The historically illiterate who blame slavery for “the Civil War” cannot conceive of any scenario whereby other reasons exist – then and now – for a dissolution of the Union. The fact is that the South is a distinct national identity entirely foreign to the Yankee. That does not necessarily make all Yankees “bad,” they are just not Southerners.
From politics to social norms to faith to racial identity, the South has very little in common with the rest of the “United” States. Historical differences have existed from the inception of the Constitution. The reluctance of the South in the 1780s to join a “union in perpetuity” is the very reason that the “perpetuity” line was struck from the new Constitution after it replaced the Articles of Confederation (which had such a clause). The War of Northern Aggression was never about slavery. It was about the North forcing the South to remain in a “voluntary” union.
Today, we see the events unfolding in Texas, whereby the Governor of Texas is rightfully defying a Supreme Court and Presidency that lacks historical and national clarity. It is a reminder of three things. First, history is more complex than Marxists would allow you to explore and, just as it was in 1861, the events unfolding on the border are more than just “mean Texans hating Mexicans.” This is about fundamental states’ rights versus a federal government attempting to impose its transformative will on a sovereign people from thousands of miles away. The events of 1861 and 2024 are not specifically racial. They are fundamentally ideological, which is an outgrowth of race.
Secondly, “perpetual unions” perpetually fail when national distinctions become obvious. The Founding Fathers knew that and, as such, they attempted to create a framework with a weak federal government designed to entice interstate cooperation, not impose federal dictates. As students of history, the Founders saw the rise and fall of republics. We are only two generations removed from people who remember the “perpetual” Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires. Many Baby Boomers were born during the twilight of the British Empire – upon which “the sun never set.” Within my own lifetime, we watched the “perpetual” Soviet Union disintegrate and return to independent nation-states. There is no such thing as a perpetual union, especially when the parties of that union are so intensely at odds.
Finally, the United States is a “country” philosophically at odds with itself. Which is more important to the American “patriot” – the Constitution (or at least its European originating ideals) or a Union whereby almost half the states oppose those ideals in their very political and social machinations? There is no chance of a reconciliation of two diametrically opposed visions for the future of America. States such as Texas and Florida are fighting for their collective lives against the destructive force of unmitigated illegal migration at the same time that Illinois, New York, and California are creating sanctuary policies and communities. Those parties and residents within those states will never see eye-to-eye with one another. It is time for the American patriot to choose: save the Constitution and/or its principles OR save the Union and watch the Constitution melt away as the United States turns into something that is socially and ideologically foreign – thanks to open border policies and increased democracy. One cannot have both.
In sum, it has been apparent for some time that the Union does not work. It has been apparent for more than 160 years. A new framework – preferably a peaceful divorce – is necessary. If territory is important to the Yankee, he should consider a union with his northern neighbor – Canada – with whom the Yankee has more in common ideologically and even demographically than he does with the South. Let us depart and tend to our own needs, such as the border, as we deem fit. We can create our own Constitution while they create something more suitable to their ideological needs.
The son of a recent Irish immigrant and another with roots to Virginia since 1670. I love both my Irish and Southern Nations with a passion. Florida will always be my country. Dissident support here: Padraig Martin is Dixie on the Rocks (buymeacoffee.com)
“The reluctance of the South in the 1780s to join a “union in perpetuity” is the very reason that the “perpetuity” line was struck from the new Constitution after it replaced the Articles of Confederation (which had such a clause).”
I’m very surprised to learn this about the Articles. I know Patrick Henry was opposed to the new Constitution and any talk of “perpetuity”, and it seems incongruous that any of those Federalists pushing ratification would have agreed to strike such a line as would have strengthened their own and the later positions of Lincoln and Webster.
I’m encouraged by some of the dialogue about Texas. It’s critical though that states pledging support hold firm. Perhaps we can turn the Cloward-Piven strategy on them and overwhelm their resources. If not, the Texas National Guard would just join the January 6th crowd.
