How we can SECEDE from the Union!!

[Nate K]

It's really not that hard, if you focus on what would need to be done in order for this to happen, it's very doable.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is how I'm pretty sure it works..

There is the State House and the State Senate, just like in the National Congress. Each state has a different amount of representatives and senators, that to my knowledge is NOT based on population.

If we control both sides and agree to secede from the Union, what's stopping us? Will America go to war? If enough states do so, I highly doubt it!

Now if my theory is correct, we ought to use some strategy here, and look at the number of representatives and senators in each state that would enable us to get the most in! Now what would be better for us, a state with a large General Assembly based on population or a smaller one?

Here are some key states I think we should focus on (especially Texas) and their General Assembly number:

New Hampshire: 24 in the Senate and 400 in the House. Population: est. 1.4 million

Vermont: 30 in the Senate and 150 in the House. Population: est. 650,000

Texas: 31 in the Senate and 150 in the House. Population:24 million

Montana: 50 in the Senate and 100 in the House. Population: 1 million.

Have another state in mind? Post it and I'll look it up. I'm getting this info from the 2008 Almanac.

What does this mean for you? Well this all means start preparing for state government!! State government at this point, if you look at it from this angle, much more powerful than federal. Are you interested in politics? Do you feel that you could serve your constituents? Are you a well enough speaker for the job? If you answer any of these with a yes, YOU SHOULD RUN FOR AT LEAST STATE HOUSE. If you are well qualified (ex. Master's Degree, great speaker, etc.) you should run for State Senate.

Are you not interested enough in politics or that field of study? That's ok too!! You can donate to the people running in your state, which is just as important!

Let's use an example here for Texas (a state we should all focus on).. A representative for Texas serves approx. 160,000 people. (24,000,000/ 150) That means you would need to have decent funds/ donors in that state to win, my guess is around 100-150k.

However!, in New Hampshire a state representative serves 3, 500 people!! (1,400,000/ 400). You would need little funds to win that state!


So why secede in the first place?

Because it may just be a whole lot simpler concentrating our efforts in a few states or even one state, rather than trying to focus on the corruption of the whole country! PLUS, this is a plan that is not expected by the elites, this will have them on their toes, and trust me, with enough planning done quickly, we could pull this off.

So what should you do now?? Start sharing ideas in this thread and come up with ideas of your own!!

[nate895]

No, you need to call a convention, because a convention ratified the Constitution, and therefore only they can rescind ratification, and there would be a debate, and we would have to get secessionist to become delegates to the convention. I encourage you to read A Constitutional History of Secession by John Remington Graham if you wish to learn more.

[silverhandorder]

We can win our country back to the law of the land.

I am not thinking about this yet until they have SS Troopers reinforcing Martial Law.

[danberkeley]

once we secede, all we need is guns to protect ourselves from
the federal government. ooops, too late. at least obama will
keep me safe from the boogey men using his rhetoric.

[PopeDonzel]

Secede from the Union FTL

[Nate K]

We can win our country back to the law of the land.

I am not thinking about this yet until they have SS Troopers reinforcing Martial Law.

While I agree, I think it is equally important to take over the state legislation NOW rather than later, where we risk losing MORE of our freedom as time goes by!

[silverhandorder]

While I agree, I think it is equally important to take over the state legislation NOW rather than later, where we risk losing MORE of our freedom as time goes by!

I agree with you too :p. I see a lot of people from my meet up mobilizing with in the party here in NYC. So I am confident in New Yorkers.

[Nate K]

I agree with you too :p. I see a lot of people from my meet up mobilizing with in the party here in NYC. So I am confident in New Yorkers.

That's good to hear. One way or another, we need to take over the Republican party whether it is state-wide or nation-wide.

I haven't lost my ambition to fund every Libertarian who will strategically grant the most freedom and I will be working double hard on getting people more educated and out there to be funded!

[virginiakid]

While I agree, I think it is equally important to take over the state legislation NOW rather than later, where we risk losing MORE of our freedom as time goes by!

The state government is where it is at. Get enough delegates, senators and even a governor who are willing to stand up for their states rights according to the constitution then you can easily bring the federal government back into submission and make it follow its own constitution that it made with the people and the states.

[UnReconstructed]

You must have forgotten this was already tried without success.

[nate895]

You must have forgotten this was already tried without success.

I understand, and I also understand that if the US attacks a seceding state, they will be cut off from the rest of the world.

[Nate K]

Who will help me make a website dedicated to getting in state government?

Is anyone computer savvy? I need some help!

[Nate K]

I understand, and I also understand that if the US attacks a seceding state, they will be cut off from the rest of the world.

Bingo, the feds are in NO condition to take arms against us!!

Think like they do.. they are already planning wars with various other countries, they NEED Canada to help with manpower, do you really think they'd want to turn this into a war?

If everyone on this forum were to focus on this and start working on it, we could turn this situation around and have the elites by their balls! I guarantee it.

[virginiakid]

BTW, I think Vermont has a secessionist party. I know the south had one a couple of years ago, but I guess they died out. I bet Montana has one. I know in Canada, Quebec was given the right to secede from Canada, but they chose not to. And in the Western Provinces there are secessionist movements taking place there as well.

