Is Secession Even Possible?

I’ve often read on Identity Dixie, from both contributors and commenters, that the United States is dead, and we need to secede from it. So far as that goes, I agree with both the fact as stated and the accompanying sentiment. The elemental question though is: is this possible?

Jefferson Davis had announced to the Federal government, upon secession, that “all we ask is to be let alone.” Many thoughtful people in the North never questioned the right of the Southern states to withdraw from a Union they’d entered into voluntarily. In the accession to the “more perfect union” was the express condition by Virginia reserving the right to withdraw their consent “whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression.” Other ratifying states used similar language. I doubt whether even Lincoln would have wanted to debate the point in an open forum. Consider this piece of legerdemain by the Great Emancipator:

“I felt that measures otherwise unconstitutional might become lawful by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the Constitution through the preservation of the Nation. Right or Wrong, I assumed this ground and now avow it.” In this statement Lincoln deliberately violated his oath of office by admitting the endorsement of unconstitutional acts…

“I did understand however, that my oath to preserve the Constitution to the best of my ability, imposed upon me the duty of preserving, by every indispensable means, that government – that nation – of which that constitution was the organic law.” Thus, he confessed he knew what he was doing and willfully violated his oath.

H.R Rumburg’s Essay “Reaping the Whirlwind

My point is that the Federal government (and its influencers) wouldn’t just let the South go, despite conceding its lawful right to do so. Parasites aren’t moved by entreaties, or the rational and legal arguments of a host, to be let alone. In truth, the states of the South were viewed as mere agrarian colonies – Winfield Scott had admitted as much to a British observer – and today it’s much worse. The reach of global finance is further extended, more well-established, and entrenched over the whole planet by means of privately-owned central banks. “Give me control of a nation’s money supply, and I care not who makes its laws” is a maxim of the Rothschild family. The ever-prophetic R.L. Dabney anticipated the present and future ramifications when he wrote:

“That power had transferred its immediate designs across the Atlantic, was consolidating itself anew in the Northern States of America, with a wealth, an organization, an audacity, an extent, to which it never aspired in the lands of its birth, and was preparing to make the United States the fulcrum whence they should extend [their] lever to upheave every legitimate throne in the Old World… This, in truth, was the monster whose terrific pathway among the nations, the Confederate States undertook to obstruct, in behalf not only of their own children, but of all the children of men.”

R.L. Dabney, The Life and Campaigns of Lt.-Gen. T.J. (Stonewall) Jackson

Alexis de Tocqueville in On Democracy in America likewise had rather cryptically alluded to “an immense tutelary power” whose purpose was to keep men in “perpetual childhood.”

If you really want independent self-government and a sovereign nation, you have to extricate yourself from the global financial system, which by its very nature is at odds with the independence of any person, family, community, or people. It’s not just Federal vs. State and Local. Consider how enmeshed in the tentacles of technology and a global economy all of us are, and ask yourselves honestly: is secession even possible? It might be, it’s not just the Old South of moonlight and magnolias that’s gone with the wind, but the possibility of representative government itself.

Can a reckless elbow society of deracinated individuals, held together by nothing but a cash nexus, elect disinterested ministers concerned for the public good? Can a constitutional monarch remain a faithful minister under God to a people for good (Rom. 13:4) while in thrall to the policy influence of the lender to nation-states? The borrower, after all, is servant to the lender (Prov. 22:7), and not to his constituents or subjects.

Jefferson Davis was recorded as having said: “The principle for which we contend is bound to reassert itself, though it may be at another time and in another form.” Germany enjoyed about twelve years (1933-1945) of an economy based, not on gold or fiat money, but on the productive capacity of the nation’s people. This was greeted with less than enthusiasm, to say the least, while private banking institutions were profiting from loaning money to foreign countries. What if other nations should follow their example? In consequence, Germany called down upon themselves the wrath of all the politically, because financially, subject nations of the world, and suffered a ruin even more complete as that of the Old South.

I opened this piece by concurring in the judgment that the U.S. is dead, and secession is a desired release from being “shackled to a corpse,” to borrow a metaphor from Romans 7:24. I’m not wishing to broadcast a message of helpless despair, but only trying to loosen the minds of some from the false paradigms of a two-party system and its respective mainstream media outlets that our adversaries use to keep us diverted and distracted from what we’re really up against. Indeed, carnal weapons of warfare will prove worse than useless against this spiritual wickedness in high places that has a technology at its disposal that would make Genghis Khan’s methods look crude and ineffective by comparison.

