The concept of secession has become a key word in society when there are discontented people who somehow believe central government in a democracy is evil, because it will not allow them to pursue their prejudices.
So we have, more in the past than right now, the glamor of secession that has been promoted by French speaking Quebec to overcome the English influence in the rest of Canada, although Quebec would be in very poor economic shape if it did secede.
We also have the move for Scotland to secede from the United Kingdom, breaking away from England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, but in reality, that would impoverish Scotland.
And then we have the “Red” states, particularly those in the South, but also including the Southwest and the Great Plains, who dream of secession, mourning the failure of secession during the Civil War.
And yet, it is these “Red” states that are, by far, the poorest states in America, and get loads of benefits from the national government that they profess to hate!
It seems more the reality that these people living in the “Red” states who wish secession are purely ignorant, lack education, and have no clue as to how much they benefit from the federal government, so they are spiting themselves with their own stubbornness.
But really, what it comes down to is that they resent the inability to discriminate freely against African Americans, Latinos, women, and gays, due to federal laws and intervention by federal courts.
These states claim to be “devout” and “religious”, but actually are far from being so, as they lack all ethics and morals that true religion teaches!
These states have many people who wish the 19th century was back, when men dominated women, whites dominated over African Americans, and a small plantation elite controlled all government, much of it in the national government, until that “evil” man, Abraham Lincoln, came along and reasserted the basic teachings of the Founding Fathers, that this was a nation of freedom, liberty, and justice, even though many of the Founding Fathers practiced hypocrisy and deception themselves, but knew it was wrong! The Civil Rights Movement had begun with the end of slavery, a long, hard fought battle still being waged!
Lincoln opened up a new concept of America, and he would see leaders in the 20th century, including Harry Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, and Lyndon B. Johnson assert federal authority in the manner of Lincoln, revolutionizing the two political parties. The Democrats would become the Republicans of the Civil War in principle, and the Republicans would become the old, prejudiced Southern Democrats, fighting against equal opportunity and justice.
Meanwhile, the people of the “Red” states became victims, who were appealed to on the basis of fundamentalist religion, which had worked against integration of the races, and wanted to keep women down in a subservient position, and worked against promotion of equality for gays and lesbians, even though they had such people in their own midst, preaching one thing and conducting their lives as the opposite, pure hypocrisy!
Once the struggling people of the “Red” states realize they have been victimized by religious and political propaganda, the Republican Party will be as dead as a doornail, as it is a party based on pure hypocrisy and lack of basic principles of the party they created 160 years ago!
Professor,
What about that latest “Red” state that seceded just the other day–
Crimea. LOL!
That is nothing to laugh about, Paul! LOL
Agreed, Professor.
Coming from New England, the birthplace of the American Revolution,
we were “this” close to seceding back in the early years of the 1800’s.
Federalist merchants were more than a little upset about the trade embargo that Jefferson imposed against England.
The Hartford Convention almost made us a “new” New England.
We were not enamored of the War of 1812.
So, you see, even back then it was always about the money.
You are totally correct, but glad it did not happen, because I love New England as it is! LOL Boston, in particular, is cool! LOL
I do agree Professor with your synopsis of secession always being thrown out there as an alternative when there is a perception about too much power in a central government.
I always have said that “special interests” are those perceived inequities that we all view that someone else has. Economics is based on “scarcity” and, when you think about, everyone fights for those economic assets which makes everyone a “special interest” whether you are an industrialist, laborer, white collar or out and out poor person.
Good point, Paul! Thanks!
A quite legitimate motivation for secession is to end our involvement in foreign wars and close our foreign bases. That should be considered a truly righteous goal by people all across the political spectrum — and there are secessionists in Vermont motivated by this very goal.
(There are other legitimate motiviations as well, but this is a matter of life and death to our victims.)
No disrespect, Dan. But if Vermont secedes, the only people who will be upset will be the secondary home owners from New York, who will have to apply for a passport ; )
HAHA, that is funny, Paul! LOL
hahahahahahaha!
Well, in fact, the 19th century thinker and activist Frederick Douglass was opposed to passports saying that the only passport that should be needed was our common likeness with our Creator. And hopefully, if some states can manage to secede, maybe some will try that idea out.
Dan, Secession will NOT happen, as it is illegal, as demonstrated by the Civil War, which caused two thirds of a million deaths.
The Union under Abraham Lincoln won, and the idea of secession is simply a fantasy of right wing whackos, who want an America that resembles the mid 19th century, where whites dominated, and killed native Americans, enslaved blacks, and persecuted Chinese immigrants and eventually banned their emigration. That time is long past, and the secessionists will die off as the population becomes ever more diverse!
Viva la Revolution (with a side of Ben and Jerry):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Vermont_Republic
“Well, in fact, the 19th century thinker and activist Frederick Douglass was opposed to passports saying that the only passport that should be needed was our common likeness with our Creator.”
—————————————————————
Dan,
I’ll remember that line of thought the next time I am in line at a TSA screening at the airport.
Ronald,
Thanks for your response, and i can certainly agree that secession is currently illegal, and certainly will not happen before a lot of people have had a chance to chew it over for a long time.
And of course i agree about the murder of our First Nations brothers and sisters — the Trail of Tears was brutal, and ironically probably more Christians perished in it than at the hands of any Roman emporer. However, like slavery, this was a crime in which both the North and the South participated.
And — given the 3 million we killed in Viet Nam, and the 3 million in Korea (from 1945 to 1953) — we have not changed our spots.
So my desire is just to get the idea out so it can be weighed carefully. After all, if there are Israelis who are seriously considering a two-state solution, it’s something for us to mull over also — imvho.
America is not Israel, although I must say, that if we let the Red States leave, it would be quite beneficial for the nation, but not for the Red States, that get a lot of the benefits that they do not pay for, ironically!