nate895
02-02-2009, 01:10 AM
I wrote this essay last night and just before the Super Bowl. It is approximately 2,000 words in length. I hope it convinces enough people to commit their resources to one of the solutions outlined to make our revolution successful.
Look around you today and it is painfully obvious to any and all liberty lovers that the state of liberty is grave in virtually the entire globe. Nowhere is it more painful than in the United States of America, the birthplace of liberty in the modern world. The people have elected a string of Presidents who have eroded liberty to the point of near nonexistence. If you are a citizen of the United States, you are guilty of some crime; that much is certain. States are forced by the central authority to maintain laws that many do not want, but they must comply or they will face some punishment from the welfare-warfare state based in the District of Columbia. Sadly, if liberty lovers cannot soon gain a strong foothold in the government to at least stop the continuous bleeding from liberty, the only remaining option is to leave the Union and forge our own destiny as our own independent republic.
Liberty lovers should not give up entirely on the current Union, we have three options to save liberty within the current boundaries of the American Empire: to gain the prerequisite forty-one seats in the Senate to filibuster, to gain a majority of the seats in the House of Representatives, or to gain the White House and veto ability in the two houses of Congress. Whichever option we choose, it is imperative that liberty lovers be absolutely committed to winning and spreading the message to every single last person who will listen. During the campaign, it is very important to get dedicated converts to the cause of liberty. The problem this movement has had in the past in this regard is that it lacks sufficient intellectual manpower. This is a symptom of our philosophy primarily; after all, why should we commit our lives to gaining a foothold in, and theorizing on, an institution we believe should be severely limited? The time has come where we can no longer casually support our ideas, but rather we must fully support our political goals and publish materials as much as our socialist, neoconservative, and fascist friends manage to. More people need to write books for liberty, magazines and newspapers need to be published that support liberty. This is a revolution, after all; the printing presses need to produce materials at a rate that justifies the title we gave it. Our internet efforts should be ancillary to our print efforts because people must seek us out on the internet, and the printed word of an educated individual has so much more power than two laymen debating on Facebook forums. Forums need to be sponsored, college campuses infiltrated (maybe even a few established), and candidates fielded.
The first option is to gain the filibuster ability in the Senate. In order to gain that ability, there would need to be forty one liberty lovers in the Senate of the United States. The advantages of this strategy are that we would only need to focus on a minimum of twenty-one states, which can be cherry picked based on ease to victory and future possibility of support for secession and that we do not have to gain any majorities beyond in the electorates in the states we focus on. The disadvantages to this strategy are that the movement has few people who have the political experience to be an automatic contender for Senator, which leads to the second disadvantage, which is that more resources would have to be committed to Senate runs.
Our second option is to win the majority in the House of Representatives. A majority is required in the House because the rules of the House limit the minority’s rights, and there are no ways to procedurally stop a bill unless you are the chairman of a committee, which requires being in the majority. The advantages to this strategy is that the revolution can focus on the region which would eventually secede should our plans fail, in addition to cherry picked localities, as opposed to whole states, outside of that region. Representative is considered an opening position, so no political experience is required to win the job, so fewer resources need to be committed proportionally than Senators. The disadvantages are that winning a majority would almost certainly require unseating many incumbents, and challenging them in their own primaries. That would be required to a lesser extent in the Senate as well. Another problem is that Representatives don’t get as much exposure as Senators and therefore it might be more difficult to expand from initial wins. The Senate or House of Representatives are both involved in the quest for the Presidency.
The final option is to attempt to gain the Presidency and just higher than one-third of either the Senate or House of Representatives. That would prevent any worse bills from being passed, and if we elect a President with a significant win in both the Electoral College and popular vote, they will be able to use some political capital to get the most important planks of our revolution enacted before we gain control of the Senate and House of Representatives. The hurdles to using this plan are that we have two people who could run for President, win, and we know for sure are on our side are Ron Paul or Gary Johnson. That would mean that we must begin ASAP on winning seats in either the House or Senate, and gathering resource for a go at the Presidency once again. All the while, committing some of our resources on the alternative should our plans fail: secession.