Benjamin Morgan Palmer completed his great essay “The Tribunal of History” in this way:

“Constitutional freedom will reappear, again and again, amid the birth-throes of regenerated states—for regulated liberty is to the Commonwealth what piety is to the Church—the very law of its life. Both have struggled through corruption and decay towards a complete realization. But if the day should ever come when despotism shall so consolidate its power as to crush human freedom forever beneath its iron heel, then will be consummated the second apostasy of man, after the Flood, in the usurpation of Nimrod. Human history will have completed its great cycle, and nothing [will] remain but the summons to the Universal Judgment.”

Benjamin Morgan Palmer, “The Tribunal of History”

Your deciding whether or not we’ve reached that day will probably depend in large measure on your eschatology. For myself, on the question of secession, I’ll only go so far as to say that “with man it’s impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Our orders are to occupy until He comes. This includes both a defensive posture and “earnestly contending for the faith” as faithful stewards of whatever talents each of us has been given until He calls us to give an account.

-By German Confederate

18 comments

  1. Everyone wants their own “happy place.” Their own “Utopia.” Give it to them. Presented the right way, you’ll have the majority of society “begging for balkanization.” DEMANDING IT!

    Not secession ( even though of course that’s what it is ), but “restructuring.” Even the majority of deep state / illuminati are for it. Russia China? They’ll see a balkanized America as less of a threat. The co$t? Sell Hawaii to Japan and Alaska to Russia. Problem solved.

    People need a realistic blueprint they can get behind, and yes … it’s upto God. He does expect us to be good stewards “and” leave our childrens children something.

    CSA II will need to be “enlarged” and we’re wasting our time if it’s not made ALL WHITE.

    1. Would that it were as simple as your mind has apparently made it out to be, Josey. Nothing is ever that simple, man, you should know that by simple intuition if nothing else.

  2. Excellent article, sir. You wrote:

    Many thoughtful people in the North never questioned the right of the Southern states to withdraw from a Union they’d entered into voluntarily.

    Yes, I’ve written about that many times myself, both here and elsewhere. I’ve also pointed out that many of those same people later reversed their former position/opinion on the matter and decided all of a sudden that in fact ‘voluntary union does not equal the right to secession.’ That last phrase is a play on the title of one of my own articles from many moons ago – Voluntary Union Equals the Right to Secession.

    To answer the question you pose in the post title, no, not for the foreseeable future it isn’t. Conditions can change, though, and that is what we hope for.

    1. Many of those same people? Reminds me of the controlled media filming 20 flunkies protesting something and making it look like ( with camera trickery ), 1000 protesters.

      And interestingly the controlled media would also argue against secession.

      Yes frogs … stay in the boiling water …

      WE think ( “we” 🙂 ) it’s better to die on our feet with honor having tried than to die on our knees in the boiling water. Naturally George Soros and … “some commentors” would disagree.

      1. …it’s better to die on our feet with honor having tried than to die on our knees in the boiling water. Naturally George Soros and … “some commentors” would disagree.

        *commenters*, not “commentors.” I normally avoid making corrections like that, but when it’s evident it’s not just a typo, well…

        Anyway, don’t you have any better analogies than your oft-repeated boiling frog, or the Titanic sinking or whatever? I mean, you really do sound like a broken record, Josey. Besides, how do you propose to “die on our feet with honor,” and at the same time to “leave our children’s children something,” in your words? Inquiring minds would love to know.

        One more thing you seem blissfully unaware of: the Russians don’t think like us, or, well, you, nor do the Chinese, et al. My question on that point then is, what kind of western-centric nonsense have you imbibed that makes you think for a micro-second that you can, somehow or other, convince the nations in question with your wonderful powers of persuasion that a balkanized America isn’t in fact an easier target, say, than a “unified” America?

        I’m telling you, dude, you ain’t thought this through well. Not by a long shot. On that note, I again appeal to the writings of our Revolutionary forbears, whom you seem to greatly admire and all, but also whom you seem to know very little to nothing about overall. …

        1. I sit a top the English language … owning it. Using it as a tool to creatively influence the unwitting administrators in ranks and levels below me. Without the creative geniuses where would we be? Without the ( collectively speaking ), administration, where would we be? There would be no hope for a CSA II.

          There are even places for proofreaders. Everyone can play a part.

          1. A “general in your own army,” eh. Take that drug-addled nonsense out of here, man, and talk like you have some sense.

    2. Those who reversed course may have done so under extreme duress. Lincoln was imprisoning people for not taking a loyalty oath. He executed citizens in Palmyra, MO. for refusing to betray friends. Thankfully, there were still those like Clement Vallandigham who stood on principle regardless of consequences. I remember Steve Wilkins saying that this is likely to be a multi-generational work. I’m not quite so optimistic, but will welcome being proven wrong.

      I always appreciate your comments … and the ongoing feud you have with Josey W.

