And So It Begins: Secession NOW!

turdfrgsn

it's a funny name
Mar 7, 2005
2,020
0
261
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!!!
Apr 24, 2005
7,347
0
261
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.
Dec 9, 2004
3,871
0
0
California
#4
If this doesn’t prove both sides have idiots within them, I don't know what does.
 

TrybalRage

Registered User
Aug 5, 2004
2,035
2
533
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
Feb 17, 2004
5,853
0
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
Oct 10, 2004
14,802
0
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.
Jan 9, 2006
5,051
3
228
#9
California's economy could handle it.

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

MrAbovePar

En Taro Anthony
Mar 14, 2005
13,779
3,173
678
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
Mar 3, 2005
3,753
2
0
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.
 
#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
Oct 10, 2004
14,802
0
0
#13
When Civil War 2 comes I'm shooting all you unionists execution style.
 

MrAbovePar

En Taro Anthony
Mar 14, 2005
13,779
3,173
678
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
Nov 17, 2006
548
0
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
Oct 10, 2004
14,802
0
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
Nov 17, 2006
548
0
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
Jun 1, 2005
142,481
50,271
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?
 

THE FEZ MAN

as a matter of fact i dont have 5$
Aug 23, 2002
42,711
9,695
848
#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
Jun 1, 2005
142,481
50,271
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.