2nd Secessionist Convention

[SupraSovereign]

Secession is a big mistake. Dont take my word for it. All We The People need is to take back our two vital powers, the Power of the Purse and the Power of the Sword. Revitalize the Constitutional State Militia by State Statute and get to your reps and make sure they institute a sound money system based in gold and silver. See Edwin Vieira, Jr.

[unitasetmagus]

The whole US sould secede and scrap corporate dictatorship, government debt, etc. - you don't need war, you need freedom.

[ericd727]

California and Texas should be able to live without one another. Both states and people would be happier. And Texas wouldn't have to pay the enormous debt of California's bankrupt welfare state, and California could legalize pot all day long with no intrusion from the Feds, which Texas controls (second only to Cali). They can still be pen pals of course.

[PowerPlantEngineer]

Notice what these lunatics are NOT doing this time?

They are NOT attacking US Forts because they lost an election. They are not threatening to attack the capital. They are not hanging people who voted for the wrong candidate. They are not raping slaves or selling children.

And the ONLY fucking reason they are not doing any of that -- is LIncoln taught them not to. They learned not to attack US forts, not to rape slaves and sell children.

Lincoln is their daddy and they hate that.

[northpal2]

Free the freemen of the south!

unshackle thyself from the BEAST.

[smokenchill]

please leave the union ...pleazzzze...i cant wait

[techygrrlkush]

Yahhhooooooos. You must be very unhappy people.

Oooh. Crytpo fascist states! This is getting good! :O  :)

[DrewDawg50]

If you think you can do something like this peacefully you're an asshole. If anything you better get familliar with a rifle and a casket. You'll have a bunch of young guys looking to shoot you and your family in about 3 days. You should just know this before you go and do something stupid.

[brainerdrebel]

Why doesn't the Union build an iron curtain around the Southern States to keep us in? The KGB is pale in comparison to the IRS, FBI and CIA, not to mention Homeland Insecurity. The fatherland will kill us to keep us in, burn us out, destroy our economy, blockade our ports, does this sound like Germany or the Union Armies. What a great Union we live in.

[PowerPlantEngineer]

brain you have an iron curtain around you know. It's called stupidty and myth -- and you fucks built it yourself.

[brainerdrebel]

PowerPlant you must have been sleeping on the job, you are just a year late responding. I wouldn't want states in my union that didn't want to be in it.

"If I thought this war was to abolish slavery, I would resign my commission and offer my sword to the other side."

Ulysses S. Grant

[anachro1]

She's just another greedy Republican pig. I pray to the Good Lord Jesus that a moose stomps her to death, then wolves eat her carcass.

[snman37922]

If your organizing all the groups together that want indendence, then isn't this conference the exact opposite of what your calling for?

[jbrazil2008]

You've got it wrong. If you want to keep us in submission, you need a president like lincoln who is willing to burn our state (S.C.) to the ground. that worked with great results. FEDS OUT!!!! Leave S.C. alone! Dio Vindice

[johnnyreb1025]

"Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as

a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be

bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the

new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a

NATIONAL constitution."

-- James Madison (Federalist No. 39, 1788)

[peter70chgo]

@johnnyreb1025 Interesting quote johnnyreb but the general belief is that the Civil War put that idea to rest. The Republicans, and especially Lincoln, made it clear that the Union was indesolvable and that is the idea that prevailed at the end of the Civil Way. Therefore, it would seem that you would have to refight the Civil War to change the interpretation of the Constitution. I seriously doubt that you will find a Federal Court that would rule otherwise.

[hoggdawn]

As a doctrinaire Northerner, I believe that the South must be kept in submission. Lincoln would be spinning in his grave if he knew Southern Americans were dissatisfied with their status in this country, the best country on earth. I think we need to suppress free speech in all southern states so that this cancer of succession doesn't spread.

[zephendroyd]

As an educated northerner (Pennsylvania), I condemn your idiocy and apologize to Southerners for your ignorance. Try reading a book for a change.

[hoggdawn]

Instead of spreading unfounded accusations, can you be a bit more specific? In what ways do you think I'm displaying "idiocy"? I simply stated my wish for the south to be suppressed (if not oppressed) to preserve the United States of America. In what ways do you find that intellectually deficient? Is loyalty to the North somehow indicative of stupidity? Please enlighten!