Well, you know as well as I do that there were lots of debates involving “concessions” and “compromises” made between the sides, both in the Constitutional Convention, and in the ratifying conventions as well. The former are talked about quite a bit in the Federalist Papers, which I’ve said for many years ought to be studied closely by all who wish to understand what our form of government was originally intended to be. Southerners in particular ought to put a great deal of reflection and stock in the Federalist Papers, not only because one of our own (Madison) authored many of them, but also because another of our own (Jefferson) later declared them to be “the greatest commentary on government that was ever written.” There is another “unlikely” reason as well, namely Hamilton; sometimes you gotta bite the ol’ bullet and admit that your arch political enemy (your Hostis) knows the individual and collective mind of his own people better – much better – than you do (who cares if he was a Monarchist in favor of a central bank and soft money?). This comes out loud and clear in Federalist no. 84, wherein Hamilton, like a prophet, accurately predicts that the Bill of Rights, “if added, as contended for,” would ultimately be turned upside-down by those “so disposed,” namely powerful Yankees of Northern Mind and Character. Who among us can deny, with a straight face, that this is precisely what occurred? That we didn’t heed his warnings is blight on us, not on him or his ilk.
Thanks for the additional information, sir! Henry insisted on the addition of a Bill of Rights and I’m not sure now if it would have made any difference either way in influencing how things played out. “They will, when they feel a desire to go further, avoid the shame, if not the guilt of perjury, by swearing the true intent and meaning to be, according to their comprehension, that which suits their purpose” as Albert Taylor Bledsoe said..
This just in from Mark Anderson of American Free Press, ‘Double Cross at the Border’: His sources indicate Gov. Abbott may be just one more example of controlled opposition. They reveal that the Texas National Guard is turning over apprehended illegals to the Feds, but it’s being disguised by media vitriol against the governor and his supposed actions. This is a too familiar tactic, and one does start to wonder if we’re all just holograms living in a holodeck suite of orchestrated programs.
There are no completely blue states and in many cases completely red ones. There are always blue islands in every state. Some larger than others.
Culture seems to be a much more accurate representation of where things are, and we can measure that county by county.
Texas should have done this two years ago instead of wasting time and money bussing aliens to Chicago and New York. They should have bussed the aliens back to where they came from. I guess it’s better late than never though. Good for them.
Bussing them *anywhere* is a logistical nightmare that is wholly unnecessary in any case. We were on the right track to solving this problem back in 2007-10, when the push was made in several states (Texas included) to reassert our Constitutional prerogative to control and regulate immigration however we saw fit within our own jurisdictions. Our mistake then – as it is now, and shall ever be until we’ve grown the balls to say “enough is enough!” to “federal” overreach – was to cowar to the “decisions” of the federal courts and their gutting of our duly-enacted laws of their muscle and sinews, leaving us with the skin-and-bones of emaciated legislation still on the books.
Our southern border must be secured by an inpenetrable wall of legislation, denying housing, denying employment, denying “social services,” and especially denying “birthright” citizenship status to children of illegal aliens of all nationalities birthed in the U.S. and/or in American hospitals. And by strict penalties inflicted against those who house, harbor, or transport them. In other words, a return to our unresolved resolves of 2007-10 aforementioned.
Can’t see the Forest Through The Trees!
Granted I’m a Southern Conservative and Thank God I’m in a State that’s Red. However as my beloved Lynyrd Skynyrd once said “I can see the concrete slowly creepin. Call it what you want but the Deep State is global and it creeps everywhere. Europe, Asia, Africa and here in the US. We as a nation and we as a global civilization are in big trouble. Trying to mold one people with multiple cultural differences into one is a disaster in the making. It will lead to WW 3. I will say if we change things here at home maybe then we can help those abroad. It does start here at home first. If we can’t take our boarders back and depose the clown show that is the Obama backed administration. I see succession into the Horizon. It won’t be like the last civil war. It will be like the Revolution for Independence. Too many Loyalist are in our states. They will need to be rooted out and deported. God Help is All if it goes Kinetic.
This article is a harsh reality that more normies need to earnestly face. Especially this piece:
“States such as Texas and Florida are fighting for their collective lives against the destructive force of unmitigated illegal migration at the same time that Illinois, New York, and California are creating sanctuary policies and communities. Those parties and residents within those states will never see eye-to-eye with one another.”
We were never meant to be united with such suicidal nutjobs. If a Union involves sanctuary state communists, it is a union no sane individual should want to be a part of.
Good article.