|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| SECESSION: MY THOUGHTS | |||||||||||||||
| By Ronald C. Tobin | |||||||||||||||
| E-Mail: [email protected] | |||||||||||||||
| Bob Black does indeed make a very strong case for NOT relying on the Constitution of 1787 for justifying the right of secession. Frankly, he shows the pitfalls of relying on that document to justify ANYTHING noble and worthwhile. I abandoned trying to use the Constitution to justify any of my stands or actions many years ago. I have long since come to agree with Lysander Spooner regarding the true value of the Constitution of the United States of America. Which is, for those who wonder, no value at all. | |||||||||||||||
| Nonetheless, as a libertarian anarchist I do agree that states (or provinces or departments) have every right to secede from the main body, no matter what the organic law may say. In fact, I will say that counties have the right to secede from states, cities from counties, even neighborhoods from cities. I will go so far as to say that the individual has the right to secede from society as a whole and go his/her own way, so long as they respect the rights of others to do likewise. | |||||||||||||||
| There is nothing complex or unusual about this stand that I take here. It is all part and parcel of the Right of Free Association. No Constitution will ever truly recognize that right, and no government can long abide by it. Here in the American Imperium, the State wants people to believe it is somehow eternal, that the Union of States is perpetual and cannot therefore be sundered. This is, of course, rubbish, but most people believe that now. They think that the Civil War settled the issue, when all that it really did was show that "might makes right" in the eyes of tyrants such as Abraham Lincoln. | |||||||||||||||
| An important point about the Constitution of 1787 is that its very 'legitimacy' is questionable. What few Americans realize, in no large part due to deliberate omissions by mainstream historians (who would be better referred to as apologists for the State) is that the convention the Constitution came out of was called to AMEND the Articles of Confederation, not to trash it and replace it with this new document. If this were to happen today, the delegates would be arrested and charged with treason. Instead, they got away with it and thus changed the nature of the nation that had been created. | |||||||||||||||
| It is hypocrisy indeed for American politicians to claim there is no legitimate right of secession. The so-called American Revolution was nothing more than a war of secession from the British Empire. The real revolution, if you will, was the creation and implementation of the Constitution of 1787. | |||||||||||||||
| Secession is a right that grows out of the Right of Free Association. Like any other valid right, one does not need, nor should one desire, a government document that spells it out. I support secession as a step towards the truly free, stateless society. | |||||||||||||||
| As for the Constitution of 1787, I hereby declare it to be DOA. While citing it may seem like a good idea in some areas, it really is not. Let us abandon this nostalgia once and for all and concentrate on the tasks ahead. The Right of Free Association is ours by birthright, and that is where one gains the right of secession. | |||||||||||||||
| I thank Bob Black and Professor Naylor for sharing their views with us on this very controversial topic. Anyone else who cares to comment please feel free to do so. | |||||||||||||||
| [Article originally appeared in the May/June 2004 issue of THE THOUGHT.] | |||||||||||||||
| RETURN TO MAIN INDEX | |||||||||||||||