It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Secessionist Movements of North America

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:19 PM
link   
'A nationwide poll conducted in the United States by Zogby International in 2008 found that 22% of Americans support a state or region's right to peacefully secede from the United States, the highest rate since the civil war, a trend that continues to grow.'

I believe that number is significantly higher in the present 2011.

Let's take a look at a few of the more popular movements:


The Second Vermont Republic





Region: Vermont (USA)
Population: 625,741
GDP: $22 Billion



Formed in 2003 by Duke University professor emeritus Thomas Naylor, the Second Vermont Republic bills itself as a "nonviolent citizens network" focused on independence for the state of Vermont and the dissolution of the Union. Why? Because of "the tyranny of corporate America and the U.S. government" and so that Vermonters would not be, as Naylor told TIME in 2010, "forced to participate in killing women and children in the Middle East." The group also wants Vermont to become dependent on family-owned farms and businesses so as not to rely on other states or countries to sustain itself. Their flag is similar in design to that of an earlier Vermont secessionist movement from the 18th century.


From the movements website:


The Second Vermont Republic is a nonviolent citizens' network and think tank opposed to the tyranny of Corporate America and the U.S. government, and committed to the peaceful return of Vermont to its status as an independent republic and more broadly the dissolution of the Union.


The Second Vermont Republic


The Republic of Cascadia





Regions: British Columbia, Washington, Oregon (Canada, USA)
Population: 15,000,710
GDP: $618.5 Billion

From Time Magazine's "Top 10 Aspiring Nations"


The Republic of Cascadia would bring together Washington State, Oregon and British Columbia. Proponents of the new country (which has little chance of ever becoming a reality) say the approximately 14 million residents of "Cascadia" should demand their freedom from the oppressive governments of Canada and the U.S. "For too long have our people put up with indifference ... from distant seats of power," they write on the Republic of Cascadia website. Supporters point to the words of Thomas Jefferson, who apparently never intended that the U.S. reach all the way to the Pacific Ocean.
Abundant in both natural and industrial resources, home to giant corporations like Microsoft, Amazon, Starbucks and Nike, and host to the Hollywood of the North (Vancouver), the country would likely prosper. Socially, it would probably be one of the most liberal countries in the world. While conservatives call much of the rural eastern side of Washington and Oregon home, liberals inhabit the much-larger cities of Seattle, Portland and Vancouver, where all things eco-friendly and organic reign supreme. A far more conservative movement farther north, in Alaska, seeks to make that vast, remote state an independent country.





At the maximum extent, Cascadia would be home to more than 20 million people and would boast an economy that generates more than $750 billion worth of goods and services annually, which would place Cascadia in the top 20 economies of the world. The notional Cascadia, were it to encompass the states and province it spans, would be the 20th largest nation in the world, with a land area of 1,384,588 km² (534,572 sq mi).


According to a Western Standard's research study, 35.7% of people in British Columbia supported exploring secession from Canada. That seems pretty high, but then again I haven't visited B.C. more than once.

The Republic of Cascadia


Alaskan Independence Party





Region: Alaska (USA)
Population: 710,231
GDP: $30 Billion

The AIP (Alaskan Independence Party) is a political party in Alaska that advocates the option of Alaska becoming an independent country, though members support multiple solutions.

From the AIP's website:


There is a commonly held belief across Alaska, that the US Constitution has been set aside, and other then ourselves, there are no protections to the liberty and freedoms we are to have as our continued inheritance since the formation of the Union of the "several States". Our main "goal" is a legal vote and ballot; one that was not given in 1958 and was in violation of International Law and Treaty. Alaskans were robbed of the choices we were to have as a non-self-governing territory, and steam-rolled into the current classification of a State. The Native population of Alaska, in a large percentage, did not even receive a ballot because of the Federal Voting Rights Act in place, at the time requiring the ability to read and write English, and for the first time in any Statehood vote of a Territory entering this "Union", the military and their of age dependents, through a special act of the US Congress, were allowed access to the Statehood ballot. Then, as today, corruption abounds. The US government is far and away outside the bounds placed on it by the 9th and 10th amendments and is operating illegally for all.