Secession can be done, it would take years of teaching people and you must have the right conditions to do it. Are we there yet? I bet we are getting close. But you can be sure that the federal government will make war with any state to beat it and its people back into submission like it did against the southern states during the WBTS.

[nate895]

BTW, I think Vermont has a secessionist party. I know the south had one a couple of years ago, but I guess they died out. I bet Montana has one. I know in Canada, Quebec was given the right to secede from Canada, but they chose not to. And in the Western Provinces there are secessionist movements taking place there as well.

Secession can be done, it would take years of teaching people and you must have the right conditions to do it. Are we there yet? I bet we are getting close. But you can be sure that the federal government will make war with any state to beat it and its people back into submission like it did against the southern states during the WBTS.

The South still has one, and they are allied with those in Vermont. Most of the efforts have been abandoned for the Ron Paul campaign in the South.

[ronpaulforpresident]

Yeah we can be like Kosovo!

[nate895]

Yeah we can be like Kosovo!

Except for without the EU and NATO crap.

[Nate K]

There's already a secessionist movement in Vermont?!? Why aren't we focusing on that state!?

[nate895]

There's already a secessionist movement in Vermont?!? Why aren't we focusing on that state!?

The secessionist movement is more like Dennis Kucinich than Ron Paul.

[ladyliberty3]

What I wonder about is this: How many states get some of their water from other states and is the Fed involved? Do states have their own elec. grid or is it all connected and the Fed involved? What about US Highways that run through all states? What about the national guard in each of those states? What about military bases? and on it goes???????

[Nate K]

What I wonder about is this: How many states get some of their water from other states and is the Fed involved? Do states have their own elec. grid or is it all connected and the Fed involved? What about US Highways that run through all states? What about the national guard in each of those states? What about military bases? and on it goes???????

Those are good questions that we ought to find out through the journey!

[TNforPaul45]

The individual state legislatures can vote and pass Secession legislation if they wish (is how they did it the first time)....

But breaking The Union is not the answer, and on this point I agree with Pres. Lincoln. The Sum is greater than the Parts.

The issues we face, are not issues that can effectively be resolved through a breaking of our Union. We can clean out Washington and still keep the States together. Let's focus our energies on building up a third party alternative and take over the congress through votes not bullets.

TN.

[virginiakid]

Secession movements are unpopular because people have been trained to think that secession is evil and unconstitutional. They totally forget that it was the American Colonies who seceded from the British Crown. It is apparent it the Declaration of Independence and it is reserved to the states because of the 9th and 10th Amendments.

Just be ready to be taken as kooks(not like RP supporters aren't look upon that way already), remember that the elite, those who are in power will do anything to stay in power.

[nate895]

What I wonder about is this: How many states get some of their water from other states and is the Fed involved? Do states have their own elec. grid or is it all connected and the Fed involved? What about US Highways that run through all states? What about the national guard in each of those states? What about military bases? and on it goes???????

Well, the power grid is on a regional basis, NE, SE, MW, NW, CA and AK, and HW are the only states to get their own I think. That would be a problem if seceding without aid of other states in the region, that is probably why the South would be best for this kind of movement (hey, they have done it before). The US highways wouldn't be much of a problem, the national guard is controlled directly by the states' governor, so that isn't much of a problem (unless you have a neocon/lib general).

Military bases would be a huge problem in a standoff, but most have minimal amounts of men, and so would surrender pretty quick if the militia was called forth in the states seceding. If you were in the South and secede, Fort Bragg in NC, Fort Knox in KY, Fort Benning in GA, and Norfolk Naval Station would be huge barriers.

Another huge problem in a possible war, is the lack of an Air Force, and of a Navy, and there is only one way to remedy that in a standoff situation.

[Nate K]

The individual state legislatures can vote and pass Secession legislation if they wish (is how they did it the first time)....

But breaking The Union is not the answer, and on this point I agree with Pres. Lincoln. The Sum is greater than the Parts.

The issues we face, are not issues that can effectively be resolved through a breaking of our Union. We can clean out Washington and still keep the States together. Let's focus our energies on building up a third party alternative and take over the congress through votes not bullets.

TN.

Like I said before, I agree, but consider this:

- The feds will be held at a major disadvantage if they see even the threat of secession, making a national change more advantageous.

- It is also a good preparation just in case things get out of control in the country, better to have the state government locked down before hand.

Ultimately, we can do both, by using the threat of one, it can amplify the result of the other.

[virginiakid]

The individual state legislatures can vote and pass Secession legislation if they wish (is how they did it the first time)....

But breaking The Union is not the answer, and on this point I agree with Pres. Lincoln. The Sum is greater than the Parts.

The issues we face, are not issues that can effectively be resolved through a breaking of our Union. We can clean out Washington and still keep the States together. Let's focus our energies on building up a third party alternative and take over the congress through votes not bullets.

TN.

The states can regain their constitutional power and rights for them and their people if they just got the backbone to stand up for what is right. Our state governments have turned into a bunch of wimps and cowards who are afraid to shake things up a little.

[nate895]

Secession movements are unpopular because people have been trained to think that secession is evil and unconstitutional. They totally forget that it was the American Colonies who seceded from the British Crown. It is apparent it the Declaration of Independence and it is reserved to the states because of the 9th and 10th Amendments.

