How To Secede From The USA...

[ExiledV20]

I saw the following in the "Cult militia trying to start a war..." state and thought it would be good to address here:

How could one legally and non-violently secede from America? Let's say, for the sake on convenience, that the area is already on the border, with ocean access. One of the Florida keys for instance. Me & everyone else on this bit of land want to form our own country, and write our own constitution. How could it be done without ending in a 4 day stand-off with the FBI & ATF and a whole lotta body bags? What would be different in the scenario if it were instead a chunk of land in the middle of Tennesee?

The answer is: You can't.

After the American Civil War, the question of whether secession was legal was still not ended. However, SCOTUS made the decision on the subject in <i>Texas v. White</i> (1869), The following passages explicitly lay it out; first it insolubility of the USA in its origins were established:

<i>The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to "be perpetual." And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained "to form a more perfect Union." It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?</i>

It then went on to say how becoming a state was final and irrevocable:

<i>When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.</i>

And then finally gives the full opinion on secession:

<i>Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law</i>

So, secession is not legally valid in any way, shape, or form in the USA. Very unfortunate. There is, however, a way to revoke your American citizenship. No, it's not a tax dodge. Simply go to another country (say, Canada), walk into the embassy there, as for the papers to renounce citizenship, fill them out, recite the statement before the official(s) necessary, and behold! You are now no longer an American citizen. And if you don't have citizenship elsewhere, you are now stateless!

This does not relieve you of your tax obligations, though. Which is why most people want to secede/revoke citizenship to begin with.

[Red Panda]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conch_Republic

Not very seriouse but it makes for a good read. I especially like this part

As part of the protest, Mayor Wardlow was proclaimed Prime Minister of the Republic, which immediately declared war against the U.S. (symbolically breaking a loaf of stale Cuban bread over the head of a man dressed in a naval uniform), quickly surrendered after one minute (to the man in the uniform), and applied for one billion dollars in foreign aid.

[draggar]

Better read than the Wiki:

http://www.conchrepublic.com/the_beginning.htm

At the bottom they have a link to the next page - you'll even read how the US invaded the Conch Republic - and surrendered.

They actually did some good, too, as the Conch Republic.

But - there's distension in the Conch Republic. I think the 7-mile bridge is the border - north of that to Key Largo is considered "The Northernmost Territories". They seceded over the argument that Key West (the self proclaimed capital of the Conch Republic) over a celebration (was it Lobsterfest?).

[Hobbs]

If that's how Key West wants it, I say the US pulls any and all federal funding for the residents, including scholarships, grants and loans. Oh, and those pesky hurricanes that Florida gets? No more USCG assistance or disaster relief. If they do get any aid, it'll be in the form of how the US deals with foreign countries that recieve aid; huge loans. Oh, and if they thought a Border Patrol checkpoint was bad, wait until it becomes an actual border crossing.

[joe hx]

The Conch Republic made me think for a second. The Civil War and the Supreme Court rulings in Exiled's post set the precedent that states can't secede, but the Conch Republic area is not a state in and of itself. I'm probably wrong, but in that sense could a small city or village secede.

Also, a lot of native american tribes out west consider themselves independent of the US, don't they?

[Hobbs]

Also, a lot of native american tribes out west consider themselves independent of the US, don't they?

Native American tribes have special territorial rights because of their status as Native American tribes. They're allowed these rights by the federal government through treaties and agreements between the government and the respective tribes.

[crashhelmet]

While secession might not be legal or valid, it doesn't mean that a state or group of states can't secede. All it takes is a "Declaration of Independence" and a victory in a well fought war. It's what worked for our "Founding Fathers" and where the Confederates failed in the Civil War.

Like Hobbs pointed out, if a state or group of states wants to secede, the first thing is to cut off all of their federal assistance. If that doesn't wake them up and bring them crawling and groveling back, it becomes another civil war.

In my opinion, this country is due for another one. History tends to repeat itself and we'll need it to strengthen and bring us back to actually being the "United" States of America.

"United We Stand, Divided We Fall" - Aesop

CH

[ExiledV20]

In my opinion, this country is due for another one. History tends to repeat itself and we'll need it to strengthen and bring us back to actually being the "United" States of America.

History doesn't actually repeat itself, but we'll leave that for a discussion of historiological process and theory. But no, we really don't need another civil war. It will not strengthen the country; it'll make the previous bloodbath look like a picnic. The first strikes of a new civil war wouldn't be a military offensive. It would be homemade biological and chemical strikes, preferably on civilian areas where strategic elements of command reside.

For instance, you would determine where most of the Fort Benning personnel send their kids to school. Dose them with a chemical attack, say homemade mustard gas. This sends the parents into a panic. Arrange for parents on their way to the school to be ambushed with automatic fire. The military command and personnel of Fort Benning become emotionally compromised and therefore vulnerable, creating strategic weakness.

The war casualties would be even more immense. You know the Rebel Command is located in or around Macon, GA. So you whistle up a bomber squadron and saturate the town with cluster bombs and incendiaries. Civilians? Unfortunate, but collateral damage is expected in order achieve mission objectives within the parameters set.

