Skip to comments.Is it Time to Part Company?
Posted on 03/08/2012 6:11:15 PM PST by B.O. Plenty
The political situation in the US is winding up day by day..clearly screaming louder and getting more vicious.
The left are getting more insane, right down to insisting that we all pay for their health care, food stamps, college tuition...and now even their condoms!....God only knows what their next demands will be...maybe they will demand that we all chip in and get them a car...or a house, or a vacation to France...???
Walter E. Williams suggested a solution years ago. I dust it off every now and then because a lot the younger Freepers haven't seen this:...so here goes:
It's Time To Part Company
One political question we have to answer is whether George W. Bush or Albert Gore shall be president and just which party will control the House of Representatives and the Senate. But I'd suggest that there's a far more important long run question we must answer: If one group of people prefers government control and management of people's lives and another prefers liberty and a desire to be left alone, should they be required to fight, antagonize one another, risk bloodshed and loss of life in order to impose their preferences or should they be able to peaceably part company and go their separate ways?
Like a marriage that has gone bad, I believe there are enough irreconcilable differences between those who want to control and those want to be left alone that divorce is the only peaceable alternative. Just as in a marriage, where vows are broken, our human rights protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution have been grossly violated by a government instituted to protect them. Americans who are responsible for and support constitutional abrogation have no intention of mending their ways.
Let's look at just some of the magnitude of the violations.
Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution enumerates the activities for which Congress is authorized to tax and spend. James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, explained it in The Federalist Papers: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. . . . The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State."
Nowhere amongst the enumerated powers of congress is there authority to tax and spend for: Social Security, public education, farm subsidies, bank bailouts, food stamps and other activities that represent roughly two-thirds of the federal budget. Neither is there authority for Congress's mandates to the states and people about how they may use their land, the speed at which they can drive, whether a library has wheelchair ramps and the gallons of water used per toilet flush. A list of congressional violations of the letter and spirit of the Constitution is virtually without end.
Americans who wish to live free have two options: We can resist, fight and risk bloodshed to force America's tyrants to respect our liberties and human rights, or we can seek a peaceful resolution of our irreconcilable differences by separating. That can be done by peopling several states, say Texas and Louisiana, control their legislatures and then issue a unilateral declaration of independence just as the Founders did in 1776. You say, "Williams, nobody has to go that far, just get involved in the political process and vote for the right person." That's nonsense. Liberty shouldn't require a vote. It's a God-given or natural right.
Some independence or secessionists movements, such as our 1776 war with England and our 1861 War Between the States, have been violent, but they need not be. In 1905, Norway seceded from Sweden, Panama seceded from Columbia (1903), and West Virginia from Virginia (1863). Nonetheless, violent secession can lead to great friendships. England is probably our greatest ally and we have fought three major wars together. There is no reason why Texiana (Texas and Louisiana) couldn't peaceably secede, be an ally, and have strong economic ties with United States.
The bottom line question for all of us is should we part company or continue trying to forcibly impose our wills on one another?
Walter E. Williams
September 8, 2000
I agree completely with him, but it ain’t gonna happen until things are a lot worse than this. Remember that the Civil War did not bring it to an end.
Was this around the time that the Free State Project was just beginning? It was a great movement until it was hijacked by rabid libertarians/antisemites/bigots/racists.
Let God show us what to do. If you doubt this or think it’s not serious, think again.
Always a good repost.
The economic collapse is way overdue. They’ve run out of other peoples money.
The main problem with the secessionist approach is the assumption that the left will respect boundaries. They won’t. They’ll foul their own nest and move to the freer area to foul that. Look at Florida or any state that has taken in refugees from the Socialist states; Florida would be a solid conservative state except for the hordes of North-Easterners that retired there and kept their socialist politics. The left is a biblical plague of locusts.
Retreat is not an option. Civil war is inevitable.
Within my extended family, the Leftards have been banished.
We are already in a civil war and have been for decades. The liberals use the courts and the media. Occasionally they have used violence. “Can’t we all get along?” “No, you communist, sexually pervert bastards, we can’t!”
If at first you don’t succeed...
If the idiots on the Left keep trying to impose their will on us, without reason, then I wouldn’t be overly optimistic about the future.
I guess the thing I don’t understand is that if liberals think this country sucks so bad and they want to change it to be more like other countries, why don’t they just leave?
Cos it’s jest so doggone pretty here.
Who is John Gault?
