The ultimate goal must be secession!
While I appreciate your position and whence I
think from which it is you are coming, this is all very misguided, IMO.
I see advantages each to federalism and anti-federalism. Where I stand on that issue, I am still undecided and it isn't really relevant here.
The fundamental point, which you miss with your great starboard broadside (mainly because the target it to port), is that the ultimate goal is freedom. Given this, secession is
not, in and of itself, a sufficient vehicle. There are at least three
necessary elements any people must possess in order to become free and remain that way.
First, the greater population (critical mass) must be well enough educated and
trained in the
art and craft of liberty. Make no mistake about it, liberty most certainly requires art and craft by those who would live freely, which implies a minimal
expertise required of a free nation's citizens in order that the state of freedom may be maintained on a long-term basis. This cannot be escaped under any circumstance because human beings are involved and in such endeavors
nobody can be trusted. Ever.
Second, that same critical mass must actively maintain and
exercise the will to maintain the state of liberty on an ongoing basis. This is where my loose notion of a universal secular religion came into play, where our freedoms are regarded and acted upon in much the same ways as one's religion often is. The point I probably failed to make in my earlier attempts at broaching this topic is that freedom becomes part of the individual such that it cannot be separated from him any more than his heart or other vital organs could be without destroying the creature. As long as people are willing to trust their liberties, their rights, their very lives to third parties for the convenience of being able to single-mindedly pursue more important issues such as spending time wringing one's hands over what color the new BMW should be, free nations shall remain in peril. Liberty must be the first and foremost concern in the everyday lives of free people.
Thus far we see that in order to maintain liberty in the long run, people need to understand it and the various ancillary issues that touch upon it and must be willing to act in a manner consistent with proper maintenance. This includes the possibility of actually killing other individuals, whether acting alone or in groups, who would dare trespass against their rightful claims. Such willingness is yet another element in this formula because it is often the case that those who would usurp are most often of a sort who understand and respect nothing but unvarnished force. Attempts to reason with such people universally lead to that most vile and unacceptable result: compromise. One
never compromises on basic rights. One compromises when deciding whether the pizza will have anchovies.
Third, there must be formal constructs in place that support liberty and make clear the right of the individual to live according to the dictates of his conscience and to be free of the threat of force for his rightful action. Large populations must have such formalisms in place in order to keep usurpers at bay without having to resort to threats and violence as the first tier response.
A well educated population imbued with not only the ability, but a vigorous bent toward maintaining their liberties first and foremost and well supported with the ever helpful formal constructs that support the ready maintenance of a free state, is what is most needed. Secession may or may not be an additional, distantly secondary consideration. I see some great virtues in federalism when properly constructed and administered, just as I see equally potential hazards in anti-federalism. Each has its virtues and drawbacks. Each is wholly dependent upon the quality and demeanor of the people whom they purport to serve, for it is precisely those people who comprise the body of governance and not some ill-defined third-party fiction called "government" or "the state" or even "the people", whose reality is naught but a lie foisted upon people too ignorant or lazy to know or care about the truth. This is a central truth that most people fail to grasp. It is so because to acknowledge it would then demand right action on their parts, which in turn demands responsibility for themselves - a demand with which far too many refuse to be burdened. This is why our nation is in the shape we now find it. Until enough
people decide to choose true freedom, which exacts a high cost in personal responsibility, we will continue the slide into bald faced slavery, thinking that we can get something for nothing.
Also, one given that should always be assumed is that there will
always be one or more cadres of gangsters looking for ways to take what you have without permission, whether it be the fruits of your labor, your freedom, or other rightful possessions. This is called "getting over" and it is as old as the hills.
I am sure there are a few of you that want to shoot me because I keep repeating the same things over and over. I apologize for being such a broken record, but to date I see very little evidence that too many people understand what is REALLY needed here, which is a return to basics and self-examination.
As usual, my plugged nickel's worth.
So you are judging "success" by what? Sorry but I'm an outcomes driven person. South Carolina wanted the protectionist tariff overturned and they won. The south wanted to protect slavery and prevent the Morill tariff and they lost. Had the south not seceded they could have beaten the Morill tariff in the senate! Yes that's right. The number of senators the south lost by seceding would have been enough to defeat the Morill tariff in a straight up or down vote. Heck, if the southern senators had just stayed in the senate instead of withdrawing themselves they could have won the vote. So no. My argument isn't "stupid". The south's political calculus was "stupid".
