Partition in Scotland

From the Guardian

I would not lose any sleep if the Scots voted to repeal the 1707 act. Independence need not end the United Kingdom: Scotland and England shared a monarch before 1707, as Britain and Canada do today. Separation need be no more radical than the partial autonomy of a dozen European countries from their neighbours. Borders were not sealed or passports cancelled under the Government of Ireland Act 1920. If eastern Europe can handle partition, so can Britain.

The phased withdrawal of the subvention would be traumatic, but it would do Scotland nothing but good to learn that public money does not grow on English trees. If economic history teaches anything, it is that huge inflows of aid rot an economy, while "unearned" wealth, as from oil, is usually wasted. The phased end of the subsidy would be thoroughly good for Scotland, not bad.

Partition is the new politics, despite being the hobgoblin of centralism. It is through partition that Ireland is booming, Slovakia reviving and the Baltic states prospering. The British government is in favour of it for everyone else, even forcing it on the former Yugoslavia and Iraq/Kurdistan. This year it welcomed Montenegro to Europe's community. By what hypocrisy do Westminster grandees ridicule Scotland's ambition?

Big federal states were fine when governments were small and unobtrusive. Today's governments are elephantine and unresponsive to local sentiment. That is why Spain, France and Italy have all opted for constitutional devolution in the past two decades, fending off separatist pressure. Anti-federalism is why European public opinion revolted against Brussels last year, and why there is no more talk of a Scandinavian union. As for size being crucial to viability, this is corporatist rubbish. If Denmark is viable, why not Scotland?

All such considerations must anyway bow before self-determination. If the Scots want to repeal the 1707 act (as some Britons want to repeal the European Union's treaties), the British cannot deny it. The story of the past quarter-century is that states enjoy no legitimacy without the consent of their territorial minorities. Britain went to war for this principle in Kosovo.

The Burlington Declaration

FIRST-EVER NORTH AMERICAN SECESSIONIST CONVENTION A SUCCESS MEETING BRINGS MORE THAN 40 SECESSIONISTS FROM ALL OVER THE COUNTRY TO BURLINGTON, VERMONT

November 8, 2006

The first North American Secessionist Convention was held in Vermont last week-end [November 3-5, 2006] and attracted more than three dozen people from groups actively working for secession from the United States.

The gathering, sponsored by the Middlebury Institute (http://www.middleburyinstitute.net - "for the study of separatism, secession, and self-determination"), drew 43 people, with delegatesfrom 16 secessionist organizations in 18 states, including Hawaii, Alaska, Cascadia, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, andNew Hampshire.

The convention issued a document outlining its basic points of agreement at the end of the meeting. The Burlington Declaration stated:

We, the participants in the First North American Secessionist Convention, though representing many different and diverse groups and constituencies, agree on the following principles as representing the truths of natural law and historical experience:

1. Any political entity has the right to separate itself from a larger body of which it is a part and peaceably to establish its independence as a free and legitimate state in the eyes of the world.

2. Governments are instituted among peoples, deriving their just powers from the consent of their citizens, and whenever any form of government becomes destructive of the legitimate goals of life, liberty, prosperity, and self-determination, it is the right of the people in democratic fashion to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

3. Any government formed by and dependent upon a constitution to regulate its actions and affairs has certain legitimate powers delegated to it, but any powers not so delegated are reserved to the people of that state and their democratically chosen political bodies.

4. Nations once independent should engage in peace, commerce, good will, and honest friendship with all nations, and observe good faith, justice, and harmony toward all, but establish entangling relationships with none, nor engage in colonial dominance, political or economic, over any.

5. Direct democracy, with one vote for each and every citizen (as the polity shall designate citizenship), has proven to be a desirable form of governance among people, but it can operate with justice and equality only when at a small enough scale that each person may be known to every other person; when representative forms of government are undertaken, they should likewise best be established at a scale small enough so that each representative can be informed of the opinions and beliefs of the general run of the people in the constituency or community which that person is chosen to represent.

It is within this body of principles that we ask all governments to operate and it is by them that we ourselves, individually and the organizations we represent, intend to be guided.

Burlington, Vermont
November 4, 2006

Scots Want Independence From Britian

Mike Tuggle discusses a recent poll that indicates that a majority of Scots desire independence from Britian.

Peoples who have in the past been forced into submission and denied their right of self-determination are increasiingly re-asserting their identity and fundamental right to preserve their culture.

North American Secessionist Convention

Kirkpatrick Sale, Founder of the Middlebury Institute, wrote an excellent article in Counter Punch discussing the upcoming Secessionist Convention and Secession in general. (link via Dru)

Carol Moore discusses the convention here.

