States Rights to Succession.. will the South Rise Again?

[Hangtime]

From another thread that wandered a bit off topic. However, it's a powerful question..

Originally posted by Toad
More importantly and more to the point, there is no Constitutional delegation of power to the Federal Government to forcefully (militarily) keep a State from secession or leaving the Union.

That's my point and so far no one has shown otherwise.

The question rather than it's answer poses a question from me...

"Why?"

Does the south require a seperate nation.. or is it time for a 'new union'? What are the key current motivations to rise in rebellion against the current federal republic?

[Sandman]

Ahem... I'm pretty sure Lincoln would have disagreed.

[Hangtime]

Yep.. and that's what I posted in the Hawaii thread. However, the robust discussion that devolved seems to indicate something else is happening here.. some thought must be given to the motivations required in this day and age for succession.

I profess ignorance, and request enlightenment as to what would cause a state, or group of states to decide to chuck the union and start over.

[Toad]

From the other thread comes your answer:

WHEN in the Course of human Events,
it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

[Toad]

Sandy, Lincoln obviously did disagree.

However, I pose you the question I posed in the other thread:

Where in the Constitution does it delegate to the Federal Government the power to militarily force States to remain in the Union?

Because that power is not specifically enumerated, the 10th Amenedment would apply, would it not?

[Hangtime]

How so?

Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the
proposition that all men are created equal.  Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure.  

We are met on a great battlefield of that war.  We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live.  It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.  But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate--we cannot consecrate--we cannot hallow this ground.  The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract.

The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here but it can never forget what they did here.  It is for us the living, rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.  

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us,--that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion--that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain--that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
 ------

What great issue faces us as a nation that would require succession from the Union to pursue? Is it the monster of the Federal Governemnt itself that is the cause? Is it beyond repair via the vote? If so, might I suggest a revolution aimed at the head of the beast, rather than succession aimed at it's body?

[lasersailor184]

What great issue faces us as a nation that would require succession from the Union to pursue? Is it the monster of the Federal Governemnt itself that is the cause? Is it beyond repair via the vote? If so, might I suggest a revolution aimed at the head of the beast, rather than succession aimed at it's body?

The fact that we currently live under a communistic / socialistic state.

Stunning isn't it?  Compare what we have to communistic states.  The number of disimilarities will rock you.



Myself?  I'm just waiting for them to try to touch my guns before I start the revolution.

[Hangtime]

Haven't seen any state governments that were less messed up than the federal one. methinks that 'succession' is not a solution.

if the ballot box cannot solve the problem, what chance does a revolution have?

[lasersailor184]

No, not a state secession.  I'm talking about tearing the whole thing down and starting over.

[Yeager]

Its one of those tricky issues that makes you wonder what went on behind closed doors as the constitution was engineered.

There is nothing in the constitution that expressely establishes the right, or denies it, of any state from withdrawing from the union thereby leaving it up to the states legislatures to decide based on the will of the people.  Apparently.

Lincoln was most absolutely correct in beating down the southern rebellion.  Also remember that the terrorist insurgency (KKK) was a force to be reckoned with for over 100 years after the formal end of hostilities.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Hangtime
Is it the monster of the Federal Governemnt itself that is the cause?

[/b]

Yep. That's the only possible one I see. I don't think it's to that point yet, however. In my mind, it's the potential threat though.

Some quotes from James Madison:

Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.


I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.


The Constitution of the United States was created by the people of the United States composing the respective states, who alone had the right .

 

Is it beyond repair via the vote?

[/b]

It may well be. That's what we're going to find out in the next 20+ years or so I think.

 

If so, might I suggest a revolution aimed at the head of the beast, rather than succession aimed at it's body?

Suggest what you like. Seems to be that if the Federal Government gets THAT intrusive and THAT overbearing, it will be another Civil War. If the insurrection succeeds, I think it would result in mostly a return to the original intent with a stronger emphasis on restraining the Federal Government and protecting the rights of the individual States.

Just my take on it, if it ever came to that.

From Jefferson:

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them." --Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves in all cases to which they think themselves competent (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved), or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press." --Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. ME 16:45

[Skuzzy]

Revolution is not going to happen.  In 20 years, the people who could do it, would do it, and would stand by it are going to be too old to do it.
Each generation gets more 'me' minded than the last.  More apathetic.  Less involved.  Less independent.  A shell of the people who founded this country is all that is left.  There is no true fire or spirit.  All talk, no walk.
My son complained about it for years while he was going through high school.  "All they care about is the next fad".

[Toad]

Maybe.

But I think there's a point where even the "me-ists" will decide the Feds are too oppressive and overbearing.

Then, with the battle cry "I gotta be Meeeeeeeeee" they will revolt.  

[Hawklore]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Revolution is not going to happen.  In 20 years, the people who could do it, would do it, and would stand by it are going to be too old to do it.
Each generation gets more 'me' minded than the last.  More apathetic.  Less involved.  Less independent.  A shell of the people who founded this country is all that is left.  There is no true fire or spirit.  All talk, no walk.
My son complained about it for years while he was going through high school.  "All they care about is the next fad".

Guns, History, Girls, Kids, Animals, Nature, Veterans..

Thats on my care list..

I could care less about fads..

My fad is WWII history!

[lasersailor184]

If the insurrection succeeds, I think it would result in mostly a return to the original intent with a stronger emphasis on restraining the Federal Government and protecting the rights of the individual States.

You obviously don't remember your history lessons.

States Rights = Confederacy.  It failed twice.  It's also failing in the European Union.


When I do revolt (when, not if) I'll take it back to the day the bill of rights was written (not counting the further ammendments).

The problem isn't a strong federal government.  They had a strong federal government way back then.  The problem was that people became more and more complacent and let it grow without bounds.