Thomas J. DiLorenzo: The American Tradition of Secession

[robert68]

An interesting quote:

Secession is nothing but revolution. The framers of our constitution never exhausted so much labor, wisdom, and forbearance in its formation, and surrounded it with so many guards and securities, if it was intended to be broken by every member of the Confederacy at will. It was intended for "perpetual union" so expressed in the preamble, and for the establishment of a government, not a compact, which can only be dissolved by revolution, or the consent of all the people in convention assembled. It is idle to talk of secession. Anarchy would have been established, and not a government, by Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, and the other patriots of the Revolution.

—Robert E. Lee, letter, 23 January 1861

 

[robert68]

That's funny, because every state had to ratify the Constitution individually and to voluntarily become part of the union. It wasn't put to a popular vote of the 13 colonies.

Those “states” that “individually ratified” the Constitution were just people from each state hand picked by the pro Constitution forces. It was entirely extralegal.

 

[matt0611]

Those “states” that “individually ratified” the Constitution were just people from each state hand picked by the pro Constitution forces. It was entirely extralegal.

My point still stands, every state had to ratify the Constitution, there wasn't a popular vote of the 13 colonies or anything like that. The union did not "create the states", that notion is preposterous.

 

[jay_dub]

My point still stands, every state had to ratify the Constitution, there wasn't a popular vote of the 13 colonies or anything like that. The union did not "create the states", that notion is preposterous.

I agree. It is beyond absurd to think that the Creation (the Union) would have supremacy over the Creator (the States).

 

[robert68]

Please show me where, article and section, in the US Constitution that secession is prohibited to the states.

Where's an article and section in the US Constitution stating that a state can secede from the Union?

 

[jay_dub]

Where's an article and section in the US Constitution stating that a state can secede from the Union?

Where in the UN Charter does it say we can leave the UN?

 

[robert68]

Where in the UN Charter does it say we can leave the UN?

Don't know or care.

 

[mad cow]

Where's an article and section in the US Constitution stating that a state can secede from the Union?

The 10th Amendment states this plain as day.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Where's an article and section in the US Constitution stating that a state can secede from the Union?

You do not understand the nature of the Constitution. The Constitution is a document of enumerated powers, as demonstrated by the 9th and 10th Amendments. The 10th Amendment says it explicitly.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Read the 10th Amendment carefully. It makes it very explicit that if the power to secede is not prohibited from the States by the Constitution (it's not) then it is reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

The 10th Amendment states this plain as day.

Yes, exactly. The Constitution doesn't give the people the right to grow potatoes either, and yet people manage to grow potatoes unmolested all the time. There is a pretty significant lack of understanding around here as to the nature of the US Constitution.

 

[Origanalist]

Yes, exactly. The Constitution doesn't give the people the right to grow potatoes either, and yet people manage to grow potatoes unmolested all the time. There is a pretty significant lack of understanding around here as to the nature of the US Constitution.

Noooooo

 

[juleswin]

You just might be a troll if......

You are serious arguing against the legality of secession on RPF. That is more democraticunderground than RPF, next thing you know they will start making pro stronger executive powers arguments.

 

[robert68]

You do not understand the nature of the Constitution. The Constitution is a document of enumerated powers, as demonstrated by the 9th and 10th Amendments. The 10th Amendment says it explicitly.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Read the 10th Amendment carefully. It makes it very explicit that if the power to secede is not prohibited from the States by the Constitution (it's not) then it is reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

I quite understand it. But no Articles, Sections, or Amendments were cited in the DiLorenzo's article or Ron Paul’s recent remarks as legal justifications for secession; this was part of what made me ask the question. They cited the DOI, which IIRC, the Supreme Court doesn't use as a legal basis in their rulings.

 

[robert68]

My point still stands, every state had to ratify the Constitution, there wasn't a popular vote of the 13 colonies or anything like that. The union did not "create the states", that notion is preposterous.

There wasn't "a popular vote of the 13 colonies" or a legal ratification by every state.

 

[fj45lvr]

The supreme court stated secession was unconstitutional and stated the union was formed by the people, not the states. It is the precedent from the supreme court not me. I'm saying its also wrong if Native Americans have to be forced to secede if their reservations in the state don't want to. Houston was an example btw.

and we believe what a few judges say as "truth"?? the "people" met in secret to form a constitution?? LOL

 

[GunnyFreedom]

I quite understand it. But no Articles, Sections, or Amendments were cited in the DiLorenzo's article or Ron Paul’s recent remarks as legal justifications for secession; this was part of what made me ask the question. They cited the DOI, which IIRC, the Supreme Court doesn't use as a legal basis in their rulings.

Ok... then cite me the article and section that allows us to eat potatoes. or turkey for that matter.

You don't seem to understand the base nature of the US Constitution.

 

[robert68]

...

You don't seem to understand the base nature of the US Constitution.

Then neither does Ron Paul, because he never mentioned the 10th or any Amendments in either his written statement on the subject here, or his audio address on the same here.

I never said the 10th Amendment wasn’t a legal justification for secession. But evidently asking a simple question on this subject is politically incorrect with you.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Then neither does Ron Paul, because he never mentioned the 10th or any Amendments in either his written statement on the subject here, or his audio address on the same here.

I never said the 10th Amendment wasn’t a legal justification for secession. But evidently asking a simple question on this subject is politically incorrect with you.

No, asking where in the Constitution it allows States to do "X" demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the nature of the US Constitution. It is not in the nature of the document to list what states can do. It lists what the Federal Government can do, and anything not listed it cannot do. Then it lists what the States cannot do, and anything not listed the states can.

I have never heard Ron Paul once say otherwise, so please do not confuse your own misunderstanding with the understanding of Ron Paul.

 

[greenghost1964]

Well the power of the people, who according to many says when the Gov't because oppressive/overbearing/etc.......the whole purpose of the 2nd Admendment......to refresh said Gov't......YOU DON'T ask to do that.......you just do it.......like in 1775......but is that right for this time.......maybe not.......but who wants to live like 1960 era Cuba either? Waiting for the knock on the door in the middle of the night.........