Posted on 11/29/2012 4:36:02 AM PST by IbJensen
For decades, it has been obvious that there are irreconcilable differences between Americans who want to control the lives of others and those who wish to be left alone.
Which is the more peaceful solution: Americans using the brute force of government to beat liberty-minded people into submission or simply parting company? In a marriage, where vows are ignored and broken, divorce is the most peaceful solution. Similarly, our constitutional and human rights have been increasingly violated by a government instituted to protect them. Americans who support constitutional abrogation have no intention of mending their ways.
Since Barack Obama's re-election, hundreds of thousands of petitions for secession have reached the White House. Some people have argued that secession is unconstitutional, but there's absolutely nothing in the Constitution that prohibits it. What stops secession is the prospect of brute force by a mighty federal government, as witnessed by the costly War of 1861. Let's look at the secession issue.
At the 1787 constitutional convention, a proposal was made to allow the federal government to suppress a seceding state. James Madison, the acknowledged father of our Constitution, rejected it, saying: "A Union of the States containing such an ingredient seemed to provide for its own destruction. The use of force against a State would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound."
On March 2, 1861, after seven states had seceded and two days before Abraham Lincoln's inauguration, Sen. James R. Doolittle of Wisconsin proposed a constitutional amendment that said, "No State or any part thereof, heretofore admitted or hereafter admitted into the Union, shall have the power to withdraw from the jurisdiction of the United States."
Several months earlier, Reps. Daniel E. Sickles of New York, Thomas B. Florence of Pennsylvania and Otis S. Ferry of Connecticut proposed a constitutional amendment to prohibit secession. Here's my no-brainer question: Would there have been any point to offering these amendments if secession were already unconstitutional?
On the eve of the War of 1861, even unionist politicians saw secession as a right of states. Rep. Jacob M. Kunkel of Maryland said, "Any attempt to preserve the Union between the States of this Confederacy by force would be impractical, and destructive of republican liberty."
The Northern Democratic and Republican parties favored allowing the South to secede in peace. Just about every major Northern newspaper editorialized in favor of the South's right to secede. New York Tribune (Feb. 5, 1860): "If tyranny and despotism justified the Revolution of 1776, then we do not see why it would not justify the secession of Five Millions of Southrons from the Federal Union in 1861." Detroit Free Press (Feb. 19, 1861): "An attempt to subjugate the seceded States, even if successful, could produce nothing but evil -- evil unmitigated in character and appalling in content." The New York Times (March 21, 1861): "There is growing sentiment throughout the North in favor of letting the Gulf States go."
There's more evidence seen at the time our Constitution was ratified. The ratification documents of Virginia, New York and Rhode Island explicitly said that they held the right to resume powers delegated, should the federal government become abusive of those powers. The Constitution would have never been ratified if states thought that they could not maintain their sovereignty.
The War of 1861 settled the issue of secession through brute force that cost 600,000 American lives. Americans celebrate Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, but H.L. Mencken correctly evaluated the speech, "It is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense." Lincoln said that the soldiers sacrificed their lives "to the cause of self-determination -- that government of the people, by the people, for the people should not perish from the earth." Mencken says: "It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of people to govern themselves."
Search tools worked for me...
Already posted by Kaslin yesterday morning...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2963827/posts
Before that, posted by Bearhousse
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2901193/posts
Walter Williams is exceptional in his world views. Furthermore, he is “spot on” in every article I’ve read from him.
Best yet, he’s never been wrong.
I tried the search before I posted it about ten minutes ago and came up empty. Now I’ve tried it again and did indeed come up with what you have indicated both to me and to the management.
...and sometimes jerks come along to snipe!
If you're talking about me, please ping me when you try to ding me.
Why should there be three threads with the same content, FRiend? It is common knowledge that there is a search feature, and a request by MANAGEMENT not to repeat threads from the same source. The content is the article, and though this is surely a good one from Walter Williams, but is a threepeat...
Have a nice day, and be sure and click here to donate, if you haven't already. I'm been a monthly for a few years now, and proud to be a FReeper! They must have overlooked your MONEY contribution, or you chose to remain anonymous. That is your right...
thanks thread police
It is also common knowledge that the site search feature is crap.
It is also common knowledge who supports FreeRepublic...
I realize the listing isn't complete, as I am a monthly contributor, and don't show up some quarters. But, I note two omissions, which I trust are just oversights!
Maybe if you two would feed the coffers, those alleged flaws can be corrected! John has a full-time job just keeping us running! Jim Thompson has the right man on the job!
The winners get to write the history:
This was not a “Civil War”; no more than the American Colonies were a Civil War against the British crown.
The American Colonies won their war so the conflict is recorded as a War for Independence; if the British would have won it would have been recorded as a failed uprising.
The South lost their war so it was recorded as a Civil War; if they would have won they would celebrate their own Independence Day.
Cool. link, though it’s depressing given how many people read FR.
This individual who is apparently from West Virginia and likes to kayak jumped on an article I posted a few days ago that had to do with the evils of porn and masturbation. He is apparently for P&M and he continued on and on throughout the thread berating me, as well as others, about why it’s perfectly alright for children to be exposed to such evil.
He’s nitpicking.
ive given in the past and means dont allow it lately -
nice head fake though
that said....
Maybe if you two would feed the coffers, those alleged flaws can be corrected!
maybe if you minded your own business and didnt police threads you werent invited to police - there would be no issue
you have no idea how much ive contributed, so please spare me the pomposity
seems to be a pattern
Thanks for posting; I had missed the earlier posting of this article.
Prof. Williams nails it, as usual, though the central government statists will be apoplectic over it.
and I’ll add, respect your elders newbie
Thanks for the link. Glad you posted it. I’m a Dollar-A-Day member but not shown as having donated at all this quarter. Think I’ll go check into this.
Perhaps you might want to consider that not all of us have seen the previous posts. Besides, anything by Walter Williams is worth reading at least twice.
I’m very glad your a monthly. Me, I just donate 4 or 5 times every Freepathon, and have done for many more years than you’ve been here. And yes, I choose to remain anonymous. I don’t need to advertise like some folks do. I’ve never looked to see what another Freeper donated - especially to justify my rudeness.
Soliciting for Free Republic donations is good: using it to justify authoritarian whining is bad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.