Just be ready to be taken as kooks(not like RP supporters aren't look upon that way already), remember that the elite, those who are in power will do anything to stay in power.

All we would need to do is to convince the people they would be better off, and if the USA were to be split between regions, there is no question that they would be better off.

[abe447]

All we would need to do is to convince the people they would be better off, and if the USA were to be split between regions, there is no question that they would be better off.

And defeat the U.S. Army which will try and hold the union together. It probably would make sense to be split into regions. NE, West Coast, Upper midwest, South central/east. Maybe a couple more regions than that. But united we stand, divided we fall. A house divided against itself cannot stand. United States of America, not divided states of America. Blah blah blah.

[LibertiORDeth]

You must have forgotten this was already tried without success.

Precisely. Come on people this won't work, the only feasible option is Liberty Island.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=122743

[nate895]

And defeat the U.S. Army which will try and hold the union together. It probably would make sense to be split into regions. NE, West Coast, Upper midwest, South central/east. Maybe a couple more regions than that. But united we stand, divided we fall. A house divided against itself cannot stand. United States of America, not divided states of America. Blah blah blah.

The US Army is stationed overseas and has less than 500,000 men in it, the State of California alone would be able to take on the US Army, especially since it would be coming at it piecemeal.

[LibertiORDeth]

The US Army is stationed overseas and has less than 500,000 men in it, the State of California alone would be able to take on the US Army, especially since it would be coming at it piecemeal.

Still, your army of 1k soldiers...

[nate895]

Still, your army of 1k soldiers...

If you could convince enough people, otherwise this venture is worthless.

[abe447]

Nate, if there was trouble at home they'd come back. It wouldn't be that easy to defeat them being that they would have all kinds of machinery and weaponry that we don't have access to. They'd slaughter us and we'd lose rather quickly. This ain't the 1860s. But it's never gonna happen so it's kind of useless to argue about.

[Nate K]

Well for anyone who is interested in this idea, keep in contact with me.. I will need your help very soon. I already have a website address bought and a strategy plan in place. The process will take awhile and the site should be finished around the end of May. I want this done before the march to unify people even more..

If you want to help in the project, my AIM sn is CelGos. I suggest you download AIM if you don't already have it, it's simple.

And no, I will not be waiting for "another organization" to pop up. I am not compromising my ideas the least. HOWEVER, if these ideas are not liked among this crowd, I'll settle for another one if it stands for everything I do.

If you..

-Believe that this campaign is part of something much much bigger
-Want America to be transformed into EVERYTHING Paul stands for
-Support a secession if the former is not reached
-Want things to be organized soon and in a professional manner..

then you stand for everything I do.

[nate895]

Nate, if there was trouble at home they'd come back. It wouldn't be that easy to defeat them being that they would have all kinds of machinery and weaponry that we don't have access to. They'd slaughter us and we'd lose rather quickly. This ain't the 1860s. But it's never gonna happen so it's kind of useless to argue about.

They would come home, that is true (though many might have mixed loyalties, considering nearly 1/2 of the army is Southern), but it would come home piecemeal, and if you look at my post, this would have to involve preemptive strikes if the Feds meant war, and I would say 100,000 well trained men would able to accomplish what would need to be done.

[Nate K]

Some of you are forgetting, the tactics which are used in war..

I don't like to talk on issues such as war against one's on country, but this is what each side has..

The Feds have..

An organized: Army, Navy and Airforce. However, they wouldn't use most of it because our forces would be mixed in with the general population!!

What we would have and use..

A large, scattered militia throughout the country, much like in the first Revolution (farmers with pitchforks).. It would be guerrilla warfare and they would not be able to take the blows we would give.

If you fear the Feds power, you should leave this forum right now. You've already compromised a Libertarian principle.

[virginiakid]

They would come home, that is true (though many might have mixed loyalties, considering nearly 1/2 of the army is Southern), but it would come home piecemeal, and if you look at my post, this would have to involve preemptive strikes if the Feds meant war, and I would say 100,000 well trained men would able to accomplish what would need to be done.

The majority of them would side with their state, I am pretty sure of it. It would be very hard to fight against your own state, your friends, family, etc....

[nate895]

Some of you are forgetting, the tactics which are used in war..

I don't like to talk on issues such as war against one's on country, but this is what each side has..

The Feds have..

An organized: Army, Navy and Airforce. However, they wouldn't use most of it because our forces would be mixed in with the general population!!

What we would have and use..

A large, scattered militia throughout the country, much like in the first Revolution (farmers with pitchforks).. It would be guerrilla warfare and they would not be able to take the blows we would give.

If you fear the Feds power, you should leave this forum right now. You've already compromised a Libertarian principle.

Because of the national guard system, the states each have their own miniature armies, admittedly, nothing that on their own, could stand up to the might of the US Military, but a combined effort with multiple states striking hard and fast in one area would be able to delay for long enough the ability of the US Military to get organized (96 hours, or the opponent of the US Military is doomed) for the side of liberty to be able to train enough men to be able to force the Feds to capitulate. A guerrilla war is something no one would want to see, as that would mean the utter destruction of the United States, and possibly total economic ruin, enough to put the US in a third world status, it would have to be done conventionally.

The Israelis have a motto for what would need to be done: Strike first, strike hard, strike deep.