[zephendroyd]

"the South must be kept in submission"

Do you take yourself seriously? It was the states that created the union, not the other way around. If the North had a problem with slavery, then THEY should have seceeded to set an example, not attack the south for seceeding. Remember that the "Free" states ratified the same constitution that designated non-whites as less than a person.

[hoggdawn]

I've changed my opinion. Upon reflection, "preservation of the union" did nothing but enslave ALL the states to the "USA". What should have been done is to wage war upon the South to 1) free the slaves and 2) to brutally punish the South for their incredible inhumanity toward their fellow man. And then? When the slaves were free and the South brutally punished? Then they could go ahead and have their little "Confederacy", sans slaves. Agreed?

[zephendroyd]

Rarely does military action solve anything (invading the South in this case) because good intentions always end up with unintended consequences. However, the North did not invade the South over slavery, but because the South was paying most of the the Revolutionary War debt, and letting them go would have meant dire economic consequence for the North.

"Let the South go? Where then shall we get our revenues?" - Abraham Lincoln

[EnglishOnly1]

If that is how you believe, then the north should've also have freed their own slaves, and punished in like terms for their incredible inhumanity towards their fellow man. Look it up, the NORTH had slaves even AFTER the Civil War, and this was NOT a war about slavery, but taxation w/o representation & state's rights to seceed. This slavery issue is a brainwashing scheme by the new federal gov't. Use the internet, read the real history.

[hoggdawn]

I had no idea the North had slaves. Can you direct me toward some good history sources? I've read the articles of succession of all the southern states, and they all mention fighting to preserve the right to hold slaves.  Have you read the articles of succession? Do you think slavery was a good thing? I believe it was horrible!

[PowerPlantEngineer]

@EnglishOnly1

Sorry dumb fuck -- the South itself said it was about slavery idiot. The "states right" shit just meant the states right to rape slave women and sell children.

English dumb fuck - the South hated states rights, human rights, they allowed no freedom of press, speech or even religion dumb fuck.

Learn the truth about the Nazi like SOuth.

[EnglishOnly1]

@PowerPlantEngineer - You obviously have never read history for yourself... just listened to someone else preach it to you.

Whatever, I have no use for mindless zombies who don't have enough brains to even look up the info to see what's true or not true.

[PowerPlantEngineer]

English dumb fuck -- I got this from SOUTHERN books at the time. Got that retard? From SOUTHERN leaders own writing - like Lee and Davis.

Got that dumb fuck?

The SOUTHERN government you fucking idiot, controlled what you could say, or read, or write. Got that dumb fuck?

Those were the laws of the South - nothing could be written or said, or even preached, which even questioned slavery.

The fact that you don't know that shows how little you know about real history dumb fuck.

[PowerPlantEngineer]

English -- look into this dumb fuck. Look into the Southern State's laws against ANY written material against slavery. Go look dumb fuck. No free pres.

Look up the laws against speaking out against slavery. Go fucking look it up too,

And then look into the laws of the South prohibiting religions from even preaching things against slavery.

Then dumb fuck - go look up how the South didn't even allow elections in the Deep South, long BEFORE the civil war.

Go find real history moron.

[PowerPlantEngineer]

Englishonly -- Look up UFO's and men who gave birth too.

If you want real history dumb fuck -- read Lee's letter saying GOD ordained slavery and intended it to be cruel and painful.

Look up Davis saying "God delivered the Negro to us" to enslave.

Look up Lee's whipping slave women in his barn - standing by yelling to whip harder.

Look up the South's own official document saying slaver was the FOUNDATION of the confederacy.

By all means dumb fuck - look up real history idiot.

[meetman3]

I think that the Southland will oneday win their independence through the courts. WE have fought for the Korea peoples "Right" to form their own country. WE have fought for the Vietnam peoples "Right"to form their own country. The US Goverment knows that "WE" have the same right! May the last one out of the Union please turn the lights out!!

[RedShirtArmy]

Secession is the right of all free people. We existed before the Union. We will exist long after it's gone as well.

Deo Vindice

[Manieshevitz]

seeing as i cant figure out my stance ill say a little thought of mine.

its puzzled me that in the US we both celebrate and condemn terrorism.

[kenrg]

Fascinating! (I pulled up the page for the California group while this was one) - I'm actually rather torn... On the one hand, I fully support the RIGHT to secede (and the right to revolution, each in Jeffersonian terms)... but the practicality of most of the states surviving as independent entities, or even a loose confederation, is highly doubtful. My first priority is on restoring democracy to the U.S., secession is more of a last resort (but maybe we're there?).

