Is secession treason?

[heavenlyboy34]

A state secedes whereas a person may be treasonous.

I don't think it is possible for a person to secede.

It is possible. It's called microsecession. Don't have it handy, but Mises wrote about it.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

State's rights or not, I doubt he'd allow a state to secede. I could see perhaps a community, but not an entire state.

Unfortunate if that's true. Jefferson thought secession was okay, and I don't see any problem with it.

 

[pen_thief]

You're enslaved and worrying about whether proposed methods of freeing yourself are lawful/legal? Free your mind and the question becomes moot.

Exactly. My reply was far less eloquent, ("Who cares?")

 

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

simple answer - no

 

[Anti Federalist]

If this be treason, then let's make the most of it.

It's only treason if you lose.

That and that.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

That and that.

+1

 

[Mr. Rapp]

These sound like dangerous ideas and this probably is one of the many reasons why Ron Paul has not won a state. Everybody reads these forums and topics like these show up. The government will not allow any candidate whose followers openly talk of secessions, revolutions, etc. to gain footholds by winning states and claiming their ideas are not that of the federal government. I don't think any state wants to be embarrassed or accused of disloyalty to the union. I think its our job to convince them that is not our intent and that we strive to better our country with new fresh ideas and choices.

 

[otherone]

States could theoretically take a form of civil disobedience to the income tax. Finding a state were most people were willing to do that...that would be a problem.

There is always 'free state' talk at RPF, with the idea that a current state population can be 'overpowered' by an influx of the Freedom-minded. But let's look at Texas, for instance...with a legislature composed of a 31-member Senate and a 150-member House of Representatives, wouldn't it be more plausible to get RPFer's in the majority, and then pass legislation that says, for instance, that all personal federal income tax must be sent through Austin? Nebraska has the smallest legislature at 49...only 30 souls are necessary to be veto-proof!

 

[heavenlyboy34]

These sound like dangerous ideas and this probably is one of the many reasons why Ron Paul has not won a state. Everybody reads these forums and topics like these show up. The government will not allow any candidate whose followers openly talk of secessions, revolutions, etc. to gain footholds by winning states and claiming their ideas are not that of the federal government. I don't think any state wants to be embarrassed or accused of disloyalty to the union. I think its our job to convince them that is not our intent and that we strive to better our country with new fresh ideas and choices.

Nobody said freedom was safe, bro. Freedom is probably the most dangerous thing in life. Life is so dangerous it could kill you!

 

[Czolgosz]

Glad to see friends talking about actions to free ourselves.

I don't want to readily dismiss some of the points made about secession, nullification, counties, legal/lawful, etc., but try and not be too mired in the semantics of freeing yourself from a violent master. Keep in mind that most of us here want to see our actions result in more and more freedom, as far as we can go. This should unite us.

While we may disagree on how to approach resolution, we must remember to ultimately support one another's endeavor. I personally believe that we should consolidate into a self sustainable area (coastal, w/ resources) and enforce our Constitutionally preserved rights together (united We stand). And agree that we should act just as we believe the current Federal government should act, willing to talk and trade. Not aggressive, but willing and able to defend (as pointed out by jm).

Others would like to see us continue to work within the master's system, to re-educate, and reign in the abusive Fed. While I believe this could work, if properly done, it would take generations. I support you folks who will take this route.

If this isn't just talk and y'all are serious, we need to build a roadmap, of sorts, utilizing history and individuals of various knowledge (legal, business, military, tech, farmers, geologists, you name it.). We must inquire w/ liberty activists across America, not just on RPF. A short list of discussion points and requirements were mentioned, they include (but are not limited to)

Coastal or inland
Sustainability
etc.

 

[Czolgosz]

These sound like dangerous ideas and this probably is one of the many reasons why Ron Paul has not won a state. Everybody reads these forums and topics like these show up. The government will not allow any candidate whose followers openly talk of secessions, revolutions, etc. to gain footholds by winning states and claiming their ideas are not that of the federal government. I don't think any state wants to be embarrassed or accused of disloyalty to the union. I think its our job to convince them that is not our intent and that we strive to better our country with new fresh ideas and choices.