I agreed then, and even more so now.
i had a feeling the s would htf back in 2007, bought a fixer-upper sailboat and moved aboard...it was an ideal cheap home during the recession...but with current events i’m getting it ready to move...prob will make a decision about going expatriate later this year
I suppose someone sufficiently perceptive could have called for a peaceful “divorce” when Teddy started, and Woodrow accelerated movement toward “progressivism,” (by whatever name you prefer.) But a hundred years later, most of our blue states are broke. They hold a majority of our populace, but almost no assets or capabilities. They have to dominate with numbers and steal all they can from our red states, or starve. How long do you think we can feed them?
“I guess the thing I dont understand is that if liberals think this country sucks so bad and they want to change it to be more like other countries, why dont they just leave?”
Two reasons: 1) They love telling other people how they must live, and 2) Marxists long for WORLD domination, and American stands in the way and must be taken down.
In my mind, fitting metaphors for Leftists are cancer cells and cockroaches. The solution that implies is no mystery. They cannot - they will not - co-exist. They have subverted every part of our founding document and weakened every strength inherent in our people and culture.
“i had a feeling the s would htf back in 2007, bought a fixer-upper sailboat and moved aboard...it was an ideal cheap home during the recession...but with current events im getting it ready to move...prob will make a decision about going expatriate later this year”
There are labels for those who leave the battle when facing attack.
That’s pretty much how I see it.
The left won’t let us leave because we are the ones made to pay for their stuff. They need us.
dang it, do I have to link it again??
I have a more detailed plan that does not require splitting up the USA. I wrote it many moons ago.
Eureka! I have formulated the perfect government
Remember that the Civil War did not bring it to an end.
I can’t fault Lincoln for many of his actions ,,, and he may not have had a real choice in the matter as we had hit the tipping point on weak V. strong fed gov. ... but the civil war caused more problems than it solved , changing the US into a country dominated by the fed rather than independant republics and commonwealths working toward common goals ... The main benefit of the civil war ,, the end of slavery ,, was happening anyway because of innovation and mechanization... I think it would have occurred within 20 years of 1865 without a war.. The real tragedy was that the northern states maintained their punishing duties and taxes on the south and set us on our current path.
Who is John Gault?
The French cousin of John Galt.
if there’s really a revolution i’ll rethink it, but i doubt there be a revolution in this country now...maybe ever...people are too addicted to their comforts, their distractions, their lusts and chasing the almighty dollar
if George Washington shows, i’ll sign up...otherwise i am gone searching for my tagline
I love Walter.
It is my sincere wish he apply his extrordinary intellect and reasoning skills to a rational whereby
California, New York, Massachusets, and Wash DC connect via one of their famous highspeed green rail systems, secede, and leave the rest of us the heck alone.
Pray for peace, but do it sitting at a loading bench.
“A citizen may not be required to offer a ‘good and substantial reason’ why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right’s existence is all the reason he needs.”
— U.S. District Court Judge Benson E. Legg, in Woolard et al v. Sheridan et al.
And the first rights are those of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
A very good question. Let it be said first and foremost in all debates on the subject that this country was founded on the principles of "liberty and a desire to be left alone."
If there's going to be a divorce the party who no longer wants to abide by the original contract should be the ones who packs their bags and hits the road.
We could split the country roughly along lines of red states and blue states.
And, what about everything from passports to citizenship to Social Security benefits to be paid? Would one become a citizen of a new country?
Do you folks anticipate America breaking up, along the lines of the old Soviet Union, into numerous other countries?
Would we all need passports to travel from one state to another?
I’m all for states rights and having more control of governmental functions at the state level. But there are many conservatives in liberal states such as California. Would all be compelled to move under such plans? What if somebody wants to live in California in spite of its liberalism?
I’m too old to run away. I’ll stand and fight.
” - - - - “A list of congressional violations of the letter and spirit of the Constitution is virtually without end.”
Once again Walter nails it!
That’s why I say the libs should just pack their bags and leave. They are the ones who don’t like our form of government. Progressives are the real anti-government radicals.
DEFUND socialist collectives, foreign and domestic. (pick some...it’s easy)
DEPOPULATE socialists from the body politic. (expand on 2010...WOOHOO!)
live - free - republic - individual
The history and experience learned in the years since has only reenforced the idea that the left is never going to let us live in peace..
..their demands will only increase until some kind of extraordinary "redress" is imposed on them. Whatever form that takes is unclear?...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.