Lara DeLuz argues for Cascadian secession.

One thing you can do to support this effort is sign the Declaration of States' Rights petition. Not all secessionist agree that the concept of nation-states has any role in modern secession talk (primarily libertarian theorist) however a significant number of others do believe states have a role and retain sovereignty.

Regardless of which side of that philosophical fence you find yourself on one thing is clear - the nation-state does exist and our home states are agents of our will. A resurgence in states' rights would be a key step toward achieving a more decentralized form of government and would very possibly open the door to peaceful secession. Once that is accomplished those that advocate a nation-state model or the libertarian community based model can figure out how and if decentralization should continue in their home.

The American Secession Project plans to present the petition with signatures to the Middlebury Institute prior to the convention - as a measure of support for the cause, our small contribution.

Pass the word around, sign the petition, there are still a few days remaining.

Secession in South Carolina must be peaceful

Christian Exodus occasionally hears from respondents that secession from the Union is "insane." Well, Independence from the other States in the union is only "insane" when coupled with an assumption that it would be violently attained. This is of course the very first conclusion uninformed Americans make when they hear the word "secession". A State declaring independence today would be entirely different than in 1776, because a global public relations campaign would need to succeed. Let's look at how it'd play out: if South Carolinians voted for independence at the ballot box, the case would then have to be made in international discourse that our vote is just as sovereign as any other people's vote, and a demand would be made that Washington and the United Nations recognize that fact. Should they recognize it, the vote would stand. Should they deny recognition and send in troops to disband our government then the world would witness Washington's tyranny and we would suffer the trouble of occupation, but at the very next opportunity we should vote for independence again, and again, and again, continually demanding freedom and notifying the world that the "land of the free" aint so free. Until eventually the other States of the involuntary union cannot stomach their own hypocrisy and finally acquiesce and let "freedom ring." That's the peaceful path to independence if ever required. No weapon would ever be used except the ballot box.

South Carolina could never forcefully demand independence with military use - that would be "insane."

Candidate for California Governor Supports Secession

For Elisha Shapiro, it’s the answer to all of California’s problems. Shapiro, 52, is running as a write-in candidate for governor under the Nihilist Party. And contrary to popular knowledge, he does believe in at least one thing very strongly: secession. As in, secession from the union.

Secession For Hawaiians

Senator Akaka's bill basically sets up a scenario that would allow Hawaii, or at least portions of it, to secede from the American union. Now I know some might start to fret over this idea, but let's think about this for a minute. What was the Declaration of Independence but a document justifying the right of secession of the separate American colonies from the British Empire? In truth, didn't the states, acting individually, secede from the Articles of Confederation, and over a period of several years accede to the union under the U.S. Constitution? (Not many think about this, but it's true.) What about this being "the land of the free?" The founders insisted on protecting the right of property, because they believed that if a person didn't have the right to own property, and to be secure in their ownership of that property, they weren't truly free. With that in mind, wouldn't the native Hawaiians have a right to take their property and "leave the party" if they weren't "having fun" any more? Read all of Jeff Adams piece

California Secessionist Blog

California Secession Blog

Partition in Iraq

Good commentary from Mike Tuggle:

Iraq IS a multicultural nation, which is why the Neocons have resisted partition for so long, just as the US resisted partition as a solution in that unfortunate multicultural experiment in the Balkans called Bosnia—even to this day, UN troops are the only thing preventing a resumption of inter-ethnic conflict.

Three Autonomous Regions in Iraq?

The Sunday Times

An independent commission set up by Congress with the approval of President George W Bush may recommend carving up Iraq into three highly autonomous regions, according to well informed sources.

Amazing, smart folks have said for three years that this is the only viable solution - just now the clowns in charge are beginning to consider this option.

Well if regional autonomy is found to be good for Iraq why not here in the US too?

Technorati tags: Iraq, autonomy, secession

Iraqi Kurds raise secession threat over oil

"ARBIL, Iraq, Sept 27 (Reuters) - Iraq's Kurdish regional government raised the threat of secession on Wednesday if the Baghdad government did not drop its claims to a say in the development of oil resources in their northern districts."

Tools

New feed

More folks getting the word out

Rebellion: "Modern-Day Secessionists Will Hold a Conference on Leaving the Union"

The New York Sun

September 27, 2oo6: "Here come the new Green Mountain Boys. The Middlebury Institute, a think tank devoted to the study of separatism, secession, and self-determination, is planning the First North American Secessionist Convention in Burlington, Vt."