All of these plans will be difficult to accomplish, but we have the final option of secession. This brings up several questions: Where should we secede? When should we secede? How many resources should we commit to secession? Should one state secede, or should we focus on a whole region? I shall answer these questions in reverse order that I asked them. Many have placed hopes in secession movements in one state. Whether that movement be in New Hampshire, Alaska, Montana, Texas, South Carolina, or some other state it will be too easy for the Federal government to take control back, if all of America’s liberty lovers can fit in the first place. New Hampshire is too small to either fit all of us, and the Feds can take back control before anyone even knew they seceded. South Carolina is similarly too small, but it might just be able to fit all of us. Alaska and Montana are large enough to not be taken over overnight, but their population forbids them from taking all of us in without significant, debilitating growing pains (not to mention they are freezing cold, and I hate the cold). Texas is probably the only state that could both handle America’s liberty lovers and not be taken over overnight, but at the size of Texas, we might as well simply expand to a whole region and make the secession even more effective.
The resources we should commit to seceding should be ancillary to our efforts to save the present Union. We cannot convince a populous to secede for an ideology they do not yet believe in. In the region we pick to secede in we should commit more resources than the other regions when we are fighting for seat in the Federal government. Resources should also be committed in those states to winning seats in their state legislatures and winning their governor’s mansions. Hopefully, we can convince a significant majority, two-thirds, at least because that would show the world that this region is very committed to their ideals and is willing to fight for them if necessary, and it would also probably lead to easier recognition from foreign governments. The time to secede should be as soon as it is obvious that it is impossible to retake the Federal government and to stop its stealing of our liberties and we have a significant enough majority in the states seceding to justify independence to the international community.
The region we should choose to secede is of vital to importance to the success of this undertaking. There are two regions that will probably be the easiest to win a liberty majority in are the Mountain West or the American South. Of the two, the American South is probably the better of the two option because the Mountain West may be cut off from the sea because California, Oregon, and Washington will be harder to convince to become libertarian, especially on the coastal port sections of all three. While many liberty lovers balk at the idea of focusing on the American South since the South has many more laws concerning morality than the other sections of the country, and they also depend more upon welfare, the reasons behind this are more complicated than merely the fact that they believe in it. When the South lost their war for independence, they became destitute because the Yankees had burned all of their productive capacity in the effort to subdue their independent spirit. Prior to the war, the South was the more libertarian section, given that it is the home to many of the American liberty thinkers. If you think of an early American thinker who believed in small government, he is probably a Southerner. Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Patrick Henry, John Taylor of Caroline, John C. Calhoun, etc. are all Southerners (mostly Virginian). However, the war subdued the South and they became moralists because they were forced into a strong central government that supported the people from cradle to grave. Why? If the people are going to take from the haves and give to the have-nots, the haves have the right to make sure their money isn’t going to be used for things they do not believe in. The easiest way to do that is to prevent all people from participating in immoral acts. Now the South is catching up to the rest of the country after a hundred years or more of poverty since they lost everything in the war, and you can see that they are beginning to believe more in their old ideas. A poll conducted by Zogby International showed the South is still the hotbed for secession the nation; the nationwide average was 20% in support of the right of secession, 18.2% in favor of using it, while the South had 26.4% support the right of secession, which translates into approximately 24% support for using it. All we need to do in the South is take the ideas they already have and take them to their natural conclusion. After all it was Robert E. Lee in a letter to Lord Acton on December 15, 1866 who predicted our current state of affairs:
While I have considered the preservation of the constitutional power of the General Government to be the foundation of our peace and safety at home and abroad, I yet believe that the maintenance of the rights and authority reserved to the states and to the people, not only are essential to the adjustment and balance of the general system, but the safeguard to the continuance of a free government. I consider it as the chief source of stability to our political system, whereas the consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of that ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it.
