The Time of Secession has Come
Secession's time has come and cannot be stopped by any army or any government
One of Ron Paul’s most famous quotes from his presidential campaigns was “An Idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government.” A cursory look over history shows the truth of such a statement, with the rise and fall of many ideas, institutions, and nations over the course of time, from the ancient days of Egypt, Greece, and Rome to the old European and Totalitarian empires of the 20th century. As the 21st Century has progressed, evidence all around is showing that yet another drastic era of change is unfolding, with the current Elite classes and structures collapsing under the weight of their own incompetence and corruption.
Thanks to the internet, the Elite classes’ utter failure is being revealed to the world, both through the efforts of intrepid citizen journalists and everyday people on the ground sharing their first-hand experiences with the elites’ destructive policies. As the full depth of the Elites’ failure and corruption has been unveiled, the common people are also finding out that the extent of the corruption is such that the current correction mechanisms (i.e.: elections) are now largely inadequate as a means of political change. This has necessitated a search for other means by which peaceful political change might be accomplished. It is this, more than anything, which has driven the rapidly rising interest in secession as a political solution across the world.
The rising tide of secession was put on full display on September 28th, 2024, as the first ever International Summit on Self-Determination was held online. Hosted by the Calexit Now movement, the summit saw a number of self-determination movements from across the world send representatives to both introduce their movements, and engage in dialogue on secession matters. From the United States, Calexit Now, Free Louisiana, the Alaskan Independence Party, FLexit, the Hawaii Sovereignty movement, and multiple New Hampshire Independence movements were all represented. The Texas Nationalist Movement sent a video address to the conference, though they were unable to fully participate due to a schedule conflict. From other corners of the globe, the Movimiento Independentista de Baja California from Mexico and the Cape Independence Party from South Africa both had representatives present. The Second Vermont Republic, the Alberta Independence Party from Canada, and the Junts per Catalunya from Spain had also been announced as intending to participate, but technical or scheduling issues reportedly prevented them from doing so. In all, movements from nine distinctly different areas were represented, both in the presentation session and the discussions which followed.
The diverse natures of the movements and their representatives was on full display during the presentation sessions, which all contributed very notable, and yet very different, insights on self-determination and secession and the reasons to pursue them. Free Louisiana leader Larkin Jackson observed in his presentation that “our eyes should not be on who gets in the White House, but rather the people standing beside us, working to make the state a better place” and “we have to remind our people that when empires recede, they often divide.” Through these statements, Jackson laid out how convincing Louisianans to support self-determination was rooted in connecting the cause of Louisiana independence to the need for self-preservation, in preparation for the inevitable unraveling of the DC Empire.
Cape Independence Party representative Jack Miller contributed observations that many large countries are a conglomeration of naturally independent states and different peoples, making continued unification both impractical and detrimental to the well-being of the common people. Using South Africa’s history and diverse racial makeup to explain his points, Miller laid out how centralization inevitably leaves the common people of certain areas at a distinct disadvantage, especially in realms such as taxes and government spending. FLexit activist Keith Bessette followed with a detailed economic analysis. Through it, he showed how FLexit activists were seeking to convince everyday Floridians of the economic feasibility of Florida Independence, as well as how the majority of Florida’s problems originated with “The Imperial City” (Washington DC).
Bessette also proceeded to make a very poignant point in favor of decentralization, citing a talk given by Mises Institute scholar Dr. Thomas Woods. He first drew on Woods’ question of how different the world would have been had over 1700 independent political entities not been gradually consolidated into one massive German state by the late 19th century. Using that as the foundation of his point, Bessette observed that continued German decentralization would have made it impossible for Adolf Hitler to wreak the sheer amount of devastation across Europe which he did in the mid-20th century. “Unification has a history of problems” Bessette astutely concluded. He also pointed out how the act of secession is really peaceful in nature, while any violence results from the efforts of the larger states to retain control. Bessette’s observations led Cape Independence Party representative Miller to add a deduction of his own that “All wars are a result of centralization.”
New Hampshire representatives Dave Ridley and Russell Kanning then presented on the New Hampshire Independence efforts, giving a hat-tip to the Free State Project which had brought many independence believers to New Hampshire. They also pointed out the more decentralized nature of their efforts, with at least six or seven different movements all engaging in secession activism, and explained how this had been a strength of their movement for independence. Kanning also added a little humor to the presentation by commenting “Our main plan of attack is for Texas to leave first, and then we’re going to sneak out the side door.”
Pete Peterson, representing the Alaskan Independence Party, laid out how Alaskans were becoming fed up at being used “as a resource colony by the federal government.” After detailing Alaska’s many grievances against far away Washington DC, Peterson proceeded to explain how Alaska’s resources and their ability to develop them made self-government very feasible. He clarified that Alaskans harbored no anti-American sentiments, but merely wished to have their own unique culture and right to self-determination respected through new bridges established with all nations. He also warned that governments do not easily give up control, and that people supporting these movements should be prepared to protect themselves in case violence is carried out against them.
Movimiento Independentista de Baja California spokesman Jay Arias began his presentation explaining how the splitting of the US state of California and the Mexican state of Baja California in 1848 had been unwanted by the local peoples. He further expounded how close ties still existed between the two Californias, as well as how Baja was being neglected and abused by Mexico City just like American states were by Washington DC. This, he added, had contributed to growing independence sentiment in the area over the last decade. Arias then concluded that recent positive secession results in Baja, of small towns seceding from larger cities and economically thriving, had given their movement an added selling point in growing independence support.