[wogsland]

Eastern Europe is doing just fine without Soviet tanks around ... just look at the success of little Estonia over the past decade and a half!

[cataloger1]

Bradley, I am assuming you are attending this convention as an actual and active participant, who supports the goals of the organization, and not simply to record it for YouTube. Is that a correct assumption?

[wogsland]

Actually, no. I attended as an observer because I wanted to give wider audience to the idea that a state could peacefully leave the US. Alaska and Hawai'i have especially good cases for doing so. I do not agree with the ideals of most southeastern secessionist organizations though.

[cataloger1]

Okay. I just wanted to clarify this. Thanks!

[jackspratt409]

What makes one case better than another? The goal is secession, period. We can all choose where to live AFTER that point. I personally don't agree with most of the ideas of Middlebury but I am thrilled to have them on our side. 'Our' side being that of peaceful secession. Why should Alaska and Hawaii have special rights the rest of us don't have?

[wogsland]

I like living in the South and don't want to loose my civics rights because I am not a Christian. I think every other state would benefit from one seceding because then the federal government would be wary of bullying them to much.

[jackspratt409]

If any state that seceded was intent on doing any such thing, they would be beyond wrong. If that was the approach or the attitude given by the LoS or by Kennedy then that is of course not right.

[majestia19]

You've pretty much convinced me that it would be a good idea if states could secede. We could be more like the EU with free trade and travel between us but without an overarching federal government. I also think this would make us less of a target for terrorists.

[majestia19]

Although after talking to you last night, I realize that not everyone has the same reasons for seceding and it seems like some people would like to make a country that wouldn't allow black people or something like that, which is pretty scary. And who knows what other crazy things they might try and implement.

[wogsland]

Why trade one tyrant for another! Some of the groups have honest, freedom-loving reasons for seceding from the US. Generally you can identify them by their emphasis on "independence" rather than "secession".

[USALawyer]

Gee Bradley, are you trying to have more vids than Nalts? Legally, the argument prior to 1865 was that the colonies vol. came to the Union and could vol. leave. 1865 legally ended that. However, there is a perfectly legal method to dissolve the Union. 2/3 of States call a Constitutional Convention. (There never has been one). Then the vote to dissolve the Union. Perfectly legal.

[wogsland]

Considering most states get a majority of their budgets in the for of federal government grants I don't think that method is viable. I don't think a US government could away with Lincoln's method of violent suppression today either though.

[USALawyer]

You said viable, I said legal. Without federal involvment (though I suppose it could use the military to suppress it), 2/3 could call it and 3/4th's dissolve the Union. It would be legal.

[wogsland]

Good point - but then the Declaration of Independence was exactly "legal" then either.

[pintpi]

I'll give you a challenge. Try and get video of a black person in attendance at that convention.

It looks like a bunch of rich/powerful white people (excluding Alaskans/Hawaiians) bitching about the federal government's intervention, limiting the tyranny of the rich/powerful over the poor/powerless.

Secession doesn't solve anything, just replaces one tyranny for another. Now, a violent overthrow of the current government to be replaced with one that is OF, BY and FOR the people, I am all for.

[pintpi]

Sorry for that rant. I didn't mean that to sound so accusatory. I wasn't directing that at you or anyone in particular. Just a bad mood I guess.

Apologies.

[majestia19]

I don't think we need a violent overthrow. I'd like to think we are past that. But wouldn't it be better if we had smaller governments OF, BY and FOR the people? Then there wouldn't be a United States of America for the rest of the world to criticize, target, and blame. And each of these smaller countries would have much more freedom to make laws or not make laws to govern themsleves.

[pintpi]

I'd like to think we are past a violent overthrow as well but thinking that, makes it that much easier for our government to ignore our opinions. It's definitely a last resort but sometimes I get so frustrated that last resorts look like perfectly good solutions.

We may not agree on a solution but at least we agree that there is a problem.

[majestia19]

You make a very good point, if the government doesn't fear us they will see no reason to change or to allow change.

[wogsland]

...apparently I need to make you watch "Gandhi" again.

[pintpi]

Certainly peaceful resistance can be quite affective but it only seems to work when our oppressors know that what they are doing is wrong and that it's only a matter of time before they lose their power over us.

I don't believe our oppressors think that what they are doing is wrong and no amount of argument will change their minds.

I hope I'm wrong.

Anyway, I've caused enough trouble here, G'day.