How many of you would support a secessionist movement?


#1

The more and more America falls to the left and looses its identity, it is starting to look like a lost cause. If say Texas were to leave the Union, who would support that?


#2

Well Texas holds the right to secede anyways without a real reason if I’m not mistaken. But I wouldn’t support its secession if there wasn’t a real good reason.


#3

[quote=“Ryan20, post:1, topic:29009”]
The more and more America falls to the left and looses its identity, it is starting to look like a lost cause. If say Texas were to leave the Union, who would support that?
[/quote]No I would not


#4

I would not only support it I would move there if they would let me. Yes they do have the legal right to get out if they want.


#5

That’s commonly reported (by Texans), but I don’t think it’s true.

No, I wouldn’t support secession; we need each other. If states started seceding, they would be dependent on themselves for defense against a large power, and the large powers might get excited about taking over the US, one state at a time.


#6

Secession of states would result in a civil war drawn along ideological lines vice geographic boundaries. The United States would be reduced to a smoldering war zone and would be vulnerable to invasion by virtually any foreign nation needing resources.

Our problems need to be solved via the ballot box and a return to governance under the constitution.


#7

The big push for this is going to be when states like Texas have to “help” bail out states like California and the receiving states show no signs of trying to change their frivolous spending habits.


#8

This.

Just to make things clear, if the Civil War had turned out the reverse, there would have been more effects than just the continuance of slavery. The Midwest states were willing to go to war separately with the South if their access to the Mississippi River was cut off; they might not have agreed by the terms of the peace treaty. Separate nations would have nullified any prewar compromises concerning slavery, and people would have had no reason to act in a civilized manner when it came to keeping their slaves from running or helping them get to freedom; this probably would have led to sporadic violence along the Mason-Dixon line. In addition to this, there probably would have been disputes over western territory; the Confederacy claimed Oklahoma and did in fact try to seize New Mexico. Undoubtedly, the Native American tribes would have taken sides, contributing to the chaos. Mexico might have used these struggles as a pretext to take back territory that it had lost in the 1840s. The guerilla warfare within the border states would likely have continued, and possibly have expanded. Within the Confederacy, it’s a serious possibility that the southern states would have created even smaller republics; if crybabies like South Carolina were not willing to take directions from Washington, whose to say that they would have listened to Richmond in the long run? Immigration would have undoubtedly plummeted, and the European powers like Britain and France would have surely tried to take advantage of things somehow. Finally, the war proper would probably have gone on long past 1865, since it would have taken the North sometime to accept the idea of a separate southern nation, if they ever would. Long story short, there would not have been two nations, but a mess of squabbling banana republics that would have had very little real power and would probably been seen as jokes on the international stage, and much more death and destruction. America would never have become a superpower. While the issues are different, something similar would likely happen if states decided to act like spoiled brats and just leave instead of trying to fix things from within.


#9

Count me in!
And yes, Suz, Texas does have the right to succeed. They made sure of that when asked to join the Union, and wrote it into their State’s Constitution. Smart people, I’d say.
(But, jftr, I’m quite content where I am. I live far enough out in the sticks where nobody bothers me, and I’ve plenty of room to grow and hunt my own food. It doesn’t get much better than that.)


#10

I’ll ask this: Would you support California leaving?


#11

YES, but I wouldnt move there again.


#12

No, bad idea. Not only do they grow a lot(most?) of our food but you know they would set up a red state and persecute our fellow conservatives over there. Hate to say this but our federal government keeps them somewhat in check.


#13

You are correct. It is not true.

SECTION XXXIII. The ordinance of the Convention passed on the first day of February, A. D. 1861, commonly know as the Ordinance of Secession, was in contravention of the Constitution and laws of the United States, and therefore, null and void from the beginning; and all laws, and parts of laws, founded upon said ordinance, were also null and void from the date of their passage. The Legislatures which sat in the State of Texas, from the 18th day of March, A. D. 1861, until the 6th day of August, A. D. 1866, had no constitutional authority to make laws binding upon the people of the State of Texas; provided, that this section shall not be construed to inhibit the authorities of this State from respecting and enforcing such rules and regulations as were prescribed by the said Legislatures, which were not in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States, or in aid of the rebellion against the United States, or prejudicial to the citizens of this State who were loyal to the United States, and which have been actually in force or observed in Texas during the above period of time; nor to affect, prejudicially, private rights which may have grown up under such rules and regulations; nor to invalidate official acts, not in aid of the rebellion against the United States, during said period of time. The Legislature which assembled in the city of Austin on the 6th day of August, A. D. 1866, was provisional only, and its acts are to be respected only so far as they were not in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States; or were not intended to reward those who participated in the late rebellion; or to discriminate between citizens on account of race or color; or to operate prejudicially to any class of citizens.

Constitution of the State of Texas (1869) – Article XII
Until the US Constitution is amended to permit secession, I would not support insurrection nor would any Lincoln Republican. Secessionists are akin to pouting children that take their toys and go home because they don’t get their way. If you can’t win federal elections at the touchscreen, it is certain you will not win an insurrection.


#14

I always am amazed at the “it is not legal so you cannot secede” argument.

When our Founders declared their independence I don’t remember the part of the story where they sent a bunch of lawyers over to Britain in an effort to see if it was legal.

I have a hard time imagining them saying “Darn it! We really wanted to cast off the unjust oppression but they won’t give us permission!”

If the Federal Government has taken authority from the States by ignoring the limits outlined in the Constitution and uses the power of the Federal Government to refuse to relinquish those States rights then secession is the only alternative to tyranny.

At this point we still don’t know if an engaged electorate with a passion to reestablish the authority of the Constitution will be honored or rejected. I certainly hope our voice in voting will cause them to turn the ship.

But if time proves that they will not respect the Constitution regardless of the peoples will then it is the duty of States to secede. Refusing to secede under clear evidence that the Constitution has been abandoned against the will of the citizens would be treason.

Right now the people are as much to blame for the lack of prominence that our Constitution has in our government as Washington.

We chose to decide what we “supported” and “opposed” in laws and candidates based on what we “liked” instead of what was Constitutional. We decided we were smart enough to ignore our Founders check and balances so our Representatives also ignored them.

They gave us what we demanded.

We will see soon if a Constitutional respect can be restored in Washington as it has been restored in the electorate. If it cannot be restored by the ballot box then there is no choice, secession must occur.

If that day arrives I sure hope nobody listens to the voices that say “we can’t, they won’t give us permission”.

If the Feds knew their right place they would know that THEY need permission from the States on almost every issue, not the other way around.


#15

Thank you, RET!
I was gonna say…“When in the course of human events…

I’m definitely no Lincoln Republican, but I guess I stand corrected re: the Texas Constitution in that secession could equal insurrection.
Still, you won’t find me asking permission.


#16

What article of the constitution grants the national government the power to prevent dissatisfied states from leaving the union?

How would the secession movement have played out had Ft. Sumter had not been fired on?


#17

Article I; Section 8:
“The Congress shall have the power…to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions.”


#18

insurrection: an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government. an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government.

The federal government’s authority is limited to only those powers enumerated in the constitution. What clause enumerates the power to prevent states from withdrawing from the union?


#19

The, “act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government” part.

I hope you realize that I’m far from in favor of people using that form of the definition of “insurrection” as an argument against seccession.
It would be awfully strange, and out of character, for a bunch of men who just got doing exactly that to turn around and say nobody else can.
Personally, I give their intelligence more credit than that.


#20

The point is, the federal government does not have the authority to say “no you may not leave the union”. Secession is not insurrection because it does not defy the federal governments* legitimate* authority.