[bunnyboy]

If that's how Key West wants it, I say the US pulls any and all federal funding for the residents, including scholarships, grants and loans. Oh, and those pesky hurricanes that Florida gets? No more USCG assistance or disaster relief. If they do get any aid, it'll be in the form of how the US deals with foreign countries that recieve aid; huge loans. Oh, and if they thought a Border Patrol checkpoint was bad, wait until it becomes an actual border crossing.

The Conch Republic made me think for a second. The Civil War and the Supreme Court rulings in Exiled's post set the precedent that states can't secede, but the Conch Republic area is not a state in and of itself. I'm probably wrong, but in that sense could a small city or village secede.

Also, a lot of native american tribes out west consider themselves independent of the US, don't they?

Last I recall any most of the Conch Republic stuff is now a tourist attraction/joke, much like... oh what was that place, near Reno, that got change...Mollosia that's right.

[Hobbs]

So you whistle up a bomber squadron and saturate the town with cluster bombs and incendiaries. Civilians? Unfortunate, but collateral damage is expected in order achieve mission objectives within the parameters set.

Your analysis completly ignores how modern warfare is conducted. The objective of any bombing operation, since Vietnam, has been the precise strike of strategic target while reducing the possibility of civilian casualties. Just because this is what you would do does not mean this is what the Armed Forces would do.

Your analysis also contains much speculation and outright fabrication of the present condition. You talk of "biological and chemical" agents. What group in the US is currently producing such agents? Despite what you might think, it takes quite a bit of skill to produce these agents in any large quantities. In the sense of biological agents, it is even more difficult since the conditions for their growth and stockpile must be contained.

If anything, the first strikes of a "rebel" faction within the US would most likely take the shape of the Oklahoma City bombing, the first attack on the WTC or the recent attack on the IRS offices; fanatics attacking US government buildings, symbolic representations of authority or positions of influence.

[draggar]

Last I recall any most of the Conch Republic stuff is now a tourist attraction/joke, much like... oh what was that place, near Reno, that got change...Mollosia that's right.

Far from it. While the whole secessation (sp?) wasn't serious, it was the Keys' way of using their constitutional rights (speech, press etc..) to protest what and how the government was acting.

It started when the government blocked off US Route 1 just north of Key Largo (south of Florida City, I think) to stop the inflow of illegal immigrants. While the road was still open, traffic flowed very slowly and it hurt the economy of the Keys by not allowing goods in and out as well as tourists. They seceeded as a protest.

Then, in 1994 the US military planned to conduct a mock invasion of Key West (to simulate invading a country and to work with the people of that country). The local governments (mayors, etc.) claim they were never informed of this thus their "fighting back" and defending of the Conch Republic.

During the government shutdown, they "invaded" and "annexed" Fort Jefferson (a museum) in the Keys and helped keep it running with private donations from residents and businesses from the Keys (oddly, despite the government claining it cost them $30,000 a day they kept it running and fully staffed for $1600 a day).

[Hobbs]

Draggar, a proper way to protest government action would be to contest it, not to openly rebel against the government. That's the problem with people today; they see something they don't like and immediately raise a call to arms, or call for succession. It's reasons like that that I hope we vote out Rick Perry this year.

[crashhelmet]

History doesn't actually repeat itself, but we'll leave that for a discussion of historiological process and theory. But no, we really don't need another civil war. It will not strengthen the country; it'll make the previous bloodbath look like a picnic. The first strikes of a new civil war wouldn't be a military offensive. It would be homemade biological and chemical strikes, preferably on civilian areas where strategic elements of command reside.

For instance, you would determine where most of the Fort Benning personnel send their kids to school. Dose them with a chemical attack, say homemade mustard gas. This sends the parents into a panic. Arrange for parents on their way to the school to be ambushed with automatic fire. The military command and personnel of Fort Benning become emotionally compromised and therefore vulnerable, creating strategic weakness.

The war casualties would be even more immense. You know the Rebel Command is located in or around Macon, GA. So you whistle up a bomber squadron and saturate the town with cluster bombs and incendiaries. Civilians? Unfortunate, but collateral damage is expected in order achieve mission objectives within the parameters set.

You seriously believe a rebellious force would attack civilians to make a statement towards the government? Attacking kids? Either you associate with the people that would plan such a horrendous attack or you have no clue how to fight a war.

Attacking kids will do nothing but unite EVERYONE else against you. Hell, the rest of our armed forces could sit back and let the offers from normally neutral countries like Switzerland or Sweden come in and bomb the crap out of you.

CH

[Rapscallion]

Draggar, a proper way to protest government action would be to contest it, not to openly rebel against the government. That's the problem with people today; they see something they don't like and immediately raise a call to arms, or call for succession.

Did anyone suggest that to the founding fathers?

Just curious, not having read up on the history much.

Rapscallion

[Hobbs]

Did anyone suggest that to the founding fathers?

Just curious, not having read up on the history much.

Rapscallion

From the Declaration of Independence:

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed...

And further on...

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence...