The Case for Secession?
Last week Governor Perry of Texas got himself into some hot water not only by supporting a resolution reminding Washington about the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution but by going one step farther and mentioning the possibility of secession. It is interesting that for the past few weeks Mr. Perry has been heralded by many on the right for standing up to Washington but by mentioning secession, most of them believe he went too far and may have ended his political career. By mentioning secession and then not backing down, he has gone from hero to fool in a moment. But should we not consider the issue in light of what to going on in our country? Rather than a knee jerk negative reaction doesn’t it merit serious consideration and discussion? I believe it does.
First, consider this fact. Before there was a United States of America, there were colonies that became states. Before there was a Federal Government, there were thirteen state governments that were looking for a way to cooperate. Here is a very important fact we all need to understand, particularly in light of this issue. The Federal Government exists to serve the states and the people, we do not exist to serve the Federal Government. The states and the people voluntarily entered into an agreement to create a higher government power to take on specific tasks they were unable to accomplish individually, specific tasks laid out in the Constitution. From the time the Constitution was adopted until the “Civil War”, secession was a constant threat, and not just over the issue of slavery. It was acceptable to consider whether or not the federal government was living up to its billing and if the contract was meeting the needs of the states and the people. Since the war between the North and the South, however, those who talk of secession have been relegated to the same place in our national consciousness as UFO abductees and the black helicopter crowd.
The reason for this is the same reason that is bringing up the question of secession in the first place, the metamorphosis of our constitutionally limited government to a centralized state that knows no bounds to its power or sphere of activity. Because so few now question the authority and the ability of the Federal Government to do anything, because most accept the role of the federal government to meet any need or fix any situation, the idea of secession is as absurd as a five year old running away from his parents yet not being able to cross the street. The progressives have changed the role of the Federal Government from one of a referee between the states to a meddling mother-in-law. Over time, we have accepted our role as children to the government’s parent and as the majority’s ability to think critically of the government has waned, secession became an ever more remote consideration.
I would propose a new analogy, however. Rather than parent/child, I think we have Dr. Frankenstein and his monster. The states got together to create this ‘monster’ called the federal government and they believed that through the bonds of the Constitution and the wisdom and morality of a religious people, the monster could be controlled and made to serve their needs. The ‘monster’, however, is snapping the last of its bonds and is demanding that its former masters now serve it and its voracious appetite. Now in the movies, what do most people do when the monster shows up? They run! If there is no hope of subduing or defeating the monster, vacating the premises is a reasonable option. If the federal government is imposing itself unconstitutionally on the states and the people and it is highly unlikely that its tendency to tyranny is going to change, secession becomes a reasonable option.
In reality, Governor Perry has shown a lot of courage and foresight. Courage because by simply mentioning the fact that there are states, and large ones at that, that are not going to put up with Washington’s abuse and there are no options left off the table for dealing with it. Foresight because any thinking person can look at the direction Washington has taken over the last several years and realize it is only prudent to have a contingency plan. Consider the fact that Washington is loading us down with debt we cannot repay, is printing trillions of dollars that can only result in hyperinflation at some point, that the Chinese are becoming a little skittish about financing our foolish expenditures and now the Department of Homeland Security is labeling anyone in the opposition possible domestic terrorists while we coddle or ignore real threats to our security. If there is a good likelihood that the Federal Government will destroy our economy and monetary system and become even more tyrannical, it is reasonable to consider all the options available. As an individual, we may need an “escape plan” not just from the oppression of the government but the civil unrest that will result when it can no longer meet the needs of its dependents. Governor Perry is merely doing what he was elected to do, adopt policies and set courses of action that are best for the people of Texas. Unlike the state of California, which like a crack addicted whore is willing to do anything for federal dollars, governor Perry understands the practical and ideological ramifications of federal aid and the strings that come with it. If Washington is going to do things the governor of any state believes are detrimental to his constituents and there is no other remedy, at some point push will come to shove. Either Washington will bribe or bully the state into obedience or the state will stand up and defy the will of Washington. Up to this point it has always been the first option. The question becomes, what happens if Governor Perry or some other governor refuses to obey the dictates of Washington? Will it go as far a secession? Probably not but if more states rise up and say no more, perhaps we can begin to put the genie back in the bottle. If not, we are all going to need an escape plan.