[nate895]

The majority of them would side with their state, I am pretty sure of it. It would be very hard to fight against your own state, your friends, family, etc....

And imagine coming home to your family after burning through the home of friends, it would not be a happy homecoming, that is for sure.

[LibertiORDeth]

If you could convince enough people, otherwise this venture is worthless.

With the capability of the US military, it would take probably 10 of your soldiers to beat one US soldier, (partly because of equipment, weapons, vehicles, etc.).

[LibertiORDeth]

Because of the national guard system, the states each have their own miniature armies, admittedly, nothing that on their own, could stand up to the might of the US Military, but a combined effort with multiple states striking hard and fast in one area would be able to delay for long enough the ability of the US Military to get organized (96 hours, or the opponent of the US Military is doomed) for the side of liberty to be able to train enough men to be able to force the Feds to capitulate. A guerrilla war is something no one would want to see, as that would mean the utter destruction of the United States, and possibly total economic ruin, enough to put the US in a third world status, it would have to be done conventionally.

The Israelis have a motto for what would need to be done: Strike first, strike hard, strike deep.

Keep dreaming bro...

[Nate K]

Because of the national guard system, the states each have their own miniature armies, admittedly, nothing that on their own, could stand up to the might of the US Military, but a combined effort with multiple states striking hard and fast in one area would be able to delay for long enough the ability of the US Military to get organized (96 hours, or the opponent of the US Military is doomed) for the side of liberty to be able to train enough men to be able to force the Feds to capitulate. A guerrilla war is something no one would want to see, as that would mean the utter destruction of the United States, and possibly total economic ruin, enough to put the US in a third world status, it would have to be done conventionally.

The Israelis have a motto for what would need to be done: Strike first, strike hard, strike deep.

I agree, this has to be done strategically. I don't support a war, but if it came down to it, I would take arms.

We should only use the THREAT of war if necessary, and if we do in a strategic manner. We would also need the majority of Americans to side with us - so appearance is important.

[Nate K]

With the capability of the US military, it would take probably 10 of your soldiers to beat one US soldier, (partly because of equipment, weapons, vehicles, etc.).

Why did we lose in Vietnam then??

[nate895]

Keep dreaming bro...

Yes it is a total dream that 100,000 men would be able to take on the police forces of Washington, D.C., and the 20,000 airmen over at Andrew's AFB and then move on to take on the Baltimore PD, Philadelphia PD, total and complete dream. Man, I never knew cops had that much fight in them.

Also, did you know if China decided to invade from the Pacific Ocean, there would be no ability to mount an effective resistance until the Mississippi River?

[nate895]

With the capability of the US military, it would take probably 10 of your soldiers to beat one US soldier, (partly because of equipment, weapons, vehicles, etc.).

It totally depends on the situation, and considering the fact that many Americans have been soldiers, this analysis is void.

[LEK]

We can win our country back to the law of the land.

I am not thinking about this yet until they have SS Troopers reinforcing Martial Law.

For his part, President Bush may have implemented a back-up plan last April when he signed National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51, an executive order allowing him to suspend the constitution without prior congressional approval. NSPD 51 gives the President the discretion to declare a state of emergency (i.e. martial law) in the event of a major terrorist attack or other “decapitating” incident against the United States, even if the attack happens outside the country. Under this scenario, he can
cancel elections, padlock the Capitol dome and send the Supreme Court justices home. The directive also assigns the President's homeland security assistant ( a low-level position exempt from senate confirmation) to administer what has been dubbed the Enduring Constitutional Government. In other words, another Sept. 11th disaster could reduce this year's election to nothing more than the status of a season of Survivor.

http://thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html

[nate895]

For his part, President Bush may have implemented a back-up plan last April when he signed National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51, an executive order allowing him to suspend the constitution without prior congressional approval. NSPD 51 gives the President the discretion to declare a state of emergency (i.e. martial law) in the event of a major terrorist attack or other “decapitating” incident against the United States, even if the attack happens outside the country. Under this scenario, he can
cancel elections, padlock the Capitol dome and send the Supreme Court justices home. The directive also assigns the President's homeland security assistant ( a low-level position exempt from senate confirmation) to administer what has been dubbed the Enduring Constitutional Government. In other words, another Sept. 11th disaster could reduce this year's election to nothing more than the status of a season of Survivor.

http://thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html

If this happens, how many are willing to resist with me?

[LibertiORDeth]

It totally depends on the situation, and considering the fact that many Americans have been soldiers, this analysis is void.

Alright soldier for soldier. You don't think the over one million strong military could defend itself against you?

[nate895]

Alright soldier for soldier. You don't think the over one million strong military could defend itself against you?

500,000 men are in the Army, 125,000 in the Marines, the rest are in the Air Force or Navy, not exactly the prime place for fighting men, plus it is all about when and how you strike, this isn't lining up on a field and the best fighter wins, it is knowing where, when, and how to strike.

[BravoSix]

If this happens, how many are willing to resist with me?

I'm not sure how many citizens would take up arms with you, and I'm not sure how many would simply roll over and take it. What I am sure of is that those of us who would actively and violently resist aren't going to be posting all over the internet proclaiming that fact.

YMMV.

[Sentient Void]

This idea sounds a bit extreme to me, at least at this point.

