The Formal Secession of South Carolina, Unanimous Adoption of the Ordinance Declaring the Union Dissolved

Comments

Suverans2's picture

Logically, if one professes to believe in individual liberty, then to be consistent one must be against State secession, because State secession is, after all, nothing more than another variation of the majority forcing its will upon the minority. The only logical position for true lovers of liberty is that of individual secession.

Sharon Secor's picture

I do, of course, agree with you at the most basic level. However, I also believe that for many, the progression towards the sort of liberty found in a State-free society is a gradual one. It is difficult for many to conceive of a life or society without government of the sort we see today. Thus, State secession can be seen a step in the right direction, and hopefully, the movement away from formal/mandatory government would continue (i.e., first the rejection of the federal government, then state, etc. and so on, until we finally arrive at individual secession or the concept of individual liberty as a workable, practical means of social organization.) Thank you for taking the time to comment, your thoughtful words and precise perspective are always appreciated.

Best Regards...

Suverans2's picture

Your point is well made.

Have a great day!

Paul's picture

I think it would be a little provocative, heh. A better strategy would be to not formally secede, but simply stop paying attention to the federal government (along with other measures such as arresting federal agents who are assaulting the people, such as happened in Montana lately with the drug busts). De facto secession, rather than de jure. This also does not have the problem that Suvarans noted, about those individuals not wanting to secede.

Suverans2's picture

G'day Paul,

First of all, that would not be "secession", by virtually anyone's definition[1]: "the act of withdrawing from membership in a group". (Source: Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page1351)

What, precisely, do you mean by, "simply stop paying attention to the federal government"?

And, what about the STATE OF WYOMING, which has officially subjected itself to the dominion of the federal government[2]; are you going to "simply stop paying attention" to it, too? And, again, in precisely what way will you "simply stop paying attention" to it?

___________________________________________________________________________________

[1] http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/secede
http://www.yourdictionary.com/secede
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/secede
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secede
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secede?show=0&t=1300443910
http://www.wordnik.com/words/secede

[2] Article VI, second paragraph, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." [Emphasis added]

Suverans2's picture

G'day Paul,

Here's, what I believe to be, some proof that the several STATES of the union have "officially subjected [themselves] to the dominion of the federal government".

___________________________________________________________________________________________

[1] Article VI, second paragraph, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." [Emphasis added]