First, consider this fact. Before there was a United States of America, there were colonies that became states. Before there was a Federal Government, there were thirteen state governments that were looking for a way to cooperate. Here is a very important fact we all need to understand, particularly in light of this issue. The Federal Government exists to serve the states and the people, we do not exist to serve the Federal Government. The states and the people voluntarily entered into an agreement to create a higher government power to take on specific tasks they were unable to accomplish individually, specific tasks laid out in the Constitution. From the time the Constitution was adopted until the “Civil War”, secession was a constant threat, and not just over the issue of slavery. It was acceptable to consider whether or not the federal government was living up to its billing and if the contract was meeting the needs of the states and the people. Since the war between the North and the South, however, those who talk of secession have been relegated to the same place in our national consciousness as UFO abductees and the black helicopter crowd.
The reason for this is the same reason that is bringing up the question of secession in the first place, the metamorphosis of our constitutionally limited government to a centralized state that knows no bounds to its power or sphere of activity. Because so few now question the authority and the ability of the Federal Government to do anything, because most accept the role of the federal government to meet any need or fix any situation, the idea of secession is as absurd as a five year old running away from his parents yet not being able to cross the street. The progressives have changed the role of the Federal Government from one of a referee between the states to a meddling mother-in-law. Over time, we have accepted our role as children to the government’s parent and as the majority’s ability to think critically of the government has waned, secession became an ever more remote consideration.
I would propose a new analogy, however. Rather than parent/child, I think we have Dr. Frankenstein and his monster. The states got together to create this ‘monster’ called the federal government and they believed that through the bonds of the Constitution and the wisdom and morality of a religious people, the monster could be controlled and made to serve their needs. The ‘monster’, however, is snapping the last of its bonds and is demanding that its former masters now serve it and its voracious appetite. Now in the movies, what do most people do when the monster shows up? They run! If there is no hope of subduing or defeating the monster, vacating the premises is a reasonable option. If the federal government is imposing itself unconstitutionally on the states and the people and it is highly unlikely that its tendency to tyranny is going to change, secession becomes a reasonable option.
In reality, Governor Perry has shown a lot of courage and foresight. Courage because by simply mentioning the fact that there are states, and large ones at that, that are not going to put up with Washington’s abuse and there are no options left off the table for dealing with it. Foresight because any thinking person can look at the direction Washington has taken over the last several years and realize it is only prudent to have a contingency plan. Consider the fact that Washington is loading us down with debt we cannot repay, is printing trillions of dollars that can only result in hyperinflation at some point, that the Chinese are becoming a little skittish about financing our foolish expenditures and now the Department of Homeland Security is labeling anyone in the opposition possible domestic terrorists while we coddle or ignore real threats to our security. If there is a good likelihood that the Federal Government will destroy our economy and monetary system and become even more tyrannical, it is reasonable to consider all the options available. As an individual, we may need an “escape plan” not just from the oppression of the government but the civil unrest that will result when it can no longer meet the needs of its dependents. Governor Perry is merely doing what he was elected to do, adopt policies and set courses of action that are best for the people of Texas. Unlike the state of California, which like a crack addicted whore is willing to do anything for federal dollars, governor Perry understands the practical and ideological ramifications of federal aid and the strings that come with it. If Washington is going to do things the governor of any state believes are detrimental to his constituents and there is no other remedy, at some point push will come to shove. Either Washington will bribe or bully the state into obedience or the state will stand up and defy the will of Washington. Up to this point it has always been the first option. The question becomes, what happens if Governor Perry or some other governor refuses to obey the dictates of Washington? Will it go as far a secession? Probably not but if more states rise up and say no more, perhaps we can begin to put the genie back in the bottle. If not, we are all going to need an escape plan.
Comments