I dunno, maybe it's cuz I was raised in TAXachusetts. lawls.

[nate895]

I'm not sure how many citizens would take up arms with you, and I'm not sure how many would simply roll over and take it. What I am sure of is that those of us who would actively and violently resist aren't going to be posting all over the internet proclaiming that fact.

YMMV.

I suppose that is the case.

Government, that was a joke, I love Bush, and whoever is the next President, really, I do.

[BarryDonegan]

you can't secede from the union without the military power to back up the federal response. we are not in a constitutional republic anymore, the power to secede doesn't exist in practice. Since the US Civil War, the Federal Empire of the US defeated the Constitution in a war, and the citizens surrendered to it; this caused international law to recognize the victor government.

the only hope you'd have of making a serious case to seperate from the Empire, would be to get national opponents of the US Empire to back you militarily, then get popular support from everyone in the territory you would like to have secede.

its not a simple process at all, it would require an armed revolt and bloodshed. remember also that thomas jefferson predicted it would be necessary to keep a republic.

[KMA-NWO]

its not a simple process at all, it would require an armed revolt and bloodshed. remember also that thomas jefferson predicted it would be necessary to keep a republic.

Funny coincidence, did you know Jefferson was a stoner?

[nate895]

you can't secede from the union without the military power to back up the federal response. we are not in a constitutional republic anymore, the power to secede doesn't exist in practice. Since the US Civil War, the Federal Empire of the US defeated the Constitution in a war, and the citizens surrendered to it; this caused international law to recognize the victor government.

the only hope you'd have of making a serious case to seperate from the Empire, would be to get national opponents of the US Empire to back you militarily, then get popular support from everyone in the territory you would like to have secede.

its not a simple process at all, it would require an armed revolt and bloodshed. remember also that thomas jefferson predicted it would be necessary to keep a republic.

What you need is to organize the government prior to the actual secession. The only place you could do that legally would be the South, as the Confederate Government never surrendered, and the governments of the Southern States arguably have no legal authority since they were setup under a state of duress. But, it wouldn't require that foreign countries support us, only the national guard and the people in the US Military who are from the states seceding (if it was the South, the US Military would be on its knees if the Southerners left it). You would have to strike at the US first, you couldn't wait for them to attack.

[Thomas Paine]

The Michigan Militia stands ready for duty.

[nate895]

The Michigan Militia stands ready for duty.

Would it aid the South?

[Cowlesy]

What you need is to organize the government prior to the actual secession. The only place you could do that legally would be the South, as the Confederate Government never surrendered, and the governments of the Southern States arguably have no legal authority since they were setup under a state of duress. But, it wouldn't require that foreign countries support us, only the national guard and the people in the US Military who are from the states seceding (if it was the South, the US Military would be on its knees if the Southerners left it). You would have to strike at the US first, you couldn't wait for them to attack.

hmm.

[LibertiORDeth]

500,000 men are in the Army, 125,000 in the Marines, the rest are in the Air Force or Navy, not exactly the prime place for fighting men, plus it is all about when and how you strike, this isn't lining up on a field and the best fighter wins, it is knowing where, when, and how to strike.

Come on be serious, you couldn't get anymore then a few thousand.

[nate895]

Come on be serious, you couldn't get anymore then a few thousand.

BS, if there was a secession of a Southern State, I there would be 50,000 today that would join the fight, we need merely expand that to be hundreds of thousands. The ideas of Ron Paul were fringe a year ago, and few believed in them, we can bring these ideas to the forefront as well given the proper structure.

[Cowlesy]

BS, if there was a secession of a Southern State, I there would be 50,000 today that would join the fight, we need merely expand that to be hundreds of thousands. The ideas of Ron Paul were fringe a year ago, and few believed in them, we can bring these ideas to the forefront as well given the proper structure.

Since you're a hardcore secessionist, what ideas do you suggest we bring to the forefront?

[nate895]

Since you're a hardcore secessionist, what ideas do you suggest we bring to the forefront?

Well, I would say we bring the idea of liberty to the forefront. The former secessionist movement did not talk about it that much, it was only an attachment to the idea of states' rights, and of history. You'd get the impression that this was a group of people that were still angry of the War for Southern Independence, not fighting for the reasons of liberty, but a sense of duty to country. You also need to make an overt attempt to convert minorities to the movement to get rid of the racist stigma associated with absolutely anything that is associated with the old Confederate States. You would also have to find a way to be able to paint the Federal Government as directly oppressive to the people of the state/region, shouldn't be hard to do, especially considering Katrina and the recent water crisis in the South.

[JonathanR]

Those interested in how to fight against a vastly superior US Military should research Paul van Riper and the Millennium Challenge of 2002.

[LibertiORDeth]

Ain't gonna work people, try this instead.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=122743

[sratiug]

Since you're a hardcore secessionist, what ideas do you suggest we bring to the forefront?

Rule of law. The Civil War was not a civil war but an unpopular undeclared war against the South prosecuted by the whim of the president. Sound familiar? How about a public trial of Jefferson Davis, in order to bring to light the issues of secession. Mr. Davis always wanted one, but no one was interested at the time.

[sratiug]

Just because a state secedes doesn't mean there must be a war. It would be hard to fight and justify a war if no one fought back. What would the charge be to arrest people?