The AIP is Alaska's third largest political party, and even managed to elect one of their own, Carl E. Moses, to the House of Representatives in 1992. Sarah Palin's husband, Todd Palin, was a registered member of the AIP from 1995 to 2002.

Alaskan Independence Party

Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement





Region: Hawaii (USA)
Population: 1,360,301
GDP: $50 Billion

From Wikipedia:


The Hawaiian sovereignty movement (ke ea Hawai‘i) is a political movement seeking some form of sovereignty for Hawai'i. Generally, the movement's focus is on self-determination and self-governance for people of whole or part native Hawaiian ancestry or, in some cases, for "Hawaiian nationals", without regard to ancestry. Some groups advocate redress from the United States for the 1893 overthrow of Queen Liliʻuokalani, and for what is seen as a prolonged military occupation beginning with the 1898 annexation. The movement generally views both the overthrow and annexation as illegal, and holds the U.S. government responsible. The historical and legal basis for these claims is one of considerable dispute.[1] While groups that comprise the movement share common concerns, their views on solutions vary greatly, ranging from establishing of some form of "Nation within a Nation" government (similar to some Native American tribes), to reparations from the US government for historical grievances and an end to American military presence, to outright independence from the US.


Supporters of Hawaiian independence generally avoid the word secession, because they don't view Hawaii as having been ceded, but rather being illegally occupied. Unfortunately for the movement there are numerous small groups with different views. Maybe If they all came together and streamlined they would have a bigger impact. Though it should be noted that due to pressure from some of these Hawaiian sovereignty groups they were able to get President Bill Clinton to sign an Apology Resolution in 1993, which was an official apology for over-throwing the Hawaiian Monarch, Queen Liliʻuokalani in 1893.

The Republic of Texas





Region: Texas (USA)
Population: 24,782,302
GDP: $1.224 Trillion

Public support in Texas for secession varies between groups. It seems to be a diverse place today, there is a large hispanic population, a big college culture in the cities, particularly Austin which is more liberal than the rest of Texas, and then you have the older (and younger) Republicans, rural and urban. Texas has taken in a lot of college students and young people from around the country because of the state's economic developments and room to build, but many of these people do not feel any particular loyalty towards Texas, or have any strong feelings about its history.

Rasmussen Reports issued a poll and found that about 1 in 3 of those surveyed believed that Texas has the right to secede from the United States, although only 18% would support secession and 75% would oppose secession. In another poll, 60% of Texans surveyed opposed becoming an independent nation. However, 48% of Texas Republicans surveyed supported it

Of course we can imagine these numbers are probably higher now that Obama has been President for a few years, and he's extremely unpopular with Republicans as far as Democratic presidents go.

The organized Republic of Texas secession movement was split up into different groups, some being much more radical (to the point of crime), than others. Today there isn't one large unified group so much as a handful of smaller ones, but this could change in the future.
edit on 6/10/2011 by Drezden because: Spelling Errors




posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Count me among those 22%.
I support all peaceful options, before escalation occurs. Because by then it is usually too late.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Great post.
Wonder when our own government will realise that the citizens of this country are ready to impeach each and every one of them that have contributed to the mass sell-out of oir once great country. America, TIME TO ACT IS NOW. Get on the phone to all members of congress and DEMAND that they rid this government of global corporate interests. You have got to remember that encouragement from the populace can inspire those good few. It can embolden them to help us.! Call this weekend and leave a message. Stop this war, end Bilderberger and corporate governance and to put America first. My phone bill is going to be big this month, but I hear in the alternative news already that Congess is trying to step up against the war in both Democrats and Republicans. Please help! Call a few every day.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:49 PM
link   
United we fall and divided we stand?

I'm not sure how many of the state governments could truly make it on their own right now and offer their citizens a better alternative. They have no cash...not that the US has money but at least they can print it.
edit on 10-6-2011 by coldkidc because: one liners aren't cool



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   
I agree that states should be allowed to secede peacefully from the Union. There is no possible way it will happen the same way it did at the start of the Civil War, with Union garrisons being overrun, leading up to the capture of Fort Sumter...It will have to be accomplished politically.

