Secession yesterday and today

The HumanClick button, just a way of contacting us direct, live and in person (well, almost !). There's nothing to download, it just opens a little pop up browser window running a Java Script, then "we'" will be in our own little private chat room. If we are online, you can contact a human, either BJ or me (AJ). If we are offline, you can contact us by email. You don't have to give your email address, but it does mean we can't reply.

Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, understood the value of secession and rebellion. Mr. Jefferson understood that a strong centralized government has the tendency to become drunk with power; i.e., power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Which is why he advocates this right in the Declaration itself:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Furthermore, in reading the Declaration of Independence, It becomes obvious that many of the grievances expressed by the fore fathers of the United States are the same in nature to those expressed by the Confederate States, such as:

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their acts of pretended Legislation.

The issue of slavery was for the most part "PR" campaign propaganda utilized by both parties to justify each ones own warring actions. The fact of the matter is very few (if any) wars through out the history of humanity have ever been fought for humanitarian reasons. Power, politics, and economics are the roots from which war sprouts. It was true for the American Revolution and it was true for the War Between the States (the term Civil War would be inaccurate, in that the goal of the South was not to overthrow the Union Government, but simply to secede and form their own independent national government).

For the opponents who will cry that these words were taken out of context or misinterpreted; that argument is easily debunked. Quoting from a letter written to Abigail Adams just before ratification of the constitution, Mr. Jefferson said, "The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive." and the following statement during Shay's Rebellion, "God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion."

The Great Emancipator himself, Abraham Lincoln, made essentially the almost exact same statement in 1848 (before becoming President and before the war), "Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right-a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own so much of the territory as they inhabit.

As for the argument for "you lost the war, so get over it already", take an example from the people of the various nations that once made up the former Soviet Union. From the ashes of destruction and discontent arises a renewed Phoenix. A military surrender is just that, just a military surrender. To kill a peoples spirit is far more difficult than simply forcing their military to surrender.

The principles and vision of the New England Confederation, a Coalition for New England's Future are best expressed in two documents that have been adopted by our organization: The Lowell Declaration (Oct., 1997) and the Portland Resolution (May, 1999).

Principles for the New England Confederation Promulgated at Lowell, Massachusetts October 9, 1997 by the Executive Committee of the New England Confederation, a Coalition for New England's Future

4. Citizens have a basic right to affect the way their governments exercise power, how they respond to the needs and wants of the people they were created to serve, and how those governments are constituted.

The purpose of the New England Confederation, a Coalition for New England's Future is to work toward greater cooperation among the six New England states, with the goals of greater sovereignty and greater autonomy for the region in economic, political and social policy.

2. Building a broad-based and bi-partisan coalition of citizens in each New England state who are interested in securing greater sovereignty for New England.

4. Establishing a new political framework for regional cooperation, which will enable New England to address regional concerns in an effective manner within the greater national and international community.

1. THAT New England is a historically, geographically and politically recognized region consisting of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut;

2. THAT the New England States, while each having their separate identities, constitutions, governments, social and political systems and economic needs, nevertheless share crucial factors in common that they do not wholly share with other nations, states or regions;

3. THAT these factors include a living tradition of individual liberty; an interwoven history, culture and regional identity; common economic and commercial interests; common environmental needs; common social problems; shared natural resources; a common tourism base, and a common transportation and trade infrastructure;

1. THAT ever-increasing power over the factors in Section (A), Paragraph (3) had been assumed by the central government in Washington, in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, and that the central government routinely engages in regulation, taxation and social engineering not authorized by the Constitution;

3. THAT as individual states and as a region, New England needs to recover authority over its own affairs and to reassert its voice within the communal life of the United States of America.

4. THAT the most effective way to do so is by HOME RULE, defined as 1) the divestiture by the central government of all rights and powers not granted to it by the Constitution of the United States of America and 2) the creation and operation of a New England regional legislative body with a structure to be determined by the lawful governments of the six states, which legislative body will facilitate New England self-government in matters of regional economic and commercial interests and regulation, environmental affairs, education, urban planning, immigration and foreign trade.

THAT The New England Confederation, A Coalition for New England's Future, sets NEW ENGLAND HOME RULE as its single and ultimate goal, and that all its efforts, resources and activities will be dedicated to this end.

Until we as Alaskans recieve our Ultimate Goal, the AIP will continue to strive to make Alaska a better place to live with less government interference in our every day lives.

The call for this vote is in furtherance of the dream of the Alaskan Independence Party's founding father, Joe Vogler, that Alaskans achieve independence under a minimal government, fully responsive to the people, and promoting a peaceful and lawful means of resolving differences.

One meaning of "sovereignty" is control over land and natural resources: the land, the water in the land, the ocean (including a 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone) and the air we breathe. We know well that the indigenous approach to "managing" these "resources" is fundamentally different from the Western colonial approach, emphasizing balance, reciprocity and sustainability versus domination, exploitation and exhaustion.

As stated in U.S. Public Law 103-150, the "Apology Resolution" to Native Hawaiians, "prior to the arrival of the first Europeans in 1778, the Native Hawaiian people lived in a highly organized, self-sufficient, subsistent social system based on communal land tenure" which supported a population estimated by some to have been as much as one million people, in the same range as the number who inhabit Hawaii today.

