And So It Begins: Secession NOW!

turdfrgsn

it's a funny name
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
2,020
Likes
0
Points
261
Location
North Beach, MD
#1
Secessionists Meeting in Tennessee

By BILL POOVEY – 6 hours ago

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. (AP) — In an unlikely marriage of desire to secede from the United States, two advocacy groups from opposite political traditions — New England and the South — are sitting down to talk.

Tired of foreign wars and what they consider right-wing courts, the Middlebury Institute wants liberal states like Vermont to be able to secede peacefully.

That sounds just fine to the League of the South, a conservative group that refuses to give up on Southern independence.

"We believe that an independent South, or Hawaii, Alaska, or Vermont would be better able to serve the interest of everybody, regardless of race or ethnicity," said Michael Hill of Killen, Ala., president of the League of the South.

Separated by hundreds of miles and divergent political philosophies, the Middlebury Institute and the League of the South are hosting a two-day Secessionist Convention starting Wednesday in Chattanooga.

They expect to attract supporters from California, Alaska and Hawaii, inviting anyone who wants to dissolve the Union so states can save themselves from an overbearing federal government.

If allowed to go their own way, New Englanders "probably would allow abortion and have gun control," Hill said, while Southerners "would probably crack down on illegal immigration harder than it is being now."

The U.S. Constitution does not explicitly prohibit secession, but few people think it is politically viable.

Vermont, one of the nation's most liberal states, has become a hotbed for liberal secessionists, a fringe movement that gained new traction because of the Iraq war, rising oil prices and the formation of several pro-secession groups.

Thomas Naylor, the founder of one of those groups, the Second Vermont Republic, said the friendly relationship with the League of the South doesn't mean everyone shares all the same beliefs.

But Naylor, a retired Duke University professor, said the League of the South shares his group's opposition to the federal government and the need to pursue secession.

"It doesn't matter if our next president is Condoleeza (Rice) or Hillary (Clinton), it is going to be grim," said Naylor, adding that there are secessionist movements in more than 25 states, including Hawaii, Alaska, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Texas.

The Middlebury Institute, based in Cold Spring, N.Y., was started in 2005. Its followers, disillusioned by the Iraq war and federal imperialism, share the idea of states becoming independent republics. They contend their movement is growing.

The first North American Separatist Convention was held last fall in Vermont, which, unlike most Southern states, supports civil unions. Voters there elected a socialist to the U.S. Senate.

Middlebury director Kirpatrick Sale said Hill offered to sponsor the second secessionist convention, but the co-sponsor arrangement was intended to show that "the folks up north regard you as legitimate colleagues."

"It bothers me that people have wrongly declared them to be racists," Sale said.

The League of the South says it is not racist, but proudly displays a Confederate Battle Flag on its banner.

Mark Potok, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Project, which monitors hate groups, said the League of the South "has been on our list close to a decade."

"What is remarkable and really astounding about this situation is we see people and institutions who are supposedly on the progressive left rubbing shoulders with bona fide white supremacists," Potok said.

Sale said the League of the South "has not done or said anything racist in its 14 years of existence," and that the Southern Poverty Law Center is not credible.

"They call everybody racists," Sale said. "There are, no doubt, racists in the League of the South, and there are, no doubt, racists everywhere."

Harry Watson, director of the Center For the Study of the American South and a history professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said it was a surprise to see The Middlebury Institute conferring with the League of the South, "an organization that's associated with a cause that many of us associate with the preservation of slavery."

He said the unlikely partnering "represents the far left and far right of American politics coming together."
On the Net:

* Middlebury Institute: http://middleburyinstitute.org/
* League of the South: http://www.leagueofthesouth.net
* Second Vermont Republic: http://www.vermontrepublic.org/
* Southern Poverty Law Center: http://www.splcenter.org/index.jsp

Hosted by Google
Copyright © 2007 The Associated P
 

HummerTuesdays

Another girrrrl!!!
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
7,347
Likes
0
Points
261
Location
On the road to ruin
#2
It'll never happen. All the federal elected & appointed officials would lose their office & the pay offs. They won't allow their friends to be without a cushy job.
 

weakside

He was stupid. I was lucky. I will visit him soon.
Joined
Dec 9, 2004
Messages
3,871
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
California
#4
If this doesn’t prove both sides have idiots within them, I don't know what does.
 

TrybalRage

Registered User
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
2,035
Likes
2
Points
533
Location
Kennesaw, GA
#5
Funny how little they know about each other.

They say that Vermont would enact gun control, when in fact Vermont has the laxest laws in the nation regarding concealed carry.
 