I do not believe that secession will ever be allowed because the State government will likely never be on board. Even if they were, the Federal government will likely use everything in its power to prevent it, including martial law. As much as I wish Texas would secede, there isn't anything in place that would be better than the Federal government.

The question as to whether a state is a sovereign entity, or is required to remain in the Union because of the Constitution has been debated at least since 1812, when New England wanted to secede. There are rumors that Texas and Vermont, possibly others as well, reserve the right to secede if they wish, but these are simply untrue rumors.

This fact alone would keep any state from LEGALLY seceding from the Union, therefore making the only option another Civil War, which will never have enough support to succeed. It is recursive. It would have to be done politically, but it cannot be done politically at the same time. Our only hope as a nation, realistically, is to slowly alter the Federal government, imo.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by coldkidc
United we fall and divided we stand?

I'm not sure how many of the state governments could truly make it on their own right now and offer their citizens a better alternative. They have no cash...not that the US has money but at least they can print it.
edit on 10-6-2011 by coldkidc because: one liners aren't cool


Divided we are better able to fix social issues, and create greater harmony within regions of the country. Ideally the country was supposed to allow for states to function the way they wanted to without an over-bearing federal government, however this is no longer the case. Unless we have a president who understands this and takes us back to the basics, people will grow more resentful and people will feel even less unity.

If there was an abusive and manipulative marriage would it not be healthier for a divorcee to occur, than to stick together for the sake of unity?



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhoKnows100
Great post.
Wonder when our own government will realise that the citizens of this country are ready to impeach each and every one of them that have contributed to the mass sell-out of oir once great country. America, TIME TO ACT IS NOW. Get on the phone to all members of congress and DEMAND that they rid this government of global corporate interests. You have got to remember that encouragement from the populace can inspire those good few. It can embolden them to help us.! Call this weekend and leave a message. Stop this war, end Bilderberger and corporate governance and to put America first. My phone bill is going to be big this month, but I hear in the alternative news already that Congess is trying to step up against the war in both Democrats and Republicans. Please help! Call a few every day.


And what exactly are you going to do without corporations? Gonna farm your own food and make your own clothes? Fix your own car and drill for your own oil? Build your own refinery to make the gas for that car you fixed yourself?

Please, you need corporations and you like what they give you or else you wouldn't be on the internet right now.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
I agree that states should be allowed to secede peacefully from the Union. There is no possible way it will happen the same way it did at the start of the Civil War, with Union garrisons being overrun, leading up to the capture of Fort Sumter...It will have to be accomplished politically.

I do not believe that secession will ever be allowed because the State government will likely never be on board. Even if they were, the Federal government will likely use everything in its power to prevent it, including martial law. As much as I wish Texas would secede, there isn't anything in place that would be better than the Federal government.

The question as to whether a state is a sovereign entity, or is required to remain in the Union because of the Constitution has been debated at least since 1812, when New England wanted to secede. There are rumors that Texas and Vermont, possibly others as well, reserve the right to secede if they wish, but these are simply untrue rumors.

This fact alone would keep any state from LEGALLY seceding from the Union, therefore making the only option another Civil War, which will never have enough support to succeed. It is recursive. It would have to be done politically, but it cannot be done politically at the same time. Our only hope as a nation, realistically, is to slowly alter the Federal government, imo.


If the U.S. government ordered the U.S. military to "invade" a state that declares itself independent, I don't believe Americans would kill Americans. They didn't have airplanes, internet, and fast ground transportation during the first civil war. U.S. citizens today aren't as separate from each other as they were then, besides people have families all over the country.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm not saying I believe this is going to happen tomorrow, or that it will happen at all. I'm just presenting information. I do hope that our country can fix the corruption, or that we elect a president who isn't owned by the corporations. However, if our country continued down its current path, I would be in favor of states and regions removing themselves from the sinking ship that is our country. Look at the national debt, look at the number of military conflicts we are in.
edit on 6/10/2011 by Drezden because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Drezden
 


Great post! I'm all for it... I have been waiting anxiously for the day when the first state secedes, because then there will be a domino effect, one after the other. New Confederations will form, freedom and liberty will exist on the North American continent for the first time in over a century. It's about time someone made a quality post on the taboo "S' word.