While we cannot and do not seek to return to 1778 and pre-contact Hawai'i, the traditional Kanaka Maoli (Native Hawaiian) values are still intact and as relevant as ever, and can still be applied as the basis of national policy today, and in the everyday lives of the people of the Nation, including fundamentally new and innovative approaches to land administration and land tenure

At the heart of Hawaiian values is the concept of Malama 'Aina, to care for the land. These words are very strong and present with Kanaka Maoli people who practice their values every day. Many non-Hawaiians who have lived close to this precious land for a time have also come to deeply appreciate this way of being.

Independence is more than just a political status. In the same way that one might seek an independent home - off the grid, self-sufficient, and less vulnerable to the economic, political, and environmental turbulence of the surrounding world - Kanaka Maoli seek an independent homeland.

Hawaii now imports more than three-quarters of its food, and over ninety percent of its energy. This is dependence. Being one of the most isolated land masses in the world with thousands of miles of ocean between us and the nearest continent, it is only common sense to move toward real independence.

Hawaii has a major role to play as an international trading port and financial center, and will certainly participate actively in the global economy. At the same time, we also realize the essential need for local self-reliance, local control of resources, and community based planning and economic development as part of the overall vision of a sustainable and bountiful future. Political independence is one necessary step toward real economic and material independence, toward real sustainability and security.

As we ponder the transition to an alternative vision for Hawaii's future, the opportunities for a harmonic blend of the past and the future abound. Hawai`i's traditional agriculture and aquaculture were some of the most advanced in the world, multiplying nature's productivity manifold in truly sustainable reciprocal systems. The knowledge and use of these systems remains, and the movement to clear the fallow taro fields and restore the unused fishponds is growing daily.

At the same time, innovative future technologies that make appropriate use of energy, resources and "waste" have a great potential in Hawaii. The availability of such technologies is increasing, and the independent Nation of Hawai`i will seek to take full advantage of these, both for our own benefit here at home, and also as a model for the rest of the world.

Hawaii is imagined around the globe as paradise, and millions of people from all nations visit here every year to share a bit of Aloha. The closer Hawai`i actually comes to being paradise - sustainable, bountiful, secure - the more that possibility will be shared with its multitude of visitors to be carried back into their visions of their own communities.

There is no place in the world like Hawai`i - no place that more needs to be truly independent, and no place that would more benefit the world by becoming so.

The Southern party was established in order to serve as a regional/nationalist party for the people of Dixie. From the very beginning, we have spoken forthrightly for the right of self- determination and independence for the people of the Southland.

We believe outright independence remains both constitutionally and morally a valid and viable option for the people of Dixie. However, thanks to decades of political indoctrination by a Northern-inspired public school system, many Southerners wrongly believe a peaceful, orderly pursuit of independence via the ballot box is unconstitutional.

Our goal of eventual, but complete, independence for the people of Dixie remains firm and unchanged. However, in light of the current social and cultural condition of the Southern people, it is clear that the task of securing full political independence for Dixie might require decades and perhaps even generations to acheive. We must remember that Irish independence wasn't built in a day -- nor was Scottish and Welsh nationalism.

We must also remember that the dream of Southern independence dates back to the early 1830's and so our own experience is not unlike those of other national groups.

Knowing this, we take comfort in knowing that God will work his will among us in his own time and in his own way. If patience is a simple virtue, then a selfless dedication on our part to advancing the idea of Southern independence, whether it is to be achieved in our own lifetimes or that of future generations of Southerners, is a truly sublime virtue.

How soon Southern independence may come is anyone's guess. Who could have predicted, for example, the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 or the sudden and unexpected collapse of the Soviet Union as its constituent republics seceded from its tyranny with lightening-like rapidity in 1991? Because "conventional wisdom" so often blinds us all to possibilities that may lie just around the corner, we should maintain an open mind and consider the possibility that Southern independence could actually come to fruition in our own lifetimes.

As we ceaselessly work towards that happy day we will continue to be inspired by the Parti Quebecois and the Scottish Nationalist Party, two parties advocating full independence for their regions. Current political realities tend to suggest to us, however, that the most viable political party model for the South for the immediate future is the Plaid Cymru, the regional/nationalist party of Wales, whose aim is to secure authentic home rule and a renewed sense of national identity within the United Kingdom.

Therefore, as the regional/nationalist party of the South, our principal mission for the immediate future will be twofold: to restore the constitutional rights guaranteed to the people of the states by the Constitution of 1787, most notably the Tenth Amendment, and to sponsor a political program aimed at restoring the unique cultural, social and religious foundations of the Southern people. Securing these objectives undoubtedly will carry us a long way down the road to full independence, which remains our long-term objective and one that we hope that a majority of the Southern people will come to embrace. As public support grows for an independent Dixie, we will quite naturally place an increasing emphasis on that long-term goal as its viability becomes more and more clear.

In short, our immediate goal is de facto independence for the people of Dixie: genuine self-government for the states guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in the Bill of Rights. Recognizing that the ultimate goal full independence would not be possible without a thorough-going cultural, religious and social rejuvenation of the Southern people, we also will step up our efforts to forge close working relationships with other conservative and Southern political, social and cultural organizations with whom the Southern party shares similar goals.