      1. The original disagreement between “Josey” and me began (six or seven months ago, when he first started commenting here under his current “pen name.”) when I offered a constructive criticism of his writing whole sentences, nay, whole paragraphs, in all-caps (and finishing it all out with multiple exclamation marks). I simply told him that doing such is the “written equivalent” of yelling at his interlocutors, and that he should therefore avoid it as much as possible, since of course yelling at your interlocutors (verbal or written) tends mostly to “go in one ear, and right out the other.” Plus, I told him that, “you really are an “outlaw,” aren’t you,” just to let him know that his chosen “pen name” wasn’t anything new to me, or that I did not understand fully the significance of (at one of my old blogs, we had a frequent commenter who went by “J. Wales,” and whose “outlawry” was as notorious as our “Josey W.’s” is.) He did not receive that constructive criticism well at the beginning, essentially “doubling down” on the offense by way of response. But, credit where credit is due and all that, he seems to have learned the lesson and corrected his initial mistake … at length. (Note: I wasn’t just responding to one post of his, but to several in a row.)

        I keep “wrestling” with him on these matters in hopes that he will, as with the all-caps thing, come to a better understanding of how to properly communicate with people, both in verbal communication and in writing. Some persons are simply incorrigible, though, and I know that as well as anyone and better than most. But “Josey” has given me hope that certain persons, by all indications otherwise, are not necessarily incorrigible, despite the preponderance of indications. Sometimes it just takes, well, time, and a willingness to follow through to the end.

        (Don’t tell him all of this, as, he might revert, in response, back to his former all-caps style of “communicating.” And none of us wants that! Next up: the unseriousness of his constantly using “smiley” emoticons to, well, indicate what? What are we to Josey’s mind, a bunch of twelve-year-olds who can’t handle the truth on its own terms?)

      2. Those who reversed course may have done so under extreme duress. Lincoln was imprisoning people for not taking a loyalty oath.

        No, I agree with you. We both know about Mr. Seward’s “little bell” and all that. I suppose the distinction I am making is between those northerners who reversed course who mattered, and those who did not matter. My point in any case is that Josey’s way of thinking has it that if a majority of “Americans” get onboard with a thing, then, they can, or will, force their perspective on the ruling class, who care nothing of what they think at any given moment in time. You know as well as I do that that is not quite the way things work in the real world we all live in…

      3. Good Article. I have always wanted to put up a timeline for the 1860s global conflicts/wars, I know of a few, the Taiping rebellion in China, upheaval in Russia that made Jews equal to Christians the same decade that Africans were made equal to Christians in the US. I know there are more conflicts at that time, a lot more (1850-1875) you can see it today and how the powers are funneling the world into there trap. The WBTS is not an isolated conflict in my opinion, it really looks like the true WW2 with Portugal vs. Holland as being WW1.

        I hope you would write about Missouri in the future, I know a lot of really criminal things happened to the people there but am not sure exactly what went on.
        Thank you Sir for all your insight into the matter.

        God Bless and deliver the Southland from all the darkness put upon Her.

          1. Thank you so much for that, I knew it was bad but not that bad. The red legs reminds me of “wet work”, our enemies euphemism for slaughtering and wading through blood up to there knees. It just reaffirms my attitude that the war of northern aggression was the beginning of the red terror in the US, and self determination for those controlling capital.
            I could write a lot more about it, but until then, Thank you for your response, my Love of the Southern people has grown immensely.
            My family also experienced this unscrupulous criminal New England power in Hawaii, although the Hawaiians were made the biggest losers, all people occidental and oriental lost their property.
            The Hawaiian Queen told her Hawaiian warriors to stand down, so it wasn’t as Heartless as Missouri.

            Keep up the great content.
            God Bless you Sir

  3. Excellent piece. Secession will be very different than before. If we are clever enough, we will ignite our people enough to want it, and make it economically appealing to the majority of nations with which we wish to trade.

  4. Texas is going to lead the way as they are the closest to leaving the US out of any other state. I support them fully but I hope Alabama leaves as well.

  5. Excellent.I loved it.To occupy until God comes is exactly my thinking.We can’t always change things but we must be here for a reason even though this isn’t our true home.I always learn so much from the information presented here.I like knowing what our ancestors felt and said about being oppressed the same as we are now.God sends each person just what they need to fight on and the great people here are truly sent from Him.Bless all here.Jesus is Lord.

  6. Excellent.I loved it.To occupy until God comes is exactly my thinking.We can’t always change things but we must be here for a reason even though this isn’t our true home.I always learn so much from the information presented here.I like knowing what our ancestors felt and said about being oppressed the same as we are now.God sends each person just what they need to fight on and the great people here are truly sent from Him.Bless all here.Jesus is Lord.

Comments are closed.