[virginiakid]

Rule of law. The Civil War was not a civil war but an unpopular undeclared war against the South prosecuted by the whim of the president. Sound familiar? How about a public trial of Jefferson Davis, in order to bring to light the issues of secession. Mr. Davis always wanted one, but no one was interested at the time.

Hmmm...I wonder why? Could it be because the south was right to secede from the union?

[nate895]

Just because a state secedes doesn't mean there must be a war. It would be hard to fight and justify a war if no one fought back. What would the charge be to arrest people?

You would have to take a wait-and-see attitude if seceding, but you would have to take a preemptive strike if they meant war.

[AJ Antimony]

As good as seceding from a corrupt union sounds, it's not going to work. First you need passionate, emotional, serious debate in the national Congress about some issue that could split the country. In the 1800s it was slavery, today it would be following the Constitution. Does this debate exist at all in Congress? Nope. Therefore secession is currently impossible.

Now, think about what the USA would do today if states again seceded. They would abuse the Civil War as a precedent to FORCE states into re-joining the union. Can't you see the neocons saying, "The great Abe Lincoln needed force to save the Union, therefore we do too." And if we assume 50% of the states secede and if we keep in mind in the 1860s the Civil War killed what, 600,000 people.... a modern day civil war would kill MILLIONS of Americans.

Also you have to THINK THIS THROUGH and wonder what happens if we successfully secede. What government do we form? Is it a modified version of the US Constitution? Or is it what the CSA was... a very loose union where essentially the states are their own country? Do you know what the Articles of Confederation was? It was the government in place after the Revolutionary War and before the adoption of the Constitution. It was very weak thus each state was essentially its own country. The Articles was very similar to the CSA government. So why were the Articles abandoned? Because it left so many holes the country could not function. A stronger central government was needed for things like fiscal policy, monetary policy and having a military. This led to the Constitution. So you have to understand that a loose confederation of states would NOT be good for us. The Articles of Confederation and the Confederate States of America prove this.

No, secession is not the answer. The Constitution of this country, like it or not, says it is WE THE PEOPLE who are the ultimate rulers of this country. Therefore if this country has problems, we change them. We don't run away from them.

EDIT: And my god, imagine another Reconstruction era if MILLIONS of Americans killed each other

[nf7mate]

Larry Kilgore is running for senate in Texas and the centerpiece of his campaign is seceeding from the US.

[nate895]

As good as seceding from a corrupt union sounds, it's not going to work. First you need passionate, emotional, serious debate in the national Congress about some issue that could split the country. In the 1800s it was slavery, today it would be following the Constitution. Does this debate exist at all in Congress? Nope. Therefore secession is currently impossible.

Now, think about what the USA would do today if states again seceded. They would abuse the Civil War as a precedent to FORCE states into re-joining the union. Can't you see the neocons saying, "The great Abe Lincoln needed force to save the Union, therefore we do too." And if we assume 50% of the states secede and if we keep in mind in the 1860s the Civil War killed what, 600,000 people.... a modern day civil war would kill MILLIONS of Americans.

Also you have to THINK THIS THROUGH and wonder what happens if we successfully secede. What government do we form? Is it a modified version of the US Constitution? Or is it what the CSA was... a very loose union where essentially the states are their own country? Do you know what the Articles of Confederation was? It was the government in place after the Revolutionary War and before the adoption of the Constitution. It was very weak thus each state was essentially its own country. The Articles was very similar to the CSA government. So why were the Articles abandoned? Because it left so many holes the country could not function. A stronger central government was needed for things like fiscal policy, monetary policy and having a military. This led to the Constitution. So you have to understand that a loose confederation of states would NOT be good for us. The Articles of Confederation and the Confederate States of America prove this.

No, secession is not the answer. The Constitution of this country, like it or not, says it is WE THE PEOPLE who are the ultimate rulers of this country. Therefore if this country has problems, we change them. We don't run away from them.

EDIT: And my god, imagine another Reconstruction era if MILLIONS of Americans killed each other

On the war point, the people of the modern United States would not have the stomach for it, and would easily give in if the secessionists were conservative, as we actually have the will to fight. All it would take to defeat the Federal Government if the Southern States seceded would be a lightning strike through East Coast, and then the Government and economy of the Feds would be totally destroyed, they would be forced to come to terms.

On the point of a loose confederation, the Articles of Confederation granted the Confederation Congress the same powers as the US Constitution, with the exception of taxation and regulation of commerce. The problem was 9/13 states needed to accede a law, and all 13 for a Constitutional Amendment, both were remedied in both the Constitution of the CSA and USA.

As for the We the people clause of the preamble, it would have been "We, the states of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations... and Georgia" but the US Constitution only required 9/13 states to ratify, and the other 4 could remain free forever (as Rhode Island and North Carolina were for a period of time), so it would have been real stupid to include foreign countries in the preamble of a Federal Constitution. It specifically states We, the people of the United States not We, the people of America as would be the case of establishing a National Government (which was specifically defeated in the Convention).

[nate895]

Larry Kilgore is running for senate in Texas and the centerpiece of his campaign is seceeding from the US.

Go Larry Kilgore.

[nate895]

OK, Kilgore is a bit too hardcore Christian, even for this Bible thumper.