I doubt RPF is that influential. Most slugs get home from work, eat their Panda Express in front of the t.v., watch a drama, then go to sleep. I *wish* they actually read something counter to what they're spoon fed.

 

[pen_thief]

I don't think any state wants to be embarrassed or accused of disloyalty to the union.

My state's already an embarrassment. It budgets itself about as well as a 16-year-old with daddy's credit card.

I couldn't start a baking business here because I was baking in my own kitchen (no inspections or qualification classes, the answer's just NO).
They just voted down the most watered down medical marijuana proposal last year for something like the third time (seeing what morphine does to cancer patients makes me absolutely livid).
Our governors here? Ryan's in prison and Blagojevich is headed there. Quinn was happy to jack up the income tax 60% for the aforementioned budget problem.

It's about time Illinois grew a pair. I'd be proud to live here for once.

 

[Matthew5]

These sound like dangerous ideas and this probably is one of the many reasons why Ron Paul has not won a state. Everybody reads these forums and topics like these show up. The government will not allow any candidate whose followers openly talk of secessions, revolutions, etc. to gain footholds by winning states and claiming their ideas are not that of the federal government. I don't think any state wants to be embarrassed or accused of disloyalty to the union. I think its our job to convince them that is not our intent and that we strive to better our country with new fresh ideas and choices.

Dangerous ideas?? No one is advocating violence here. Just a friendly what-if discussion and reviewing the history of such.

And trust me, there's been enough anarchistic talk here to send that signal a long time ago. This is simply an academic discussion. Our country would be better served if people spoke openly about all aspects of liberty. Even to how far an individual has a right to choose their government (if any at all). If anyone wants to blow this out of context and use it as a smear, they could find a lot worse and were predisposed to ill-will anyway.

What good would a RP presidency/liberty movement be if we couldn't openly discuss these ideas?

 

[TheTexan]

We just need this movement to 1) Accept that secession is the only viable path to freedom, 2) Decide on where and how we secede, whether micro, state, county, or what have you, 3) Do it.

Freedom in 3 easy steps.

 

[PierzStyx]

Legal or not, the last time it was attempted over half a million people died and entire cities were burnt to the ground. I can bet you it would be alot worse these days.

This^ In our day and age the USA would dominate any secessionist state. The USA simply has more resources, more weapons, more money, and more men. And it has international allies who are tied up in its continued survival. We wouldn't be just fighting Washington, we'd be fighting NATO. Unless you have a majority of the country joining you, it just isn't feasible. And we can see how much of the country supports secession-zilch.

 

[TheTexan]

This^ In our day and age the USA would dominate any secessionist state. The USA simply has more resources, more weapons, more money, and more men. And it has international allies who are tied up in its continued survival. We wouldn't be just fighting Washington, we'd be fighting NATO. Unless you have a majority of the country joining you, it just isn't feasible. And we can see how much of the country supports secession-zilch.

You're looking at it like it's an equation of who has more resources. It's not.

 

[otherone]

You're looking at it like it's an equation of who has more resources. It's not.

In a world dominated by the pseudo-legal phantom, IMO, the only way to interact is pseudo-legally. IMO, a peaceful, legal secession, validated in a court of law, may succeed when military action fails.

 

[TheTexan]

In a world dominated by the pseudo-legal phantom, IMO, the only way to interact is pseudo-legally. IMO, a peaceful, legal secession, validated in a court of law, may succeed when military action fails.

Definitely an avenue worth consideration.

 

[oyarde]

1st Alabama Cav.

Fascinating , a few things I noticed that are different . The capture rate for these troopers was low . The wounded , mortally wounded , killed was high , about normal levels . What was a bit different was the extremely low rate of killed or mortally wonded officers ( about .25 % ) , death by disease totals , very low ( about .7 % ) , meaning , I think , they ate better on avg. ( my guess ) , because the medical care at the time should have been equally bad , everywhere . Then the desrtion rate was a bit high ( nearly 14 % ) .

 

[oyarde]

And another thought.......

If a county actually seceded what is to say our good ol' government wouldn't buy off the elected government with pallets of 100's like they've been doing in the middle east?

There is history to that , 1890's Nebraska Panhandle basically threatened to secede to Wyoming because of the states failure to enact water laws that Wy had to encourage irrigation , Nebraska , then enacted the desired laws.