Secession -- a Revolutionary Idea

"WINDSOR, Vt. - This is prime country-fair season, when villages roll out moon-sized pumpkins, maple-flavored everything and, here at Heritage Days, a manifesto on why Vermont should secede from the United States."

Just the Facts

The 14th Amendment revealed

Tariffs = Bad Policy

UT Diary

"We pay our military to fight Islamofacism, and we pay the Middle East to
fund terrorism. How we can stop terrorism and dictatorships: stop buying oil."

This is in response to an OP/ED by Thomas Friedman. He makes a good argument that libertarians and paleoconservatives understand - tariffs are a BAD thing.

We Agree

Hammer of Truth

"Who knows? Maybe when my children are grown up and posting articles on
their own blogs, secession will be a major issue and a realistic possibility.
Maybe not, but we can hope."

Bosnian Serb Leader Advocates Independence

News Roundup: "BELGRADE, Serbia, Sept. 4 (UPI) -- A Bosnian Serb leader Monday said the secession of Serb-run Bosnia from Bosnia-Herzegovina is inevitable in the long term."

Kurds wave secession threat in Iraq flag row

"ARBIL, Iraq, Sept 3 (Reuters) - The leader of Iraq's ethnic Kurds brandished the threat of secession on Sunday as a row with the Baghdad government over the flying of the Iraqi national flag exposed an increasingly bitter rift."

Pro-secession Blog

"If the right of secession be denied... and the denial enforced the sword of coercion the nature of the polity is charged and freedom is at the end. It is no longer governement by consent, but a governement of force. Conquest is substituted for compact and the dream of liberty is over.
-Albert Taylor Bledson "

Kudos to a young lass from GA with the right stuff.

www.foodpoisonblog.com

http://www.foodpoisonblog.com/Archives/004715.html: "I thought Republicans were in favor of 'states' rights'"

Here is an interesting article that describes yet another way that states' rights are violated and federal power increased, in this case by folks that give lip service to reducing the size and scope of the Federal government.

Hawaii and the S word

I was corrected a few months back by a Hawaiian nationalist who informed me that secession was the wrong word to apply to Hawaii. However reading this document from 2003 it was apparently used then.

Is the document below correct? Someone please post corrections if this is not.

"The Kingdom of Hawaii Nou Ke Akua Ke Aupuni O Hawaii
Announces Secession From the United States of America
Declaration of Independence - Kanaka eleu, Imua!

The Kanaka Maolis, Hawaiis stout-hearted, honorable indigenous people, have never recognized the jurisdiction of the United States over our lives, lands, seas, customs, and our fortunes. Many Kanaka Maolis have been destroyed attempting to free themselves from the cruelty and the injustices of an American government that cares nothing for the rights of the indigenous people of Hawaii, but only for the richness of the lands and seas and Hawaiis strategic military potential. Many Kanaka Maolis have been molested, raped, beaten, imprisoned, and murdered in the furtherance of American imperialism. Yet we live.

We, as with the many Peoples of Oceania with whom we share a common heritage, feel it is eminently indisputable, based upon all evidences extant, that the unlawful overthrow of the kingdom of Hawaii and the forcing of the Kanaka Maolis into servitude cannot be denied.

Historical records, particularly those concerning biography and genealogy, document a general consensus affirming Hawaiis independence. Tradition, history, literary analysis, and, above all of these, the test of prayerful research and truth-seeking investigation unite to demonstrate the authenticity of the facts proving that the kingdom of Hawaii was destroyed by the United States government.
The culture of the United States is inimical to our ancestral traditions and customs. For nearly 2,000 years we determined our lives under the laws of our kingdom and by the sanctity of our lands, but the United States imposed its will on us through deceit, fraud, theft, conspiracy, and military force.

We, the indigenous peoples of Hawaii, emphatically reject incorporation into the United States of America, and hereby announce secession. We do this with clarity of mind, good conscience, and a determined will. We are ready to sacrifice our worldly assets and our very lives to see the kingdom of Hawaii restored. So say we all.

May Almighty Gods will be done. Aeia Ke Akua Mano Loa Kauoha hana, hooko."

When the Federal Government Attacks Part IV

"What is wrong with the Federal Government and why does it keep attacking our state? First it kept warning us to stop encouraging citizens to purchase prescription drugs from Canada. Then Congressmen Mark Green and F. James Sensenbrenner sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Justice asking them to check into a policy by the State Elections Board, an action that led to the threats of the Feds filing a lawsuit against Wisconsin. Still yet, during a recent visit by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Wisconsin's far superior SeniorCare is being threatened by the big Federal Government Medicare prescription drug plan. "

This occurs all over....