[nakor667]

Okay, so we have enough people to take over a state AND we want to spread the ideals of limited government nationwide. Seceding FROM the United States won't help all the other states and will only further centralize power if theres a violent reaction.

So I propose we move to a neighboring region country (Canada, Mexico, or in the Caribbean), become a majority, and fashion a political system based on limited government.

AND THEN we petition to join the USA as a new state! American has a long tradition of accepting new states, with all those ideals and philosophies being absorbed into the American identity. The US has forgotten much of the reasons behind the American Revolution, perhaps this way we can lead by example and remind people how much they have lost.

[LandonCook]

How?

We send her to washington...

http://panther.is0.okcimg.com/users/620/358/6203592388833469316/p10551080.jpg

America wouldn't stand a damn chance...

[Rhys]

The Union is fine, it's Washington we need to change.

[nakor667]

Well, we could always team-up with the D.C. Statehood Movement...

DC has a relatively small population and has wanted local control for ages. What a coup that would be, to have an anti-national government movement in the nations capitol of all places!

[NEPA_Revolution]

The Union is fine, it's Washington we need to change.

+1

[alaric]

We can win our country back to the law of the land.

I am not thinking about this yet until they have SS Troopers reinforcing Martial Law.

I hate to say this, but this is closer than you think!

[SL89]

Stop and think. Do we need succession in light of the fact that a lot of other despotic and expansionist regimes exist around the world? And Do we really want to succeed. Trade with dissenters will not come lightly. Are you truly self sufficient?? If you think so turn off your power and phone etc...For 6 months or more. No Washing machines, no electric stoves ( after the fuel runs out for your generators)no phone or internet, No TV, No food, when it runs out. Those with guns will find out that a piece of meat is hard to come by when everyone is hunting. Besides, meat will sustain you for only a short period of time. Do you really want that kind of revolution??? Ask yourselves. This is a serious, lonely and perilous undertaking.
I have read a lot of these posts including the Island concept; Most have been tragically ill conceived, unrealistic (Logistically), and doomed to failure. It makes me wonder the age of the posters and commentators here.

PS. I live in the wilds of Montana and am capable of taking care of me and mine. Are you??? And I support Montana's plight And RP until the end.

[nate895]

Stop and think. Do we need succession in light of the fact that a lot of other despotic and expansionist regimes exist around the world? And Do we really want to succeed. Trade with dissenters will not come lightly. Are you truly self sufficient?? If you think so turn off your power and phone etc...For 6 months or more. No Washing machines, no electric stoves ( after the fuel runs out for your generators)no phone or internet, No TV, No food, when it runs out. Those with guns will find out that a piece of meat is hard to come by when everyone is hunting. Besides, meat will sustain you for only a short period of time. Do you really want that kind of revolution??? Ask yourselves. This is a serious, lonely and perilous undertaking.
I have read a lot of these posts including the Island concept; Most have been tragically ill conceived, unrealistic (Logistically), and doomed to failure. It makes me wonder the age of the posters and commentators here.

PS. I live in the wilds of Montana and am capable of taking care of me and mine. Are you??? And I support Montana's plight And RP until the end.

Well, that's why you have a full region to secede, each region is totally self-sufficient in power, and it would have access to the sea, the only thing needed to become a truly great nation if you focus.

[Ron LOL]

Secession? Oh please. Way to throw the baby out with the bath water. Talk like this is why nobody takes us seriously.

More importantly, seceding is giving up. Great idea, pussy.

[nate895]

Secession? Oh please. Way to throw the baby out with the bath water. Talk like this is why nobody takes us seriously.

More importantly, seceding is giving up. Great idea, pussy.

Hey look, no intelligent comeback. Huckabee would have a similar response.

[Soccrmastr]

Theres already some popular movements for this.

[Paul4Prez]

First, self-government and self-determination are fundamental human rights. The Declaration of Independence was a declaration of secession, so the idea has a long history in America. If a state or several states seceded today, I doubt very strongly that it would turn out like it did in the 1860's, with a war to preserve the union.

That being said, the idea is pretty far out there for most people. There are active secession movements in Vermont, Alaska, Hawaii, and elsewhere, but they are a long way from majority support. To be viewed as legitimate by the rest of the world and accepted by the federal government, the seceding state would probably have to have a citizens referendum, with a super-majority vote (2/3 or 3/4) in favor.

I think our odds of taking over the Republican Party are a lot higher. Only 50% of Americans vote. Only half of those are Republicans. Only 1/5 of those vote in the primaries. In other words, we only need to get 5% of the population activated and voting in the Republican primaries to dominate the Party.

[sratiug]

Secession? Oh please. Way to throw the baby out with the bath water. Talk like this is why nobody takes us seriously.

More importantly, seceding is giving up. Great idea, pussy.

Putting up with unconstitutional government is giving up. Our leaders already threw out the constitional "baby". Nobody took the Civil War seriously I suppose? The problems we have today can be traced back to those of the Civil War era.

It's like the school problem. If a teacher could send home a shool kid at any time there would be no disciplinary problems in school. And if the kid could leave at any time he wouldn't be forced to be humiliated by teachers. But some people don't like "easy" answers, when easy answers are really all there are.

War and secession are two entirely different things, one not the logical outcome of the other.