Liberty being in such grave danger, we need to either quickly stop the bleeding at the Federal level, or leave the Union and forge our own destiny as an independent confederated republic. In order to be able to live our lives free of being guilty of crimes that shouldn’t be crimes at all, this is our only path. The welfare-warfare will be severely weakened if this Empire finally, at long last, breaks apart. We need to stop the string of Presidencies which have taken all but the most basic of rights, and even then they are under constant threat if the Supreme Court finally gives in. Liberty lovers can finally regain a foothold in the world if we leave this painful Union and forge our destiny should our efforts fail to produce the needed results. If these policies are not given the full measure of support from the Grassroots, it may be long after all of us are dead that liberty will finally reign on Earth, if it ever reigns before the Kingdom of Heaven liberates us from all tyrants.
Independence Movements:
Here are some independence/secessionist movements freedom lovers may be interested in:
Alaska:
Alaskan Independence Party (http://www.akip.org/)
California:
Jefferson State (http://www.jeffersonstate.com/) (also Southern Oregon)
New Hampshire:
Republic of New Hampshire (http://www.republicofnh.org/)
Southern United States:
I include state specific groups in this section. There are so many groups, is there anyway that a convention could be called to unite them? Also, some of these, or ones I don't post are, almost certainly racist, so someone might want to identify those ones.
State Specific:
Texas:
http://www.texasnationalist.com/tnm/index.php
http://www.texasrepublic.info/
http://www.texas.freecountries.org/
South Carolina:
http://republicofsc.wordpress.com/
Entire Region:
League of the South (http://dixienet.org/New%20Site/index.shtml)
Confederate States of America (http://www.confederatestatesofamerica.org/) and associates (http://www.federationofstates.org/)
New Confederacy (http://www.newconfederacy.com/)
I have identified numerous other independence, but they don't seem to want independence because they want liberty, but rather their own version of tyranny. I even found a Communist one called the "North Star Republic" that basically wanted to form their own USSR in Minnesota and other parts of the Northern Midwest. Please post if you have more to add to this list, or have a reason to remove one on the list.
Look around you today and it is painfully obvious to any and all liberty lovers that the state of liberty is grave in virtually the entire globe. Nowhere is it more painful than in the United States of America, the birthplace of liberty in the modern world. The people have elected a string of Presidents who have eroded liberty to the point of near nonexistence. If you are a citizen of the United States, you are guilty of some crime; that much is certain. States are forced by the central authority to maintain laws that many do not want, but they must comply or they will face some punishment from the welfare-warfare state based in the District of Columbia. Sadly, if liberty lovers cannot soon gain a strong foothold in the government to at least stop the continuous bleeding from liberty, the only remaining option is to leave the Union and forge our own destiny as our own independent republic.
Liberty lovers should not give up entirely on the current Union, we have three options to save liberty within the current boundaries of the American Empire: to gain the prerequisite forty-one seats in the Senate to filibuster, to gain a majority of the seats in the House of Representatives, or to gain the White House and veto ability in the two houses of Congress. Whichever option we choose, it is imperative that liberty lovers be absolutely committed to winning and spreading the message to every single last person who will listen. During the campaign, it is very important to get dedicated converts to the cause of liberty. The problem this movement has had in the past in this regard is that it lacks sufficient intellectual manpower. This is a symptom of our philosophy primarily; after all, why should we commit our lives to gaining a foothold in, and theorizing on, an institution we believe should be severely limited? The time has come where we can no longer casually support our ideas, but rather we must fully support our political goals and publish materials as much as our socialist, neoconservative, and fascist friends manage to. More people need to write books for liberty, magazines and newspapers need to be published that support liberty. This is a revolution, after all; the printing presses need to produce materials at a rate that justifies the title we gave it. Our internet efforts should be ancillary to our print efforts because people must seek us out on the internet, and the printed word of an educated individual has so much more power than two laymen debating on Facebook forums. Forums need to be sponsored, college campuses infiltrated (maybe even a few established), and candidates fielded.