Silicon Valley Watcher--Tom Foremski on the business and culture of innovation

"It essentially says that the Justice Dept. can step in at any time and say that any crime against any local agency that receives any federal funds - and the Dept. of Homeland Security has been littering the country with antiterrorism funds"

Interesting piece that describes yet another Federal government tactic to usurp power.

Daily Express, Sabah, Malaysia

"Kuching: Sarawak Barisan Nasional (BN) Youth Movement has demanded punitive action against Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Assemblyman Dominique Ng Kim Ho for a treasonous act of calling on Sarawak to withdraw from the Federation of Malaysia at the State Legislative Assembly sitting on Wednesday." Read More....

Too Late for Empire - by Jonathan Schell and Tom Engelhardt

"these claims would fundamentally alter the structure of the American government, upsetting the system of checks and balances and nullifying fundamental liberties, including Fourth Amendment guarantees against unreasonable searches and seizures and guarantees of due process. As such, they embody apparent failures of the president to carry out his oath to 'preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States'" Read More....

Act heralds a new dawn for devolution

"WELSH secretary Peter Hain and first minister Rhodri Morgan were last night celebrating Royal Assent for new powers for the Assembly.

Mr Hain said the Government of Wales Act would now 'endure for a generation or more'.
'It will enable the Assembly to deliver tailor-made policies for the people of Wales,' he added.

Mr Morgan said the new Act heralded a 'new dawn for devolution'. " Read More...

Education reform and states' rights - Homeland Stupidity

"For Utah, it isn't about specifics of the act or Utah's ability to meet the demands of federal standards. It is about states' rights to determine their own educational standards and strive for their goals, free from federal interference. This sentiment has a bit of history in Utah. Last year, the state came close to opting out of the act, turning away $116 million in federal funding." Read More...

Kosovo independence could lead to secession, warn Serbs

"As Kosovo status talks were to resume at the highest level today, Serbs in the north of the province warned this region along the border with Serbia proper would secede if independence was granted to Pristina. "

Conch Republic Celebration

"Its fiercely independent residents declared Key West to be in the mythical Conch Republic a couple of decades ago, post traumatic Keys road block incidents, which would be a secession from the US of A -- that should give you some idea what life just past the tourist curtain can be like"

Celebrating Secession in CA

"Approximately 150 people could be seen milling about the picnic tables and arts and crafts booths surrounding the old fire station and community center as locals and visitors celebrated the town's secession from the union in 1850."

Majority of Bosnian Serbs back secession - poll

"BANJA LUKA, Bosnia, July 5 (Reuters) - A majority of Bosnian Serbs support secession from Bosnia if Serbia's U.N.-run province of Kosovo was granted independence, a poll published in a Bosnian Serb newspaper on Wednesday showed"

Nigeria: Secession

Nevis Secession

"Former premier says secession not a dead issue"

Is There Justification For Secession Rights?A Case Study of the Kurds

Serbian Secession

Secession Meeting Turns Nasty

Even cities can be tyranical

Senate to consider letting Hawaiians pursue sovereignty�-�Nation/Politics�-�The Washington Times, America's Newspaper

For one the Senate does not "own" the sovereignty of Hawai'ians or any one else. But it is nice of them to think of being so gracious.

New Hampshire Independence Movement

"From Caleb Johnson and the Republic of New Hampshire Board:This is to inform you of the launch of our website representing the New Hampshire Independence Movement. We look forward to working with our neighbors in Vermont to establish true freedom in our lifetime."

Poll Shows Vermont Independence Movement Leads the Nation | Second Vermont Republic

"The 2006 Vermonter Poll recently conducted by the Center for Rural Studies of the University of Vermont indicates that the percentage of eligible Vermont voters who favor secession from the United States of America could very well be the highest in the nation."

Tibetan Monk Faces Eight Years for Separatism

RFA: Tibetan Monk Faces Eight Years for Separatism: "Tibetan Monk Faces Eight Years for Separatism"

Article in CSM

I missed this one, it is a pretty fair treatment of current secession trends in the US.

Defending the Declaration of Independence from David Barton

David Barton, usually a soldier for correct historical representation, recently attacked the sovereignty of the States and the right of Americans to change their form of government. Although his column correctly praised some valiant men who fought courageously, it began with terrible falsehoods about American history. I wrote him a letter to set the record straight and am making it available to our website readers so that the truth may stand in opposition to lies. The letter follows.

Dear Mr. Barton,

I recently read your column entitled "The Civil War: Honoring Courageous Soldiers." I've long been a believer in the work of Wallbuilders, but that column began as an offensive piece of propaganda.