For those of you that try to make the argument that a state can not legally or constitutionally secede let me remind you that it was the individual states that formed the federal government, not the other way around. Also remember that the U.S. was formed because we seceded from our union with England.

I will leave you with this line from the Declaration of Independence, which is clearly talking specifically about secession...

"When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them to another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal status to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitles them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
reply to post by Drezden
 


Great post! I'm all for it... I have been waiting anxiously for the day when the first state secedes, because then there will be a domino effect, one after the other. New Confederations will form, freedom and liberty will exist on the North American continent for the first time in over a century. It's about time someone made a quality post on the taboo "S' word.

For those of you that try to make the argument that a state can not legally or constitutionally secede let me remind you that it was the individual states that formed the federal government, not the other way around. Also remember that the U.S. was formed because we seceded from our union with England.

I will leave you with this line from the Declaration of Independence, which is clearly talking specifically about secession...

"When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them to another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal status to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitles them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."


If the states seceded what in the world makes you think the many seperate governments are going to be any different than what you have now. You'll probably end up with a bunch of tiny federal governments that operate just like ours does now. Leaving the union offers you no better guarantee than what you have now.

Instead you'll have many independent states just ripe for invasion from foreign nations. You don't think China would be over here in a heartbeat since it's doubtful if anyone is gonna come to your little commonwealths protection.

People never think this stuff through.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by kro32

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
reply to post by Drezden
 


Great post! I'm all for it... I have been waiting anxiously for the day when the first state secedes, because then there will be a domino effect, one after the other. New Confederations will form, freedom and liberty will exist on the North American continent for the first time in over a century. It's about time someone made a quality post on the taboo "S' word.

For those of you that try to make the argument that a state can not legally or constitutionally secede let me remind you that it was the individual states that formed the federal government, not the other way around. Also remember that the U.S. was formed because we seceded from our union with England.

I will leave you with this line from the Declaration of Independence, which is clearly talking specifically about secession...

"When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them to another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal status to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitles them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."


If the states seceded what in the world makes you think the many seperate governments are going to be any different than what you have now. You'll probably end up with a bunch of tiny federal governments that operate just like ours does now. Leaving the union offers you no better guarantee than what you have now.

Instead you'll have many independent states just ripe for invasion from foreign nations. You don't think China would be over here in a heartbeat since it's doubtful if anyone is gonna come to your little commonwealths protection.

People never think this stuff through.


I believe it may be you who hasn't thought this through. Do you think vast corruption in government could exist for long in Vermont if it was self-governing? I literally hiked from end to end of vermont in 1 week on the Appalachian trail. The people can literally drive to their capital from any part of the state and be there in a matter of minutes or hours. If I wanted to go to Washington D.C. it would take me a 4-5 days of driving. Corruption cannot hide as easily in a smaller country.. and if a state's population went through the trouble of seceding you don't think they would make sure their constitution would be written in such a way that it would be better protected from corporate driven interpretation?



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
reply to post by Drezden
 


Great post! I'm all for it... I have been waiting anxiously for the day when the first state secedes, because then there will be a domino effect, one after the other. New Confederations will form, freedom and liberty will exist on the North American continent for the first time in over a century. It's about time someone made a quality post on the taboo "S' word.

For those of you that try to make the argument that a state can not legally or constitutionally secede let me remind you that it was the individual states that formed the federal government, not the other way around. Also remember that the U.S. was formed because we seceded from our union with England.

I will leave you with this line from the Declaration of Independence, which is clearly talking specifically about secession...

"When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them to another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal status to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitles them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."


If the states seceded what in the world makes you think the many seperate governments are going to be any different than what you have now. You'll probably end up with a bunch of tiny federal governments that operate just like ours does now. Leaving the union offers you no better guarantee than what you have now.

Instead you'll have many independent states just ripe for invasion from foreign nations. You don't think China would be over here in a heartbeat since it's doubtful if anyone is gonna come to your little commonwealths protection.

People never think this stuff through.


All of the individual, newly formed federations would and should form a military for the common defense. Not to mention, this is where the idea of the state militia came from. They would be just fine.




top topics



 
7

log in

join