The first option is to gain the filibuster ability in the Senate. In order to gain that ability, there would need to be forty one liberty lovers in the Senate of the United States. The advantages of this strategy are that we would only need to focus on a minimum of twenty-one states, which can be cherry picked based on ease to victory and future possibility of support for secession and that we do not have to gain any majorities beyond in the electorates in the states we focus on. The disadvantages to this strategy are that the movement has few people who have the political experience to be an automatic contender for Senator, which leads to the second disadvantage, which is that more resources would have to be committed to Senate runs.
Our second option is to win the majority in the House of Representatives. A majority is required in the House because the rules of the House limit the minority’s rights, and there are no ways to procedurally stop a bill unless you are the chairman of a committee, which requires being in the majority. The advantages to this strategy is that the revolution can focus on the region which would eventually secede should our plans fail, in addition to cherry picked localities, as opposed to whole states, outside of that region. Representative is considered an opening position, so no political experience is required to win the job, so fewer resources need to be committed proportionally than Senators. The disadvantages are that winning a majority would almost certainly require unseating many incumbents, and challenging them in their own primaries. That would be required to a lesser extent in the Senate as well. Another problem is that Representatives don’t get as much exposure as Senators and therefore it might be more difficult to expand from initial wins. The Senate or House of Representatives are both involved in the quest for the Presidency.
The final option is to attempt to gain the Presidency and just higher than one-third of either the Senate or House of Representatives. That would prevent any worse bills from being passed, and if we elect a President with a significant win in both the Electoral College and popular vote, they will be able to use some political capital to get the most important planks of our revolution enacted before we gain control of the Senate and House of Representatives. The hurdles to using this plan are that we have two people who could run for President, win, and we know for sure are on our side are Ron Paul or Gary Johnson. That would mean that we must begin ASAP on winning seats in either the House or Senate, and gathering resource for a go at the Presidency once again. All the while, committing some of our resources on the alternative should our plans fail: secession.
All of these plans will be difficult to accomplish, but we have the final option of secession. This brings up several questions: Where should we secede? When should we secede? How many resources should we commit to secession? Should one state secede, or should we focus on a whole region? I shall answer these questions in reverse order that I asked them. Many have placed hopes in secession movements in one state. Whether that movement be in New Hampshire, Alaska, Montana, Texas, South Carolina, or some other state it will be too easy for the Federal government to take control back, if all of America’s liberty lovers can fit in the first place. New Hampshire is too small to either fit all of us, and the Feds can take back control before anyone even knew they seceded. South Carolina is similarly too small, but it might just be able to fit all of us. Alaska and Montana are large enough to not be taken over overnight, but their population forbids them from taking all of us in without significant, debilitating growing pains (not to mention they are freezing cold, and I hate the cold). Texas is probably the only state that could both handle America’s liberty lovers and not be taken over overnight, but at the size of Texas, we might as well simply expand to a whole region and make the secession even more effective.
The resources we should commit to seceding should be ancillary to our efforts to save the present Union. We cannot convince a populous to secede for an ideology they do not yet believe in. In the region we pick to secede in we should commit more resources than the other regions when we are fighting for seat in the Federal government. Resources should also be committed in those states to winning seats in their state legislatures and winning their governor’s mansions. Hopefully, we can convince a significant majority, two-thirds, at least because that would show the world that this region is very committed to their ideals and is willing to fight for them if necessary, and it would also probably lead to easier recognition from foreign governments. The time to secede should be as soon as it is obvious that it is impossible to retake the Federal government and to stop its stealing of our liberties and we have a significant enough majority in the states seceding to justify independence to the international community.