First let me say I am adamantly opposed to racism and consider slavery to be the second greatest of all American evils; abortion being our greatest national sin. Also, I'm inspired by the courage of Christian black men on both sides of the War Between the States (you chose only to highlight those of the aggressor nation). But I'm upset by your irresponsible statement that "Numerous Founding Fathers – including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Quincy Adams, and others – had previously rejected any so-called 'right' of secession." Are you ignorant on this subject or are you purposely promoting a centralist agenda? You know historical quotes better than I, but here are several acknowledging the "right" of secession:

- "If any State in the Union will declare that it prefers separation with the first alternative to a continuance in union without it, I have no hesitation in saying 'let us separate.' I would rather the States should withdraw which are for unlimited commerce and war, and confederate with those alone which are for peace and agriculture." --Thomas Jefferson to William H. Crawford, 1816

- "Can any reasonable man be well disposed towards a government which makes war and carnage the only means of supporting itself -- a government that can exist only by the sword?" Alexander Hamilton, 1788

- "Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable - a most sacred right - a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world." Abraham Lincoln, in Congress January 12, 1848

- "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — 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." Declaration of Independence, 1776

So let's review. Thomas Jefferson specifically acknowledged the right of secession as late as 1816. Alexander Hamilton, the ardent centralist that he was, rebuked any government that would wield the sword in order to maintain its existence; and yet that’s exactly what the Lincoln administration did in 1861, and you praised them for it. Yet in 1848, Congressman Abraham Lincoln himself blatantly defended this "right" of secession. But to top it all off we need look no further than our nation’s birth certificate, America’s creation document, the Declaration of Independence, which unequivocally establishes the right of any people to secede. Indeed, the American colonies seceded from the British Empire.

To add insult to injury you stated, "[Daniel] Webster eloquently proved that there was no such right under the Constitution and that to secede would be an act of treason." I've seen Webster's so-called "proof" and it's nothing but retarded fiction. The entire basis for his argument was the absurd claim that the Union created the States. What alternative universe was he living in? A public school sophomore, or 3rd grade homeschooler, can identify the plain historical and undeniable fact that the States voluntarily created the Union.

Furthermore, the accusation of treason is too frequently and lightly levied today and does not pertain to an act of secession. The U.S. Constitution defines treason as, "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." Treason must involve "levying war," "adhering to enemies," or "giving aid and comfort" to said enemies. You said that "to secede would be an act of treason." Secession is a peaceful change in government by vote of the governed people. It does not involve "war" or "enemies" of any sort. As proof, seven States peacefully seceded by February of 1861 and formed another union, a separate sovereign nation. They were independent in this union for two months before attempting to expel a belligerent foreign nation from their soil (sounds very similar to some of the reasons the U.S. went to war with Britain in 1812) at Fort Sumter. This foreign nation, the United States, then chose to raise an army and invade the C.S.A. in an attempt to conquer and subjugate it. It was the U.S. that sought a war of aggression against an otherwise peaceful and independent nation to the South. The point being that secession itself is peaceful and therefore cannot possibly be treasonous. Force is never used to secede, but is always used to conquer (prevent secession) after the people seceding have peacefully spoken. In other words, force is always initiated by the opponents of self-determination, not the secessionists.

Lastly, I'll give you the exact texts that declare the rights of States to leave the union:

- "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 U.S. Constitution, June 26, 1788, accepted as lawful ratification

- "That the Powers of Government may be resumed by the People [of New York], whensoever it shall become necessary to their Happiness;" New York ratification of the U.S. Constitution, July 26, 1788, accepted as lawful ratification

- "That the powers of government may be resumed by the people [of Rhode Island], whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness:" Rhode Island ratification of the U.S. Constitution, May 29, 1790, accepted as lawful ratification

- "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Again, let's review. Virginia, New York and Rhode Island (two northern States by the way) all reserved the right to leave the union when they ratified the U.S. Constitution. Their ratifications were accepted in entirety. And to further solidify the right of a State to leave the union we can point directly to text in the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution does not delegate power to the general government to coerce a member of the union with force of arms. Furthermore, the Constitution does not prohibit a State from leaving the union. Therefore, the right to leave the union is reserved to the States, and the federal government cannot invade it with troops to prevent such exercise of sovereignty.

There are a number of debatable subjects regarding American government. However, the right of a State to leave this voluntary union is not one of them. The existence of this "right" is indisputable. Every historical event in our nation's founding points to this truth.

Sincerely,
Cory R. Burnell, MBA