Fr. Dougal

Registered User
Joined
Feb 17, 2004
Messages
5,853
Likes
0
Points
216
#6
Could it really happen in Vermont? Let's say a Republican gets elected in '08, and Vermontonians (?) are really pissed off.

They get it on a statewide ballot of some sort... and the measure passes.

What happens then?
 

abudabit

New Wackbag
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
14,802
Likes
0
Points
0
#7
As a confederate I see this as a good thing. It won't succeed, but perhaps it will help raise the incredibly important issue of the increasingly overbearing federal government.
 

TheDrip

I'm bi-winning.
Joined
Jan 9, 2006
Messages
5,051
Likes
3
Points
228
#9
California's economy could handle it.

That being said, it's a batshit crazy idea.
 

MrAbovePar

En Taro Anthony
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
13,775
Likes
3,168
Points
678
Location
Covington. La
#10
Funny how little they know about each other.

They say that Vermont would enact gun control, when in fact Vermont has the laxest laws in the nation regarding concealed carry.
Just wait. The state's getting more liberal each year. Eventually the Massachusetts exodus will make NH and Vermont both mini-Masses.
 

Xyn

3 letters, 0 meaning
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
3,753
Likes
2
Points
0
Location
California
#11
California's economy could handle it.

That being said, it's a batshit crazy idea.
Damn right. California's economy rivals most nations.

But yeah, the idea is batshit crazy. Didn't we already fight a war over this?

Forget WW III, it's time for CW II.
 

PCLoadLetter

Crinkle Crinkle!
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
2,806
Likes
2
Points
313
Location
Fort Wayne, IN by way of Westchester Co., NY
#12
Could it really happen in Vermont? Let's say a Republican gets elected in '08, and Vermontonians (?) are really pissed off.

They get it on a statewide ballot of some sort... and the measure passes.

What happens then?
We let them secede, wait a month, then invade. Kill all the dipshits who think they're too good to be part of the union or ship them off to upstate gulags, install a proper state government, and then we can all have a pint of Phish Food and get back to normal.
 

abudabit

New Wackbag
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
14,802
Likes
0
Points
0
#13
When Civil War 2 comes I'm shooting all you unionists execution style.
 

MrAbovePar

En Taro Anthony
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
13,775
Likes
3,168
Points
678
Location
Covington. La
#15
Now that I thought about it.. Vermont would have their guns banned. Without the gun-friendly states acting as a counterweight they'll institute far reaching federal gun bans and Vermont would just get snowed over.
 

Treat_Yourself

Registered User
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Messages
548
Likes
0
Points
0
#16
Damn right. California's economy rivals most nations.

But yeah, the idea is batshit crazy. Didn't we already fight a war over this?

Forget WW III, it's time for CW II.
It's amazing how rich many of the states are. Here's a link to a map showing what nation most closely approximates the GDP of each state.


http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/350816052_0a392a0d28_o1.jpg

New Jersey's economy is about as big as Russia's. That's pretty impressive for such a small state.
 

abudabit

New Wackbag
Joined
Oct 10, 2004
Messages
14,802
Likes
0
Points
0
#17
New Jersey's economy is about as big as Russia's. That's pretty impressive for such a small state.

Not really, Russia sucks. It might as well be smack dab in the center of Africa, nothing would change.
 

Treat_Yourself

Registered User
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Messages
548
Likes
0
Points
0
#18
Not really, Russia sucks. It might as well be smack dab in the center of Africa, nothing would change.
It's not that bad. Also the GDP measured per capita in New Jersey would be much higher due to our lower population.
 

LiddyRules

I'm Gonna Be The Bestest Pilot In The Whole Galaxy
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
140,888
Likes
49,518
Points
644
#19
If there is a Civil War 2, I really don't know which side I'd go to as I hate them both so much right now. Can I go to the 1920s Gangster Planet State?
 

d0uche_n0zzle

**Negative_Creep**
Joined
Sep 15, 2004
Messages
46,646
Likes
6,848
Points
693
Location
F.U.B.A.R
#20
You can be on Team Indifferent.
 

THE FEZ MAN

as a matter of fact i dont have 5$
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
41,261
Likes
8,953
Points
768
#22
i just dont know, i thought the entire idea of "states" was to let each state to be able to control themselves the problem is the federal government constantly overstepping there bounds
 

LiddyRules

I'm Gonna Be The Bestest Pilot In The Whole Galaxy
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
140,888
Likes
49,518
Points
644
#23
i just dont know, i thought the entire idea of "states" was to let each state to be able to control themselves the problem is the federal government constantly overstepping there bounds
Republicans are supposed to be smaller government.

No, seriously.

You can be on Team Indifferent.
Eh, can't bother.
 
Top Bottom