The region we should choose to secede is of vital to importance to the success of this undertaking. There are two regions that will probably be the easiest to win a liberty majority in are the Mountain West or the American South. Of the two, the American South is probably the better of the two option because the Mountain West may be cut off from the sea because California, Oregon, and Washington will be harder to convince to become libertarian, especially on the coastal port sections of all three. While many liberty lovers balk at the idea of focusing on the American South since the South has many more laws concerning morality than the other sections of the country, and they also depend more upon welfare, the reasons behind this are more complicated than merely the fact that they believe in it. When the South lost their war for independence, they became destitute because the Yankees had burned all of their productive capacity in the effort to subdue their independent spirit. Prior to the war, the South was the more libertarian section, given that it is the home to many of the American liberty thinkers. If you think of an early American thinker who believed in small government, he is probably a Southerner. Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Patrick Henry, John Taylor of Caroline, John C. Calhoun, etc. are all Southerners (mostly Virginian). However, the war subdued the South and they became moralists because they were forced into a strong central government that supported the people from cradle to grave. Why? If the people are going to take from the haves and give to the have-nots, the haves have the right to make sure their money isn’t going to be used for things they do not believe in. The easiest way to do that is to prevent all people from participating in immoral acts. Now the South is catching up to the rest of the country after a hundred years or more of poverty since they lost everything in the war, and you can see that they are beginning to believe more in their old ideas. A poll conducted by Zogby International showed the South is still the hotbed for secession the nation; the nationwide average was 20% in support of the right of secession, 18.2% in favor of using it, while the South had 26.4% support the right of secession, which translates into approximately 24% support for using it. All we need to do in the South is take the ideas they already have and take them to their natural conclusion. After all it was Robert E. Lee in a letter to Lord Acton on December 15, 1866 who predicted our current state of affairs:
While I have considered the preservation of the constitutional power of the General Government to be the foundation of our peace and safety at home and abroad, I yet believe that the maintenance of the rights and authority reserved to the states and to the people, not only are essential to the adjustment and balance of the general system, but the safeguard to the continuance of a free government. I consider it as the chief source of stability to our political system, whereas the consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of that ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it.
Liberty being in such grave danger, we need to either quickly stop the bleeding at the Federal level, or leave the Union and forge our own destiny as an independent confederated republic. In order to be able to live our lives free of being guilty of crimes that shouldn’t be crimes at all, this is our only path. The welfare-warfare will be severely weakened if this Empire finally, at long last, breaks apart. We need to stop the string of Presidencies which have taken all but the most basic of rights, and even then they are under constant threat if the Supreme Court finally gives in. Liberty lovers can finally regain a foothold in the world if we leave this painful Union and forge our destiny should our efforts fail to produce the needed results. If these policies are not given the full measure of support from the Grassroots, it may be long after all of us are dead that liberty will finally reign on Earth, if it ever reigns before the Kingdom of Heaven liberates us from all tyrants.
Independence Movements:
Here are some independence/secessionist movements freedom lovers may be interested in:
Alaska:
Alaskan Independence Party (http://www.akip.org/)
California:
Jefferson State (http://www.jeffersonstate.com/) (also Southern Oregon)
New Hampshire:
Republic of New Hampshire (http://www.republicofnh.org/)
Southern United States:
I include state specific groups in this section. There are so many groups, is there anyway that a convention could be called to unite them? Also, some of these, or ones I don't post are, almost certainly racist, so someone might want to identify those ones.
State Specific:
Texas:
http://www.texasnationalist.com/tnm/index.php
http://www.texasrepublic.info/
http://www.texas.freecountries.org/
South Carolina:
http://republicofsc.wordpress.com/
Entire Region:
League of the South (http://dixienet.org/New%20Site/index.shtml)
Confederate States of America (http://www.confederatestatesofamerica.org/) and associates (http://www.federationofstates.org/)
New Confederacy (http://www.newconfederacy.com/)
I have identified numerous other independence, but they don't seem to want independence because they want liberty, but rather their own version of tyranny. I even found a Communist one called the "North Star Republic" that basically wanted to form their own USSR in Minnesota and other parts of the Northern Midwest. Please post if you have more to add to this list, or have a reason to remove one on the list.