Of course I do agree that it would be easier to take over the Republican party in a few states, but who's to say the rest of the party won't disassociate itself from us anyway? And the logical conclusion to a constitutional government in any state will be extreme conflict with the federal mafia, because a constitutional state government would not allow its guard units to be deployed in this war.

[constituent]

The individual state legislatures can vote and pass Secession legislation if they wish (is how they did it the first time)....

But breaking The Union is not the answer, and on this point I agree with Pres. Lincoln. The Sum is greater than the Parts.

The issues we face, are not issues that can effectively be resolved through a breaking of our Union. We can clean out Washington and still keep the States together. Let's focus our energies on building up a third party alternative and take over the congress through votes not bullets.

TN.

that's fine... but leave texas out of it.

:D

small thing, but probably important...

"independence" is likely a better word than "secession"

[nate895]

that's fine... but leave texas out of it.

:D

small thing, but probably important...

"independence" is likely a better word than "secession"

Probably, if you want to get traction.

[OReich]

Just thought I'd bring this up: I think John Locke was clearly an anarchocapitalist.

And yes, states can legally secede, but law and government are two different subjects.

[nate895]

Just thought I'd bring this up: I think John Locke was clearly an anarchocapitalist.

And yes, states can legally secede, but law and government are two different subjects.

How is Locke an anarcho-capitalist, he is for a government that is about protecting people's rights, not no government at all.

[constituent]

How is Locke an anarcho-capitalist, he is for a government that is about protecting people's rights, not no government at all.

pandering to the base?

[porcupine]

The Free State Project isn't about secession, but since that's a member on your list of prospective targets, I thought I'd mention that the Free State Project has a bunch of libertarians moving there. You would probably be interested http://www.freestateproject.org/

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

It's really not that hard, if you focus on what would need to be done in order for this to happen, it's very doable.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is how I'm pretty sure it works..

There is the State House and the State Senate, just like in the National Congress. Each state has a different amount of representatives and senators, that to my knowledge is NOT based on population.

If we control both sides and agree to secede from the Union, what's stopping us? Will America go to war? If enough states do so, I highly doubt it!

Now if my theory is correct, we ought to use some strategy here, and look at the number of representatives and senators in each state that would enable us to get the most in! Now what would be better for us, a state with a large General Assembly based on population or a smaller one?

Here are some key states I think we should focus on (especially Texas) and their General Assembly number:

New Hampshire: 24 in the Senate and 400 in the House. Population: est. 1.4 million

Vermont: 30 in the Senate and 150 in the House. Population: est. 650,000

Texas: 31 in the Senate and 150 in the House. Population:24 million

Montana: 50 in the Senate and 100 in the House. Population: 1 million.

Have another state in mind? Post it and I'll look it up. I'm getting this info from the 2008 Almanac.

What does this mean for you? Well this all means start preparing for state government!! State government at this point, if you look at it from this angle, much more powerful than federal. Are you interested in politics? Do you feel that you could serve your constituents? Are you a well enough speaker for the job? If you answer any of these with a yes, YOU SHOULD RUN FOR AT LEAST STATE HOUSE. If you are well qualified (ex. Master's Degree, great speaker, etc.) you should run for State Senate.

Are you not interested enough in politics or that field of study? That's ok too!! You can donate to the people running in your state, which is just as important!

Let's use an example here for Texas (a state we should all focus on).. A representative for Texas serves approx. 160,000 people. (24,000,000/ 150) That means you would need to have decent funds/ donors in that state to win, my guess is around 100-150k.

However!, in New Hampshire a state representative serves 3, 500 people!! (1,400,000/ 400). You would need little funds to win that state!


So why secede in the first place?

Because it may just be a whole lot simpler concentrating our efforts in a few states or even one state, rather than trying to focus on the corruption of the whole country! PLUS, this is a plan that is not expected by the elites, this will have them on their toes, and trust me, with enough planning done quickly, we could pull this off.

So what should you do now?? Start sharing ideas in this thread and come up with ideas of your own!!

We don't want to be deadbeat citizens who abandon the children of the United States like the Federal Government. If we really treasure the U.S. Constitution, then we believe that it is the foundation, the gold standard, of this nations wealth.

So, through secession from the Union, we abandon the nation's children and the U.S. Constitution.

[Goldwater Conservative]

With cell phone cameras, YouTube, and 24-hour cable "news" nowadays, there's no way I could see the feds marching down to a seceding state and threatening them to fall in line. Would the rest of America really have the stomach to kill their friends and family just because they want self-government? Without the moral issue of slavery, how could anyone justify such wanton slaughter of their fellow Americans?

This idea is definitely worth looking into, because our Founding Fathers fought the Revolution when there were only 4 million Americans spread over the 13 original states. 300 million Americans spread over half the continent, especially with the corporate media and obscene government weaponry that exist today, makes it just too damn difficult to swing the entire country. One state has to lead the way, even if that means (temporary?) secession.

[dust of nations]

this might sound brilliant, but it's not. it's merely diverting our time and energy from an actual revolution. if you haven't learned from history you are a fool. what we need to do is educate ourselves on the ideas of freedom, of paul, of jefferson, etc. we need to listen and learn and then lead.

we need each to defeat the system from within.