Hawaii sovereignty activist Poka Laenui put forward Hawaii’s background of being an independent nation until the late 19th century. He then meticulously laid out how the United States government, working in coordination with American citizens living in Hawaii, had conspired to remove Hawaii’s government and annex the islands without the Hawaiian people’s consent. He further added that, in the 1950s, the United States government had engaged in machinations to avoid applying UN guarantees of self-determination to the Alaska and Hawaii territories. The United States government had forced both territories to choose statehood by not offering them an independence option and restricting voting rights on the statehood question to American citizens rather than letting all Hawaiians or Alaskans vote. Laenui then explained that building support for Hawaii Independence had revolved around explaining to Hawaiians how they had not been given the true self-determination option at the time they became a state.
The Texas Nationalist Movement’s address to the summit, given by TNM president Daniel Miller, emphasized that self-determination was a human right with all political power inherent in the people as laid out in Article 1, Section 2 of the Texas Constitution. This, Miller asserted, meant that governance must always align with the will of the people. He further elaborated on the dangers of the forces of centralization, which are hard at work seeking to impose a single vision on all the peoples of the world, and removing everything distinctive about them and their cultures. While the centralizers’ efforts were continuing to pose severe dangers, Miller pointed out that the rise of independence movements across the world was a sign of hope. A sign of the resilience of the local peoples and their communities within the world, and the only truly effective way in which the centralizers’ plans could be counteracted. “We are here to affirm that our movements, whether from Alberta, Catalonia, the Cape, or Texas, are determined to secure our futures. We stand in solidarity because we understand that self-governance is not a distant dream. It is a necessity” Miller said. He finished his address by laying out Texas’ general path towards independence, and emphasizing how real change towards independence only happens at the most local level, commending the other movements for their local grassroots efforts.
Finally the event organizers, Marcus Ruiz Evans and Jason Wright, presented on their own movement: Calexit Now. They began by explaining that Calexit was not contingent on who won elections on the national stage, but rather was committed to going through with independence for California regardless, because the American system was coming apart and was no longer congenial to what needed to be done for the good of California. What followed was a long description of California’s grievances with the federal government, and how California politicians like Kamala Harris often gave up any attachment to the policies they had previously espoused at the state-level when they were elected to the federal level. This, they stated, made it imperative for California to seek it’s own destiny as an independent state free of Washington DC.
The summit concluded with a general discussion among the attendees. Topics discussed included similar patterns noticed among all the movements represented, as well as sharing strategies to keep their movements going in the face of heightening government restrictions, censorship and other attacks. Some movements gave more details about their own individual efforts, such as the Cape Independence Party detailing their ongoing efforts in South Africa. There was also a conversation on marketing strategies for secession movements, and how to structure a movement’s image so that it would be perceived by the general public as serious and viable. The biggest takeaway from the discussion, however, was the common themes running through all of the movements, which were boiled down to the following four points:
Looking back historically, none of the areas represented at the summit had ever freely agreed or signed on to a union with the country they were currently part of. Rather history showed they were forced into it.
All of the respective areas’ resources were going somewhere else and the areas were not being adequately compensated for their resources by those higher political entities taking their resources.
Many of the political decisions affecting the respective areas were being made by leaders far away who had no idea what negative effects these decisions were having on the local people.
Centralized governments were the root cause of the problems afflicting all these different areas.
Though small in size and, in the words of the organizers, “a test run”, this first International Summit on Self-Determination was another unquestionable sign that a new stage in the development of the ideas of self-determination has arrived. As secession spreads across the world as an unfolding phenomenon, it is becoming more and more clear that the political order is undergoing a change which will leave the world looking more radically different politically then it ever has. Secession is an idea whose time has indeed come, for as American commentator Michael Malice has eloquently opined: “Some houses don’t need to remain standing at all.”
Sources:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tac59oJUVg
https://calexitnow.org/international-summit-on-self-determination-set-for-this-saturday
https://calexitnow.org/
https://freelouisiana.org/
https://rumble.com/v58vmtp-from-steal-to-secession-am-ep.-28-louisiana-seeks-to-be-free.html
https://alaskanindependence.party/
https://x.com/BessetteKeith
https://nhexitnow.org/
https://rumble.com/v59a36d-secession-speakeasy-97-ph-edition-granite-state-secessionists-uniting-behin.html
https://tnm.me/
https://news.tnm.me/presidents-desk/speeches/daniel-miller-delivers-address-to-global-summit-of-independence-movements/
https://www.facebook.com/movimientoindependentistabc/?locale=es_LA
https://www.capexitparty.com/
https://vermontrepublic.org/
https://www.abindependence.com/
https://junts.cat/
https://mises.org/
https://tomwoods.com/
https://x.com/russellkanning
https://www.fsp.org/
https://x.com/TheTexianDM
https://calexitnow.org/calexit-speech-at-1st-annual-summit-on-self-determination
https://calexitnow.org/marketing-basics-for-independence-movements
https://keepgovlocal.substack.com/p/era-of-secession
https://observer.com/2016/06/the-case-for-american-secession/