Help me understand why the focus of this movement hasn't become secessionism.
This is currently a country of 330 million people and growing every day, 4 million square miles of land mass, 6 time zones, 3,000 miles east to west, temperate zones to deserts, mountains to plains, densely populated areas like New York and Los Angeles to places like Wyoming, where off the top of my head I think prong-horn outnumber human beings something like 4-to-1... a multi-cultural population that varies from recent African immigrants to indigenous peoples to "settlers" who can trace their lineage back over 4 centuries within a single county and almost literally everything in between... Montanans have more in common with people from Saskatchewan than people in Florida. People in southern California have more in common with people in northern Mexico than people in Missouri.
The idea that this "country" should focus so intensely on a central government in Washington, D.C., let alone on the so-called "local" governments within their own "states" is a $#@!ing lunacy. When you honestly take a step back and consider what it is that we're discussing when it comes to national politics, if you don't come to the conclusion that the whole goddamned business is completely bonkers, you're missing something.
Ultimately, as an anti-statist, my goal is micro-secession, but I'd really like someone to explain to me what the legitimate argument is against breaking this monolith up into more reasonable management districts that make considerably more sense than this untenable mass.
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Connect With Us