more than about 6 months before they “discover” the need to set up their own KGB and chain of internment camps.
Bryan, very racist of you having the “whites” not the “reds” winning.
VW:
Yeah, that’s me a bitter, mean-spirited racist type clinging to my guns and religion.
As to which side wins, I’m all for a reasonable partition…we keep all the land; all the progs get deported to North Korea after we win. I’m sure that their Great Benevolent Kim Jong-Il will share the bounteous weath that is North Korea.